Datasets:

jmajkutewicz

/

SHP-binarized

like 0

[ { "content": "Editor is \"strongly\" encouraging me to cote his papers. I received my review comments for a recent manuscript. The comments were addressable, but the editor sent a LIST of 15 of his papers asking to cite them. Some of the papers are somewhat relevant, so I cite 4 of them. The manuscript came back, and the editor says it will be accepted once I fix some \"citation issues\" My advisor told me to just cite every paper on the list and send it back. I did, and the paper got accepted. Does this not seem a bit shady? Seems like the editor is using his position to boost his citations.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Fuck that. I would contact the Editor in Chief. This editor is riding roughshod over the reputation of the journal - if the EiC does nothing, then frankly spend the rest of your career not publishing there and making sure everyone you work with knows why.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Editor is \"strongly\" encouraging me to cote his papers. I received my review comments for a recent manuscript. The comments were addressable, but the editor sent a LIST of 15 of his papers asking to cite them. Some of the papers are somewhat relevant, so I cite 4 of them. The manuscript came back, and the editor says it will be accepted once I fix some \"citation issues\" My advisor told me to just cite every paper on the list and send it back. I did, and the paper got accepted. Does this not seem a bit shady? Seems like the editor is using his position to boost his citations.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Contact the other editors about this", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Editor is \"strongly\" encouraging me to cote his papers. I received my review comments for a recent manuscript. The comments were addressable, but the editor sent a LIST of 15 of his papers asking to cite them. Some of the papers are somewhat relevant, so I cite 4 of them. The manuscript came back, and the editor says it will be accepted once I fix some \"citation issues\" My advisor told me to just cite every paper on the list and send it back. I did, and the paper got accepted. Does this not seem a bit shady? Seems like the editor is using his position to boost his citations.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "This is called \"coercive citation\": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coercive\\_citation and is generally considered a very unethical practice. I absolutely refuse to add requested citations from reviewers (a few times recently), and I clearly spell out to the Editor why I will not be adding the citations (which normally have little to do with the subject material). For an Editor to do this is way out of line. I would probably withdraw, and inform both the EIC (if there is one) AND the publisher (who are a big stick over journals). However, i realize for many authors this can be difficult, given how hard it can be to get stuff published, and often how important it is. I think I saw in the thread that the impact was 6. I would be interested if the requested citations were to the Editors papers in the same journal as an attempt at impact factor. If more than half of the requested citations were to the journal - I would also be cc'ing a copy of the email to Clarivates. They take this sort of stuff quite seriously....", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Editor is \"strongly\" encouraging me to cote his papers. I received my review comments for a recent manuscript. The comments were addressable, but the editor sent a LIST of 15 of his papers asking to cite them. Some of the papers are somewhat relevant, so I cite 4 of them. The manuscript came back, and the editor says it will be accepted once I fix some \"citation issues\" My advisor told me to just cite every paper on the list and send it back. I did, and the paper got accepted. Does this not seem a bit shady? Seems like the editor is using his position to boost his citations.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Yeh this is a bit shady alright. An exception might be where (in my field), an editor had perhaps written a specific test or procedure, or otherwise specially contributed to something the reviewers perhaps asked for elaboration in. In the latter case, they might be saving you some time, but it's rare and definitely not standard practice. Not sure what stage the paper is at but if it's out of the first round of R&R then they should defer to the reviewers. If they think it's in shape, and you've addressed their concerns, then there is no reason (the above aside) for an editor to suggest that. As other say, boosting their own and the journals citations like this is shady practice.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Editor is \"strongly\" encouraging me to cote his papers. I received my review comments for a recent manuscript. The comments were addressable, but the editor sent a LIST of 15 of his papers asking to cite them. Some of the papers are somewhat relevant, so I cite 4 of them. The manuscript came back, and the editor says it will be accepted once I fix some \"citation issues\" My advisor told me to just cite every paper on the list and send it back. I did, and the paper got accepted. Does this not seem a bit shady? Seems like the editor is using his position to boost his citations.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "1-2 citation requests is pretty normal. Shouldn't be, but it is. 15 is absurd. Your advisor is trying to move things along without making a fuss. Maybe your advisor knows the editor, or knows the editor in chief, and knows they tend to hold a grudge. I would recommend talking with your advisor if you can about it. Say something like, \"I'm not trying to go back on what we decided, but it's important to me for my professional development to understand why we cited all those papers.\" Sometimes there are people in a field it's just better not to cross. It shouldn't be that way, but sometimes it is. It could be that your advisor was protecting you from such people. Especially early in your career, discretion can be wise. It could also be that your advisor just doesn't like confrontation or wanted the paper out the door. No way of knowing.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Editor is \"strongly\" encouraging me to cote his papers. I received my review comments for a recent manuscript. The comments were addressable, but the editor sent a LIST of 15 of his papers asking to cite them. Some of the papers are somewhat relevant, so I cite 4 of them. The manuscript came back, and the editor says it will be accepted once I fix some \"citation issues\" My advisor told me to just cite every paper on the list and send it back. I did, and the paper got accepted. Does this not seem a bit shady? Seems like the editor is using his position to boost his citations.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I think it is things like these that make academia lose credibility and drive the public distrust in science. Unless we actively take measures to address these actions, distrust will continue to grow, understandably and justifiably so, and so will the consequences of this on scientific progress and it’s practical implications. The pandemic is a perfect example of this.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "I notice a lot of things are different between USA academia and \"rest of the world\" academia. Should we split up askacademia? Or make a rule that you have to specify country with each question? Gets confusing otherwise. In true academia fashion we should not endeavour to improve anything and leave it as broken as it was 🤣", "role": "user" }, { "content": "That's the same with a lot of subreddits, such as r/teachers, r/professors, r/college... or even r/askwomen and r/askmen off the top of my head. Not only are the situations different and incomparable, but the terminology doesn't translate either : I have no idea what a Title (insert random number here) School or a Community College is, just as a non-French worker would probably have no idea what I'm talking about if I told them what my L3 SdLs had done yesterday or tried to discuss whether teaching English in CM1 was worth it. Yet we are all expected to know the US terms and be able to compare them with whatever we use. Heck, many of us even start our posts with \"Non-American here\" by way of apology. However, many situations encountered are similar, and many academics like or would like to work internationally, so a split probably wouldn't work. I'm all for specifying countries or adding flairs if that can help us straighten things out a little, and I'd certainly welcome a sidebar with definitions and translations of our local terminologies.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "I notice a lot of things are different between USA academia and \"rest of the world\" academia. Should we split up askacademia? Or make a rule that you have to specify country with each question? Gets confusing otherwise. In true academia fashion we should not endeavour to improve anything and leave it as broken as it was 🤣", "role": "user" }, { "content": "A second property that is not mentioned enough is the academic field. There are a lot of questions like \"how do I write this\", \"how do not cite this\", \"how do I apply for this\" or \"how do we fix order of authors\". However all these questions can vary strongly on the field. And even in the general field there can be differences, a high energy physicist might just publish authors (all 200 of them) alphabetically, while a fluid physicist does that differently. Field is already much better than country though, but flares can be very general, e.g. \"STEM\" is really broad.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "I notice a lot of things are different between USA academia and \"rest of the world\" academia. Should we split up askacademia? Or make a rule that you have to specify country with each question? Gets confusing otherwise. In true academia fashion we should not endeavour to improve anything and leave it as broken as it was 🤣", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Is it possible to include [Country] and [Field] in the submission title text box by default? E.g. [Country] [Field] - POST TITLE [USA] [Humanities] - How many hours a week do you spend at work? [Australia] [STEM] - What the hell is a qualifying exam??? I think this fixes the problem, without applying flairs to the *user*. That way if I have experience/questions in more than one country, I can respond without having to change my flair or causing confusion.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "I notice a lot of things are different between USA academia and \"rest of the world\" academia. Should we split up askacademia? Or make a rule that you have to specify country with each question? Gets confusing otherwise. In true academia fashion we should not endeavour to improve anything and leave it as broken as it was 🤣", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Yeah, flairing country or at least by discipline (even if it's just major streams e.g STEM/Humanities/SocSci) would help tremendously in getting answers rather than the typical 'ymmv' disclaimer.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "I notice a lot of things are different between USA academia and \"rest of the world\" academia. Should we split up askacademia? Or make a rule that you have to specify country with each question? Gets confusing otherwise. In true academia fashion we should not endeavour to improve anything and leave it as broken as it was 🤣", "role": "user" }, { "content": "That's the same with a lot of subreddits, such as r/teachers, r/professors, r/college... or even r/askwomen and r/askmen off the top of my head. Not only are the situations different and incomparable, but the terminology doesn't translate either : I have no idea what a Title (insert random number here) School or a Community College is, just as a non-French worker would probably have no idea what I'm talking about if I told them what my L3 SdLs had done yesterday or tried to discuss whether teaching English in CM1 was worth it. Yet we are all expected to know the US terms and be able to compare them with whatever we use. Heck, many of us even start our posts with \"Non-American here\" by way of apology. However, many situations encountered are similar, and many academics like or would like to work internationally, so a split probably wouldn't work. I'm all for specifying countries or adding flairs if that can help us straighten things out a little, and I'd certainly welcome a sidebar with definitions and translations of our local terminologies.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "I notice a lot of things are different between USA academia and \"rest of the world\" academia. Should we split up askacademia? Or make a rule that you have to specify country with each question? Gets confusing otherwise. In true academia fashion we should not endeavour to improve anything and leave it as broken as it was 🤣", "role": "user" }, { "content": "It should just be added to the rules that people must specify what country the institution they are asking about is in.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "I notice a lot of things are different between USA academia and \"rest of the world\" academia. Should we split up askacademia? Or make a rule that you have to specify country with each question? Gets confusing otherwise. In true academia fashion we should not endeavour to improve anything and leave it as broken as it was 🤣", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Ah yes, the only two countries in the existence. USA and the Rest of The World", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "I notice a lot of things are different between USA academia and \"rest of the world\" academia. Should we split up askacademia? Or make a rule that you have to specify country with each question? Gets confusing otherwise. In true academia fashion we should not endeavour to improve anything and leave it as broken as it was 🤣", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Flairs (post and user) is probably the best way to go.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "I notice a lot of things are different between USA academia and \"rest of the world\" academia. Should we split up askacademia? Or make a rule that you have to specify country with each question? Gets confusing otherwise. In true academia fashion we should not endeavour to improve anything and leave it as broken as it was 🤣", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Ah yes, the only two countries in the existence. USA and the Rest of The World", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "I notice a lot of things are different between USA academia and \"rest of the world\" academia. Should we split up askacademia? Or make a rule that you have to specify country with each question? Gets confusing otherwise. In true academia fashion we should not endeavour to improve anything and leave it as broken as it was 🤣", "role": "user" }, { "content": "If the questions specified a locale it would save a lot of trouble. If they said a general field that would also help. Comments dont have to specify unless relevant I would think", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "How to tell a struggling PhD student who wants to stay in academia that it's time to look for other jobs? I have a PhD student who is finishing this year who ended this job round with no postdoc offers. It's not completely surprising, unfortunately. The student, let's call them P, has had 4 years to improve on things like writing, communication, technical skills, and programming but has fallen short on all of them for where they need to be to be competitive for postdocs. That being said, P is a hard worker, super enthusiastic about research, and has been a good member of my group. P has gotten some interviews, but often gives extremely technical talks with no introduction (despite many rounds of feedback on this from me and others) and has tripped up when asked about the deep details of their work. Unfortunately, I see almost no way of them making it through the whole tenure track (postdoc, postdoc, faculty, building a group) without a quantum leap in their skills, even if there was an offer this year. P is understandably very upset about not getting any offers but continues to say that all they want is a career as a researcher and to stay in academia. This doesn't seem realistic and I want to start gently steering them towards the idea of looking for opportunities in industry or policy, especially since their PhD funding runs out later this year. But I'm not at all sure how to have this conversation without dashing their dreams. They're really eager and dead-set on this line of work, but I just don't see a path. Any advice for how to steer this conversation and offer constructive suggestions? I feel terrible that I have to deliver this news, and I've never done it before.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "ITT: Anxious grad students looking through OP's post history to see if it's them.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "How to tell a struggling PhD student who wants to stay in academia that it's time to look for other jobs? I have a PhD student who is finishing this year who ended this job round with no postdoc offers. It's not completely surprising, unfortunately. The student, let's call them P, has had 4 years to improve on things like writing, communication, technical skills, and programming but has fallen short on all of them for where they need to be to be competitive for postdocs. That being said, P is a hard worker, super enthusiastic about research, and has been a good member of my group. P has gotten some interviews, but often gives extremely technical talks with no introduction (despite many rounds of feedback on this from me and others) and has tripped up when asked about the deep details of their work. Unfortunately, I see almost no way of them making it through the whole tenure track (postdoc, postdoc, faculty, building a group) without a quantum leap in their skills, even if there was an offer this year. P is understandably very upset about not getting any offers but continues to say that all they want is a career as a researcher and to stay in academia. This doesn't seem realistic and I want to start gently steering them towards the idea of looking for opportunities in industry or policy, especially since their PhD funding runs out later this year. But I'm not at all sure how to have this conversation without dashing their dreams. They're really eager and dead-set on this line of work, but I just don't see a path. Any advice for how to steer this conversation and offer constructive suggestions? I feel terrible that I have to deliver this news, and I've never done it before.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "You could always encourage the student to apply for all types of jobs and let the chips fall where they do. As long as the student applies to a variety of jobs I see no harm in them also applying to more post docs and academic positions. Just my two cents 😊", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "How to tell a struggling PhD student who wants to stay in academia that it's time to look for other jobs? I have a PhD student who is finishing this year who ended this job round with no postdoc offers. It's not completely surprising, unfortunately. The student, let's call them P, has had 4 years to improve on things like writing, communication, technical skills, and programming but has fallen short on all of them for where they need to be to be competitive for postdocs. That being said, P is a hard worker, super enthusiastic about research, and has been a good member of my group. P has gotten some interviews, but often gives extremely technical talks with no introduction (despite many rounds of feedback on this from me and others) and has tripped up when asked about the deep details of their work. Unfortunately, I see almost no way of them making it through the whole tenure track (postdoc, postdoc, faculty, building a group) without a quantum leap in their skills, even if there was an offer this year. P is understandably very upset about not getting any offers but continues to say that all they want is a career as a researcher and to stay in academia. This doesn't seem realistic and I want to start gently steering them towards the idea of looking for opportunities in industry or policy, especially since their PhD funding runs out later this year. But I'm not at all sure how to have this conversation without dashing their dreams. They're really eager and dead-set on this line of work, but I just don't see a path. Any advice for how to steer this conversation and offer constructive suggestions? I feel terrible that I have to deliver this news, and I've never done it before.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I think you lay out the options. Your funding is coming to an end here and you didn't land a post-doc. Let's brainstorm about what you can do. This can include everything from less competitive colleges to industry to government work to research adjacent careers (technical sales, regulatory oversight, etc.). There is nothing to say that the person cannot get a job and apply for post-docs next year, but emphasize you don't have the funding for them to stay in your lab for another year. This can turn the conversation from here are all of your problems to here are your choices as it stands now.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "How to tell a struggling PhD student who wants to stay in academia that it's time to look for other jobs? I have a PhD student who is finishing this year who ended this job round with no postdoc offers. It's not completely surprising, unfortunately. The student, let's call them P, has had 4 years to improve on things like writing, communication, technical skills, and programming but has fallen short on all of them for where they need to be to be competitive for postdocs. That being said, P is a hard worker, super enthusiastic about research, and has been a good member of my group. P has gotten some interviews, but often gives extremely technical talks with no introduction (despite many rounds of feedback on this from me and others) and has tripped up when asked about the deep details of their work. Unfortunately, I see almost no way of them making it through the whole tenure track (postdoc, postdoc, faculty, building a group) without a quantum leap in their skills, even if there was an offer this year. P is understandably very upset about not getting any offers but continues to say that all they want is a career as a researcher and to stay in academia. This doesn't seem realistic and I want to start gently steering them towards the idea of looking for opportunities in industry or policy, especially since their PhD funding runs out later this year. But I'm not at all sure how to have this conversation without dashing their dreams. They're really eager and dead-set on this line of work, but I just don't see a path. Any advice for how to steer this conversation and offer constructive suggestions? I feel terrible that I have to deliver this news, and I've never done it before.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Well, if you want to do this gently, don't dumb all this down in a single speech. First, tell them about super competitive academic job field, strongly urge them to cast a wider net. Perhaps it is a good idea to put them in contact with people who already hold jobs in industry and learn about their experiences. The idea is they would want an industry job organically, rather than something that they have to. However, if they still persists on following an academic path, then it might be the time to tell them the part about their shortcomings. As others have mentioned, be sure to give them the postive feedback that you wrote (hard worker, enthusiactic) with the negative to soften the blow.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "How to tell a struggling PhD student who wants to stay in academia that it's time to look for other jobs? I have a PhD student who is finishing this year who ended this job round with no postdoc offers. It's not completely surprising, unfortunately. The student, let's call them P, has had 4 years to improve on things like writing, communication, technical skills, and programming but has fallen short on all of them for where they need to be to be competitive for postdocs. That being said, P is a hard worker, super enthusiastic about research, and has been a good member of my group. P has gotten some interviews, but often gives extremely technical talks with no introduction (despite many rounds of feedback on this from me and others) and has tripped up when asked about the deep details of their work. Unfortunately, I see almost no way of them making it through the whole tenure track (postdoc, postdoc, faculty, building a group) without a quantum leap in their skills, even if there was an offer this year. P is understandably very upset about not getting any offers but continues to say that all they want is a career as a researcher and to stay in academia. This doesn't seem realistic and I want to start gently steering them towards the idea of looking for opportunities in industry or policy, especially since their PhD funding runs out later this year. But I'm not at all sure how to have this conversation without dashing their dreams. They're really eager and dead-set on this line of work, but I just don't see a path. Any advice for how to steer this conversation and offer constructive suggestions? I feel terrible that I have to deliver this news, and I've never done it before.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "ITT: Anxious grad students looking through OP's post history to see if it's them.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "How to tell a struggling PhD student who wants to stay in academia that it's time to look for other jobs? I have a PhD student who is finishing this year who ended this job round with no postdoc offers. It's not completely surprising, unfortunately. The student, let's call them P, has had 4 years to improve on things like writing, communication, technical skills, and programming but has fallen short on all of them for where they need to be to be competitive for postdocs. That being said, P is a hard worker, super enthusiastic about research, and has been a good member of my group. P has gotten some interviews, but often gives extremely technical talks with no introduction (despite many rounds of feedback on this from me and others) and has tripped up when asked about the deep details of their work. Unfortunately, I see almost no way of them making it through the whole tenure track (postdoc, postdoc, faculty, building a group) without a quantum leap in their skills, even if there was an offer this year. P is understandably very upset about not getting any offers but continues to say that all they want is a career as a researcher and to stay in academia. This doesn't seem realistic and I want to start gently steering them towards the idea of looking for opportunities in industry or policy, especially since their PhD funding runs out later this year. But I'm not at all sure how to have this conversation without dashing their dreams. They're really eager and dead-set on this line of work, but I just don't see a path. Any advice for how to steer this conversation and offer constructive suggestions? I feel terrible that I have to deliver this news, and I've never done it before.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I’ve had this tenor of conversations with trainees in the past. They are never easy, and never pleasant. I felt responsible for their lack of progress, as I suspect you do in this case. Don’t. They aren’t children. You tried, they tried, you gave feedback, you gave time and opportunity. They have different strengths to the ones that may be most useful in academia. They have to figure that out. Here’s the thing: sometimes people just aren’t ready to hear that yet. You feel a duty to tell them, but the world is telling them already. And will continue to. Given that, it may be easiest to disguise this as a debrief of their postdoc applications. If you want to help, you will have to lead them down alternate paths slowly. Make it very clear that they have X months left, and impress on them over and over how long it takes to get through the hiring process. Perhaps suggest they should go with a non-academic position for a couple of years until the postdoc market opens up a little more. It’s a white lie that may help ease them onto another path. Support, advise and guide. But it’s not yours to solve this problem for them.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "How to tell a struggling PhD student who wants to stay in academia that it's time to look for other jobs? I have a PhD student who is finishing this year who ended this job round with no postdoc offers. It's not completely surprising, unfortunately. The student, let's call them P, has had 4 years to improve on things like writing, communication, technical skills, and programming but has fallen short on all of them for where they need to be to be competitive for postdocs. That being said, P is a hard worker, super enthusiastic about research, and has been a good member of my group. P has gotten some interviews, but often gives extremely technical talks with no introduction (despite many rounds of feedback on this from me and others) and has tripped up when asked about the deep details of their work. Unfortunately, I see almost no way of them making it through the whole tenure track (postdoc, postdoc, faculty, building a group) without a quantum leap in their skills, even if there was an offer this year. P is understandably very upset about not getting any offers but continues to say that all they want is a career as a researcher and to stay in academia. This doesn't seem realistic and I want to start gently steering them towards the idea of looking for opportunities in industry or policy, especially since their PhD funding runs out later this year. But I'm not at all sure how to have this conversation without dashing their dreams. They're really eager and dead-set on this line of work, but I just don't see a path. Any advice for how to steer this conversation and offer constructive suggestions? I feel terrible that I have to deliver this news, and I've never done it before.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "> The student, let's call them P, has had 4 years to improve on things like writing, communication, technical skills, and programming but has fallen short on all of them for where they need to be to be competitive for postdocs. Let's be honest, that doesn't really bode well for industry jobs either. I agree with the other posters that you should have the difficult conversation.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "How to tell a struggling PhD student who wants to stay in academia that it's time to look for other jobs? I have a PhD student who is finishing this year who ended this job round with no postdoc offers. It's not completely surprising, unfortunately. The student, let's call them P, has had 4 years to improve on things like writing, communication, technical skills, and programming but has fallen short on all of them for where they need to be to be competitive for postdocs. That being said, P is a hard worker, super enthusiastic about research, and has been a good member of my group. P has gotten some interviews, but often gives extremely technical talks with no introduction (despite many rounds of feedback on this from me and others) and has tripped up when asked about the deep details of their work. Unfortunately, I see almost no way of them making it through the whole tenure track (postdoc, postdoc, faculty, building a group) without a quantum leap in their skills, even if there was an offer this year. P is understandably very upset about not getting any offers but continues to say that all they want is a career as a researcher and to stay in academia. This doesn't seem realistic and I want to start gently steering them towards the idea of looking for opportunities in industry or policy, especially since their PhD funding runs out later this year. But I'm not at all sure how to have this conversation without dashing their dreams. They're really eager and dead-set on this line of work, but I just don't see a path. Any advice for how to steer this conversation and offer constructive suggestions? I feel terrible that I have to deliver this news, and I've never done it before.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Well, if you want to do this gently, don't dumb all this down in a single speech. First, tell them about super competitive academic job field, strongly urge them to cast a wider net. Perhaps it is a good idea to put them in contact with people who already hold jobs in industry and learn about their experiences. The idea is they would want an industry job organically, rather than something that they have to. However, if they still persists on following an academic path, then it might be the time to tell them the part about their shortcomings. As others have mentioned, be sure to give them the postive feedback that you wrote (hard worker, enthusiactic) with the negative to soften the blow.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "How to tell a struggling PhD student who wants to stay in academia that it's time to look for other jobs? I have a PhD student who is finishing this year who ended this job round with no postdoc offers. It's not completely surprising, unfortunately. The student, let's call them P, has had 4 years to improve on things like writing, communication, technical skills, and programming but has fallen short on all of them for where they need to be to be competitive for postdocs. That being said, P is a hard worker, super enthusiastic about research, and has been a good member of my group. P has gotten some interviews, but often gives extremely technical talks with no introduction (despite many rounds of feedback on this from me and others) and has tripped up when asked about the deep details of their work. Unfortunately, I see almost no way of them making it through the whole tenure track (postdoc, postdoc, faculty, building a group) without a quantum leap in their skills, even if there was an offer this year. P is understandably very upset about not getting any offers but continues to say that all they want is a career as a researcher and to stay in academia. This doesn't seem realistic and I want to start gently steering them towards the idea of looking for opportunities in industry or policy, especially since their PhD funding runs out later this year. But I'm not at all sure how to have this conversation without dashing their dreams. They're really eager and dead-set on this line of work, but I just don't see a path. Any advice for how to steer this conversation and offer constructive suggestions? I feel terrible that I have to deliver this news, and I've never done it before.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "ITT: Anxious grad students looking through OP's post history to see if it's them.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "How to tell a struggling PhD student who wants to stay in academia that it's time to look for other jobs? I have a PhD student who is finishing this year who ended this job round with no postdoc offers. It's not completely surprising, unfortunately. The student, let's call them P, has had 4 years to improve on things like writing, communication, technical skills, and programming but has fallen short on all of them for where they need to be to be competitive for postdocs. That being said, P is a hard worker, super enthusiastic about research, and has been a good member of my group. P has gotten some interviews, but often gives extremely technical talks with no introduction (despite many rounds of feedback on this from me and others) and has tripped up when asked about the deep details of their work. Unfortunately, I see almost no way of them making it through the whole tenure track (postdoc, postdoc, faculty, building a group) without a quantum leap in their skills, even if there was an offer this year. P is understandably very upset about not getting any offers but continues to say that all they want is a career as a researcher and to stay in academia. This doesn't seem realistic and I want to start gently steering them towards the idea of looking for opportunities in industry or policy, especially since their PhD funding runs out later this year. But I'm not at all sure how to have this conversation without dashing their dreams. They're really eager and dead-set on this line of work, but I just don't see a path. Any advice for how to steer this conversation and offer constructive suggestions? I feel terrible that I have to deliver this news, and I've never done it before.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "This is exactly what I'm worried about. I apologize for not answering your question but I'm hoping you may consider my dilemma. I'm a physics masters student interested in advanced theoretical physics. Though I'm doing masters right now, I don't think I'm competent enough do any kind of research in the field I'm interested in. I haven't solved any problems from books or assignments. I have ok grades. I don't think I'm a dumbass and consider myself to be reasonably good at things which I've studied properly which is not much. But I doubt I can do research in string theory if I didn't even read Sakurai/Goldstein properly. I admit all my problems are due to procrastination. I'm in a serious dilemma. Should I just try to do some small lame master's thesis and apply for grad school or should I leave masters and start masters all over again in a different uni to properly study? I may procrastinate once again but I'm really worried I would not be able to do any good research if I don't know the basics and regret later in life. Some information: I get paid while doing masters in my country so money is not an issue. I sincerely can't imagine myself not learning physics or science in general to understand the world. I don't know what else is there other than understanding the world and I think physics is the one I love the most because I believe in reductionism and believe that everything should be understood from the absolute fundamental ideas. My school has nothing to do with it. It's me and my fucking procrastination. I'm hoping that the result would be different this time. I might be wrong and waste another couple of years, but is there any other option I have? Appreciate any response. Thanks.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Bad news Hey everyone I went to the Dr a few days ago and she found a mass on my humerus. She was reluctant to officially diagnose but it seems that it is osteosarcoma. I was wondering if this is something I should tell my grad advisor. I’m hesitant because I’m afraid she might tell me to quit to be with my family. In all honesty I want to keep going until it gets bad enough I can’t leave my bed. The reason I’m inclined to telling here is because I might be spotty quite a Few days because of imaging testing and who knows ,maybe even bone autopsies.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "If you are in the U.S., it is horrible to say but make sure that you know what any change in school status will do for your health insurance; don’t just take any random administrators word for it; and fight like hell to find an accommodation where you are able to remain on the school health insurance unless you have a definite 2nd option.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Bad news Hey everyone I went to the Dr a few days ago and she found a mass on my humerus. She was reluctant to officially diagnose but it seems that it is osteosarcoma. I was wondering if this is something I should tell my grad advisor. I’m hesitant because I’m afraid she might tell me to quit to be with my family. In all honesty I want to keep going until it gets bad enough I can’t leave my bed. The reason I’m inclined to telling here is because I might be spotty quite a Few days because of imaging testing and who knows ,maybe even bone autopsies.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "First, I am so sorry that you are dealing with this. I hope that the diagnosis is not confirmed. Second, as an advisor, I would very much like to know what you are going through, if you are comfortable enough to share, as I would want to be supportive and help plan around how you are doing. I think it would be unlikely that your advisor would push you to stay home, but may mention it as an option out of concern that that is what you want to do. As a graduate student, I told my advisor when I had to undergo medical testing so that he didn't think I was being flaky and just disappearing or slowing down in work. Sharing that info with him reduced my stress, as I felt less guilty and less worried about work. Best of luck to you.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Bad news Hey everyone I went to the Dr a few days ago and she found a mass on my humerus. She was reluctant to officially diagnose but it seems that it is osteosarcoma. I was wondering if this is something I should tell my grad advisor. I’m hesitant because I’m afraid she might tell me to quit to be with my family. In all honesty I want to keep going until it gets bad enough I can’t leave my bed. The reason I’m inclined to telling here is because I might be spotty quite a Few days because of imaging testing and who knows ,maybe even bone autopsies.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "1. Get it properly diagnosed 2. Tell your advisor 3. Screw Grad school, do all available treatments. Are you insane? Your life is more important than finishing some research", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Bad news Hey everyone I went to the Dr a few days ago and she found a mass on my humerus. She was reluctant to officially diagnose but it seems that it is osteosarcoma. I was wondering if this is something I should tell my grad advisor. I’m hesitant because I’m afraid she might tell me to quit to be with my family. In all honesty I want to keep going until it gets bad enough I can’t leave my bed. The reason I’m inclined to telling here is because I might be spotty quite a Few days because of imaging testing and who knows ,maybe even bone autopsies.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I'm so sorry, I can't imagine how stressful it must be for you right now. Hope it turns out to be something benign. If your advisor is a decent human being, I'm sure she'll be supportive of you no matter what you do and decide in this difficult situation. Sending lots of good thoughts.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Bad news Hey everyone I went to the Dr a few days ago and she found a mass on my humerus. She was reluctant to officially diagnose but it seems that it is osteosarcoma. I was wondering if this is something I should tell my grad advisor. I’m hesitant because I’m afraid she might tell me to quit to be with my family. In all honesty I want to keep going until it gets bad enough I can’t leave my bed. The reason I’m inclined to telling here is because I might be spotty quite a Few days because of imaging testing and who knows ,maybe even bone autopsies.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I am so sorry you are going through this. When I was a month away from defending my dissertation, I was diagnosed with breast cancer. I shared the news with my Advisor, who told me she was also a BC survivor. I received so much unconditional support from her and the rest of my committee, along with all the support staff in the department. I was able to defend my dissertation, and one week later had surgery to remove the tumor and began chemo. I graduated on time that May and I honestly think I couldn’t have done it without the incredible support I received from everyone in my program. My circumstances may have been unique to this wonderful group of human beings, but I think the psychological and physical toll you may have to go through will be too overwhelming to keep secret and you may want to reconsider.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Bad news Hey everyone I went to the Dr a few days ago and she found a mass on my humerus. She was reluctant to officially diagnose but it seems that it is osteosarcoma. I was wondering if this is something I should tell my grad advisor. I’m hesitant because I’m afraid she might tell me to quit to be with my family. In all honesty I want to keep going until it gets bad enough I can’t leave my bed. The reason I’m inclined to telling here is because I might be spotty quite a Few days because of imaging testing and who knows ,maybe even bone autopsies.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I wish you good health and hope things will be on calm water", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Bad news Hey everyone I went to the Dr a few days ago and she found a mass on my humerus. She was reluctant to officially diagnose but it seems that it is osteosarcoma. I was wondering if this is something I should tell my grad advisor. I’m hesitant because I’m afraid she might tell me to quit to be with my family. In all honesty I want to keep going until it gets bad enough I can’t leave my bed. The reason I’m inclined to telling here is because I might be spotty quite a Few days because of imaging testing and who knows ,maybe even bone autopsies.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "1. Get it properly diagnosed 2. Tell your advisor 3. Screw Grad school, do all available treatments. Are you insane? Your life is more important than finishing some research", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Bad news Hey everyone I went to the Dr a few days ago and she found a mass on my humerus. She was reluctant to officially diagnose but it seems that it is osteosarcoma. I was wondering if this is something I should tell my grad advisor. I’m hesitant because I’m afraid she might tell me to quit to be with my family. In all honesty I want to keep going until it gets bad enough I can’t leave my bed. The reason I’m inclined to telling here is because I might be spotty quite a Few days because of imaging testing and who knows ,maybe even bone autopsies.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I would encourage you to look into your institutions resources for students with disabilities. Best wishes!", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Bad news Hey everyone I went to the Dr a few days ago and she found a mass on my humerus. She was reluctant to officially diagnose but it seems that it is osteosarcoma. I was wondering if this is something I should tell my grad advisor. I’m hesitant because I’m afraid she might tell me to quit to be with my family. In all honesty I want to keep going until it gets bad enough I can’t leave my bed. The reason I’m inclined to telling here is because I might be spotty quite a Few days because of imaging testing and who knows ,maybe even bone autopsies.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I was diagnosed with an osteosarcoma in my late teens. I had just been accepted to a college i was excited to go to when I got the diagnoses. My mistake was to move from home and support for a college in a town I’d never lived. I had to drop out midway thru the first term. I ended up having to rely on a gaggle of semi-friends (I.e. other students) to get me to and from appointments, the ER when I spiked a temp in the middle of the night, the cancer ward for chemo, etc. It was *not* ideal. I finally moved back home after that and spent a lot of time healing. You will **need** a support network if you get this diagnosis. If you get this horrible diagnosis, you’re life will forever change. Stoicism and bravery will not be enough to combat the new reality of your life filled with chemo, blood treatments, follow ups, hospitalizations, etc. If you have any plan of living through it, you will need the grace in time and understanding to prioritize your health. Research should be deprioritized. You should really consider taking a medical leave of absence. Find friends and family who can help be your advocate when you’re too weak to do it yourself. Establish your care network. Do this *before* you start chemotherapy: I can’t describe what that shit does to you physically *and* mentally. You can’t do this by yourself. I’m so so sorry you might have to battle this monster. I truly hope you get good news and it’s benign. I agree with those saying that telling your advisor can wait until after you get an actually confirmed diagnosis. I’d say you have some personal medical issues to deal with to explain your spotty availability during appointments; your advisor should respect your medical privacy.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Bad news Hey everyone I went to the Dr a few days ago and she found a mass on my humerus. She was reluctant to officially diagnose but it seems that it is osteosarcoma. I was wondering if this is something I should tell my grad advisor. I’m hesitant because I’m afraid she might tell me to quit to be with my family. In all honesty I want to keep going until it gets bad enough I can’t leave my bed. The reason I’m inclined to telling here is because I might be spotty quite a Few days because of imaging testing and who knows ,maybe even bone autopsies.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I would encourage you to look into your institutions resources for students with disabilities. Best wishes!", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What obscure skill have you picked up as a grad student/academic? I'm doing a biology PhD, and know exactly how to empty a mortar of powdered plant material suspended in liquid nitrogen into a tiny vial without it exploding (easier said than done), an obscure \"skill\" I've picked up doing hundreds of DNA extractions. Purely our of curiousity, what's your obscure skill?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I, someone who has never smoked weed and am sober-curious, am an excellent cannabis trimmer. Stumbled into a masters project in cannabis cultivation right out of undergrad and didnt blink at the prospect of growing a shit ton of weed for science.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What obscure skill have you picked up as a grad student/academic? I'm doing a biology PhD, and know exactly how to empty a mortar of powdered plant material suspended in liquid nitrogen into a tiny vial without it exploding (easier said than done), an obscure \"skill\" I've picked up doing hundreds of DNA extractions. Purely our of curiousity, what's your obscure skill?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I can do dotted lines on a chalk board in a quick stroke as in this video: https://youtu.be/MC-grMW9YVk", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What obscure skill have you picked up as a grad student/academic? I'm doing a biology PhD, and know exactly how to empty a mortar of powdered plant material suspended in liquid nitrogen into a tiny vial without it exploding (easier said than done), an obscure \"skill\" I've picked up doing hundreds of DNA extractions. Purely our of curiousity, what's your obscure skill?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I study bird song diversity across different habitats and now have the curse of knowing when bird songs in movies and games are ecologically inaccurate...", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What obscure skill have you picked up as a grad student/academic? I'm doing a biology PhD, and know exactly how to empty a mortar of powdered plant material suspended in liquid nitrogen into a tiny vial without it exploding (easier said than done), an obscure \"skill\" I've picked up doing hundreds of DNA extractions. Purely our of curiousity, what's your obscure skill?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Coding in Fortran. (Not that Fortran is obscure *per se* by any means, but the most common reaction I get from people both in and outside of my field is, \"Why is anyone still coding in that?!\")", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What obscure skill have you picked up as a grad student/academic? I'm doing a biology PhD, and know exactly how to empty a mortar of powdered plant material suspended in liquid nitrogen into a tiny vial without it exploding (easier said than done), an obscure \"skill\" I've picked up doing hundreds of DNA extractions. Purely our of curiousity, what's your obscure skill?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I'm in political science and all I've managed to learn how to do is fake competency while basically having no idea what I'm doing. ☝️", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What obscure skill have you picked up as a grad student/academic? I'm doing a biology PhD, and know exactly how to empty a mortar of powdered plant material suspended in liquid nitrogen into a tiny vial without it exploding (easier said than done), an obscure \"skill\" I've picked up doing hundreds of DNA extractions. Purely our of curiousity, what's your obscure skill?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Weighting things by eye. You'd be surprised by how often I get exactly 4.84 mg of material (or other similar silly numbers) at my first try, I scare myself sometimes lol", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What obscure skill have you picked up as a grad student/academic? I'm doing a biology PhD, and know exactly how to empty a mortar of powdered plant material suspended in liquid nitrogen into a tiny vial without it exploding (easier said than done), an obscure \"skill\" I've picked up doing hundreds of DNA extractions. Purely our of curiousity, what's your obscure skill?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I study bird song diversity across different habitats and now have the curse of knowing when bird songs in movies and games are ecologically inaccurate...", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What obscure skill have you picked up as a grad student/academic? I'm doing a biology PhD, and know exactly how to empty a mortar of powdered plant material suspended in liquid nitrogen into a tiny vial without it exploding (easier said than done), an obscure \"skill\" I've picked up doing hundreds of DNA extractions. Purely our of curiousity, what's your obscure skill?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I mean, I can draw blood from and dissect an entire mouse in about 3 mins... making sure the organs are undamaged and harvested whole. (For later analysis. I obviously don’t do this for fun.) I’m also quite good at estimating volumes of liquids by eye, opening doors without my hands, and have an unusual tolerance for handling very hot and/or cold items.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What obscure skill have you picked up as a grad student/academic? I'm doing a biology PhD, and know exactly how to empty a mortar of powdered plant material suspended in liquid nitrogen into a tiny vial without it exploding (easier said than done), an obscure \"skill\" I've picked up doing hundreds of DNA extractions. Purely our of curiousity, what's your obscure skill?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I study bird song diversity across different habitats and now have the curse of knowing when bird songs in movies and games are ecologically inaccurate...", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What obscure skill have you picked up as a grad student/academic? I'm doing a biology PhD, and know exactly how to empty a mortar of powdered plant material suspended in liquid nitrogen into a tiny vial without it exploding (easier said than done), an obscure \"skill\" I've picked up doing hundreds of DNA extractions. Purely our of curiousity, what's your obscure skill?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I can give fish tattoos with insulin syringes. I needed to track individuals in a tank to calculate growth rates and they were too small to tag with other methods.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you think research results in STEM should be published regardless of negative or positive conclusions? Researchers in the Department of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Exeter believe that publishing scientific articles is not an end unto itself. In a recent opinion piece, they state that researchers should not be disappointed or frustrated by negative results but strive to reach unbiased conclusions driven solely by the data. Thoughts?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Really weird for the article to use the term \"negative finding.\" The commonly used term is \"null finding,\" i.e., \"our research design did not produce credible and informative results.\" Null findings should be publishable. So should replications. There are also what are called \"informative null findings,\" which means your model credibly demonstrated that there is no effect.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you think research results in STEM should be published regardless of negative or positive conclusions? Researchers in the Department of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Exeter believe that publishing scientific articles is not an end unto itself. In a recent opinion piece, they state that researchers should not be disappointed or frustrated by negative results but strive to reach unbiased conclusions driven solely by the data. Thoughts?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I'm actually writing an editorial for my journal as we speak about the peer review process. Part of it will be to not allow our personal biases taint our view of the contrarian results and conclusions of a paper. That is followed by a tip to the authors to acknowledge the other perspective and emphasize that the contrarian results do not invalidate prior research but simply indicate a discrepancy that deserves further investigation for potential boundary conditions.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you think research results in STEM should be published regardless of negative or positive conclusions? Researchers in the Department of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Exeter believe that publishing scientific articles is not an end unto itself. In a recent opinion piece, they state that researchers should not be disappointed or frustrated by negative results but strive to reach unbiased conclusions driven solely by the data. Thoughts?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Really weird for the article to use the term \"negative finding.\" The commonly used term is \"null finding,\" i.e., \"our research design did not produce credible and informative results.\" Null findings should be publishable. So should replications. There are also what are called \"informative null findings,\" which means your model credibly demonstrated that there is no effect.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you think research results in STEM should be published regardless of negative or positive conclusions? Researchers in the Department of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Exeter believe that publishing scientific articles is not an end unto itself. In a recent opinion piece, they state that researchers should not be disappointed or frustrated by negative results but strive to reach unbiased conclusions driven solely by the data. Thoughts?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I think the results should be published, and I also think they shouldn't be paywalled, particularly if the research were publicly-funded.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you think research results in STEM should be published regardless of negative or positive conclusions? Researchers in the Department of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Exeter believe that publishing scientific articles is not an end unto itself. In a recent opinion piece, they state that researchers should not be disappointed or frustrated by negative results but strive to reach unbiased conclusions driven solely by the data. Thoughts?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "It's a way too complicated problem to just give an umbrella suggestion about what should be done.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you think research results in STEM should be published regardless of negative or positive conclusions? Researchers in the Department of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Exeter believe that publishing scientific articles is not an end unto itself. In a recent opinion piece, they state that researchers should not be disappointed or frustrated by negative results but strive to reach unbiased conclusions driven solely by the data. Thoughts?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I think the results should be published, and I also think they shouldn't be paywalled, particularly if the research were publicly-funded.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you think research results in STEM should be published regardless of negative or positive conclusions? Researchers in the Department of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Exeter believe that publishing scientific articles is not an end unto itself. In a recent opinion piece, they state that researchers should not be disappointed or frustrated by negative results but strive to reach unbiased conclusions driven solely by the data. Thoughts?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I think they probably should, but they don't warrant the full effort of an academic paper. One solution might be if journals had a \"negative notes\" section that left people publish very short briefs about the findings. This prevents having to read and write full length papers with zero impact, but also puts it in the scientific record to advise future studies.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you think research results in STEM should be published regardless of negative or positive conclusions? Researchers in the Department of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Exeter believe that publishing scientific articles is not an end unto itself. In a recent opinion piece, they state that researchers should not be disappointed or frustrated by negative results but strive to reach unbiased conclusions driven solely by the data. Thoughts?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I think the results should be published, and I also think they shouldn't be paywalled, particularly if the research were publicly-funded.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you think research results in STEM should be published regardless of negative or positive conclusions? Researchers in the Department of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Exeter believe that publishing scientific articles is not an end unto itself. In a recent opinion piece, they state that researchers should not be disappointed or frustrated by negative results but strive to reach unbiased conclusions driven solely by the data. Thoughts?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "It's a way too complicated problem to just give an umbrella suggestion about what should be done.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you think research results in STEM should be published regardless of negative or positive conclusions? Researchers in the Department of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Exeter believe that publishing scientific articles is not an end unto itself. In a recent opinion piece, they state that researchers should not be disappointed or frustrated by negative results but strive to reach unbiased conclusions driven solely by the data. Thoughts?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I have plenty of failed theories and failed designs. I want to publish them, but journals don't accept research that results in the failure of a theory. You have to bring forth a successful and a failed theory to get a journal to give your failed theory some representation, only because it's being compared to positive results. I hate this shit. It leads to researchers tweaking results and corrupting data. More than that, given that most theories fail and coming towards a successful solution that works requires an understanding of what doesn't work and why, this attitude has bastardized the academic record. This is damaging to the collective knowledge base of humanity.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "I think I've just failed my PhD This is kind of my open letter to academia... My PhD was tough. It started really well, full UK scholarship, amazing project, and enthusiasm to do amazing research and follow the dream career. Then something happened. Can't pinpoint where or when, but my mental health deteriorated rapidly. I started to be afraid of going to the lab, and everything crumbled from there. Two intermissions to try to sort my health, a referral at the first Viva and major corrections on my second and I have just submitted corrections.. I tried so hard to juggle the corrections with work, and I really doubt it was enough. I'm away from academia now, and even though I'm starting again I'm doing well in my new career. Still disappointed in myself though. On the other hand, I've now done the final mic-drop on the (very personal) hell that became academia. To those who managed to survive, you are in a wonderful industry where you get to be creative and use your unique view on the world to enhance the knowledge of the human population. I wish you all the best of success and all of the grants and papers your hearts desire. I'm not bitter of any of you, just a bit disappointed in myself. But hey that's life. Thanks academia, I've learned lots not only about my subject matter, but also about myself.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "There is so much I want to say to you. But I'm gonna start with the most important. You did NOT fail. You took control of your mental health, and frankly, that's so much more important than a degree. I need you to understand how utterly brave and strong that choice was. There are many of us didn't make that choice. I remember having a nervous breakdown 6 months before I defended, like on the brink of committing myself to a psych ward. If it hadn't been for a bit of luck and a kind committee member, I wouldn't have finished either. The other thing I need you to understand is that Academia isn't the great answer. You can save the world without ever taking another foot on a campus. I wish you the best of all the world in your new career. And I don't know you at all, but I'm very proud of you.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "I think I've just failed my PhD This is kind of my open letter to academia... My PhD was tough. It started really well, full UK scholarship, amazing project, and enthusiasm to do amazing research and follow the dream career. Then something happened. Can't pinpoint where or when, but my mental health deteriorated rapidly. I started to be afraid of going to the lab, and everything crumbled from there. Two intermissions to try to sort my health, a referral at the first Viva and major corrections on my second and I have just submitted corrections.. I tried so hard to juggle the corrections with work, and I really doubt it was enough. I'm away from academia now, and even though I'm starting again I'm doing well in my new career. Still disappointed in myself though. On the other hand, I've now done the final mic-drop on the (very personal) hell that became academia. To those who managed to survive, you are in a wonderful industry where you get to be creative and use your unique view on the world to enhance the knowledge of the human population. I wish you all the best of success and all of the grants and papers your hearts desire. I'm not bitter of any of you, just a bit disappointed in myself. But hey that's life. Thanks academia, I've learned lots not only about my subject matter, but also about myself.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Congrats on finding your footing on a path that appears to work for you. Having worked in industry and academia, I know first-hand that neither one is \"better,\" they are just different career paths, with different advantages and disadvantages. I know brilliant, successful people that never tried to earn a Ph.D., that tried and chose not to finish, that finished and chose to go into industry, and that finished and stayed in academia. Leaving academia and going into something that works for you is absolutely not a failure, it is a success. I'm not disappointed in you--nor in any of my students who chose a different path than I did (in fact, I have counseled some of them not to follow my path)--and you absolutely need not be disappointed in yourself. If you are happy with where you are now, that's all that matters.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Have you ever seen anyone fail a PhD Defense? Per the title. I defend my dissertation in a few days, and I feel like my defense is shaping up to be very... Unimpressive for a variety of reasons. My committee gave me the green light to look for jobs and write a dissertation. I turned in the document a few days ago, and I have a job lined up, but I'm growing nervous about my defense because, well, it feels like it's garbage. I'm largely asking because I want to know just how bad I need to do in order to actually fail.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I have failed a student once, but the reasons were not related to the results. The reasons were (a) the manuscript was very badly written and (b) the work was blatantly unfinished. The reason why the supervisor let this student defend were related to the rules of the university (you had to defend after N years) rather than being an official \"green light\". The student failed that time, but we gave them a second chance after one year of extra work, which ended up in a successful attempt and graduation. None of this applies to you. You'll pass!", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Have you ever seen anyone fail a PhD Defense? Per the title. I defend my dissertation in a few days, and I feel like my defense is shaping up to be very... Unimpressive for a variety of reasons. My committee gave me the green light to look for jobs and write a dissertation. I turned in the document a few days ago, and I have a job lined up, but I'm growing nervous about my defense because, well, it feels like it's garbage. I'm largely asking because I want to know just how bad I need to do in order to actually fail.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "You're stressed— it's natural, but it's going to be fine. Are you going in person or are you doing it via Zoom? If going in person, focus more on where you want to get lunch/dinner after (if safe to do so) and not the event itself. The day after, you'll be asking yourself what you were so stressed about, I promise :)", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Have you ever seen anyone fail a PhD Defense? Per the title. I defend my dissertation in a few days, and I feel like my defense is shaping up to be very... Unimpressive for a variety of reasons. My committee gave me the green light to look for jobs and write a dissertation. I turned in the document a few days ago, and I have a job lined up, but I'm growing nervous about my defense because, well, it feels like it's garbage. I'm largely asking because I want to know just how bad I need to do in order to actually fail.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "At my school you have to collect the 5 signatures like a quest in an RPG. They wouldnt let you do that part if you wernt ready. The quals is where they beat you senseless. The defense is more of a formality. If you did your work, if your adviser thinks it's sufficient, it is. Think of it more like your first time being a colleague and not a student. You did some research. It's original. They've never seen it before. They arnt quizzing you on info they know and you might. They're questioning you about a topic they dont know and you do. You are the instructor and they are your very very curious and demanding students. You are the worlds leading expert on whatever. Bring them up to speed.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Have you ever seen anyone fail a PhD Defense? Per the title. I defend my dissertation in a few days, and I feel like my defense is shaping up to be very... Unimpressive for a variety of reasons. My committee gave me the green light to look for jobs and write a dissertation. I turned in the document a few days ago, and I have a job lined up, but I'm growing nervous about my defense because, well, it feels like it's garbage. I'm largely asking because I want to know just how bad I need to do in order to actually fail.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "In every program I know of, it's the responsibility of the chair/adviser to have a private sit-down talk with the candidate if they're not ready. Most committees have read most (or all) of the dissertation prior to the defense, and they pretty much know if it's going to pass. Candidates get varying levels of revisions, but the pass/fail is decided before you enter the room.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Have you ever seen anyone fail a PhD Defense? Per the title. I defend my dissertation in a few days, and I feel like my defense is shaping up to be very... Unimpressive for a variety of reasons. My committee gave me the green light to look for jobs and write a dissertation. I turned in the document a few days ago, and I have a job lined up, but I'm growing nervous about my defense because, well, it feels like it's garbage. I'm largely asking because I want to know just how bad I need to do in order to actually fail.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "NZ here. I know an oral defence is used to determine and ensure the work was written by the student. So if you were really struggling to answer questions about the content then you could fail... But generally speaking everyone I've ever heard of doing it has passed", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Have you ever seen anyone fail a PhD Defense? Per the title. I defend my dissertation in a few days, and I feel like my defense is shaping up to be very... Unimpressive for a variety of reasons. My committee gave me the green light to look for jobs and write a dissertation. I turned in the document a few days ago, and I have a job lined up, but I'm growing nervous about my defense because, well, it feels like it's garbage. I'm largely asking because I want to know just how bad I need to do in order to actually fail.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Yes, colleague and office-mate failed first defense and was given 6 months to do a complete re-write, after which they passed and now hold a tenure-track position.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Have you ever seen anyone fail a PhD Defense? Per the title. I defend my dissertation in a few days, and I feel like my defense is shaping up to be very... Unimpressive for a variety of reasons. My committee gave me the green light to look for jobs and write a dissertation. I turned in the document a few days ago, and I have a job lined up, but I'm growing nervous about my defense because, well, it feels like it's garbage. I'm largely asking because I want to know just how bad I need to do in order to actually fail.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "At my school you have to collect the 5 signatures like a quest in an RPG. They wouldnt let you do that part if you wernt ready. The quals is where they beat you senseless. The defense is more of a formality. If you did your work, if your adviser thinks it's sufficient, it is. Think of it more like your first time being a colleague and not a student. You did some research. It's original. They've never seen it before. They arnt quizzing you on info they know and you might. They're questioning you about a topic they dont know and you do. You are the instructor and they are your very very curious and demanding students. You are the worlds leading expert on whatever. Bring them up to speed.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Have you ever seen anyone fail a PhD Defense? Per the title. I defend my dissertation in a few days, and I feel like my defense is shaping up to be very... Unimpressive for a variety of reasons. My committee gave me the green light to look for jobs and write a dissertation. I turned in the document a few days ago, and I have a job lined up, but I'm growing nervous about my defense because, well, it feels like it's garbage. I'm largely asking because I want to know just how bad I need to do in order to actually fail.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Mine is on Friday 🤢", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Have you ever seen anyone fail a PhD Defense? Per the title. I defend my dissertation in a few days, and I feel like my defense is shaping up to be very... Unimpressive for a variety of reasons. My committee gave me the green light to look for jobs and write a dissertation. I turned in the document a few days ago, and I have a job lined up, but I'm growing nervous about my defense because, well, it feels like it's garbage. I'm largely asking because I want to know just how bad I need to do in order to actually fail.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "At my school you have to collect the 5 signatures like a quest in an RPG. They wouldnt let you do that part if you wernt ready. The quals is where they beat you senseless. The defense is more of a formality. If you did your work, if your adviser thinks it's sufficient, it is. Think of it more like your first time being a colleague and not a student. You did some research. It's original. They've never seen it before. They arnt quizzing you on info they know and you might. They're questioning you about a topic they dont know and you do. You are the instructor and they are your very very curious and demanding students. You are the worlds leading expert on whatever. Bring them up to speed.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Have you ever seen anyone fail a PhD Defense? Per the title. I defend my dissertation in a few days, and I feel like my defense is shaping up to be very... Unimpressive for a variety of reasons. My committee gave me the green light to look for jobs and write a dissertation. I turned in the document a few days ago, and I have a job lined up, but I'm growing nervous about my defense because, well, it feels like it's garbage. I'm largely asking because I want to know just how bad I need to do in order to actually fail.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "You're stressed— it's natural, but it's going to be fine. Are you going in person or are you doing it via Zoom? If going in person, focus more on where you want to get lunch/dinner after (if safe to do so) and not the event itself. The day after, you'll be asking yourself what you were so stressed about, I promise :)", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "If you could start your PhD life from scratch, what one thing would you do differently? Hindsight hour!", "role": "user" }, { "content": "1. Start therapy. Mental health is the most important thing and imo the best determinant of success in grad school and in life. Also student insurance is sweet. 2. Network network network. Don't assume you will stay in academia. And don't look at the PhD as an end in itself. Think about what you want once you are done and prepare for it. You might change your views along the way but better start the process early than in the last 1 year. 3. Stick to a 9-5 routine if possible and actually socialize on days off. Don't let anyone push your boundaries. People will try to make you feel bad for not slaving away. Recognize it for the dysfunctional way of life it is. Work smart and work consistent. This is your degree, don't follow anyone blindly if you don't agree.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "If you could start your PhD life from scratch, what one thing would you do differently? Hindsight hour!", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I would have left. After harassment and negligence of the department and university, the abuse of graduate students, I wish I had walked away.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "If you could start your PhD life from scratch, what one thing would you do differently? Hindsight hour!", "role": "user" }, { "content": "1. Start therapy. Mental health is the most important thing and imo the best determinant of success in grad school and in life. Also student insurance is sweet. 2. Network network network. Don't assume you will stay in academia. And don't look at the PhD as an end in itself. Think about what you want once you are done and prepare for it. You might change your views along the way but better start the process early than in the last 1 year. 3. Stick to a 9-5 routine if possible and actually socialize on days off. Don't let anyone push your boundaries. People will try to make you feel bad for not slaving away. Recognize it for the dysfunctional way of life it is. Work smart and work consistent. This is your degree, don't follow anyone blindly if you don't agree.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "If you could start your PhD life from scratch, what one thing would you do differently? Hindsight hour!", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Have a better balance. Prioritize regular time away from research and work out regularly. Mental illness is incredibly common among doctoral students.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "If you could start your PhD life from scratch, what one thing would you do differently? Hindsight hour!", "role": "user" }, { "content": "1. Start therapy. Mental health is the most important thing and imo the best determinant of success in grad school and in life. Also student insurance is sweet. 2. Network network network. Don't assume you will stay in academia. And don't look at the PhD as an end in itself. Think about what you want once you are done and prepare for it. You might change your views along the way but better start the process early than in the last 1 year. 3. Stick to a 9-5 routine if possible and actually socialize on days off. Don't let anyone push your boundaries. People will try to make you feel bad for not slaving away. Recognize it for the dysfunctional way of life it is. Work smart and work consistent. This is your degree, don't follow anyone blindly if you don't agree.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "If you could start your PhD life from scratch, what one thing would you do differently? Hindsight hour!", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Probably try harder for grants, maybe look for less competitive ones and work to focus the impact of my research. I took loans to cover research costs and it’s biting me in the ass now. Also I’d work harder to network. It’s something I’m still terrible at and connections can make a big difference on the job market.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "If you could start your PhD life from scratch, what one thing would you do differently? Hindsight hour!", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Save money. Go to lab everyday from 10-6. Stop procrastinating about experiments. Ignore your labmates. Your experiments are equally important, don’t be like “yeah I can wait” Go to gym.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "If you could start your PhD life from scratch, what one thing would you do differently? Hindsight hour!", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Really nothing.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "If you could start your PhD life from scratch, what one thing would you do differently? Hindsight hour!", "role": "user" }, { "content": "1. Start therapy. Mental health is the most important thing and imo the best determinant of success in grad school and in life. Also student insurance is sweet. 2. Network network network. Don't assume you will stay in academia. And don't look at the PhD as an end in itself. Think about what you want once you are done and prepare for it. You might change your views along the way but better start the process early than in the last 1 year. 3. Stick to a 9-5 routine if possible and actually socialize on days off. Don't let anyone push your boundaries. People will try to make you feel bad for not slaving away. Recognize it for the dysfunctional way of life it is. Work smart and work consistent. This is your degree, don't follow anyone blindly if you don't agree.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "If you could start your PhD life from scratch, what one thing would you do differently? Hindsight hour!", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Digital engagement. Like starting academic engagement with Twitter, and posting in-progress work to places like academia.edu and researchgate.net earlier. Most of my networking has come from digital engagement because my field is quite small and scholars in the field are so widely dispersed across the globe. I now include this as a small project for my students at the Masters level.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "People who hire faculty and postdocs, out of the “200 applicants for 1 position” how many were never serious contenders to begin with? And the ones who aren’t serious contenders, what tends to disqualify them? Wrong subfield? Wrong field entirely? Not enough pubs? Low rank university?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "In my experience, it's usually 1/3. We usually have some random people submitting apps, like medical doctors that think they should now be a professor in a completely unrelated field. The next 1/3 is usually missing something big, like pubs or teaching experience. The last 1/3 are where most of the attention is focused, and the difference between those applicants is usually quite nuanced.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "People who hire faculty and postdocs, out of the “200 applicants for 1 position” how many were never serious contenders to begin with? And the ones who aren’t serious contenders, what tends to disqualify them? Wrong subfield? Wrong field entirely? Not enough pubs? Low rank university?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I recently hired another assistant professor. Pool of ~30 applied. ~15 were actually qualified. ~6 were good fits for short list. 3 made final short list.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "People who hire faculty and postdocs, out of the “200 applicants for 1 position” how many were never serious contenders to begin with? And the ones who aren’t serious contenders, what tends to disqualify them? Wrong subfield? Wrong field entirely? Not enough pubs? Low rank university?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "In my experience, it's usually 1/3. We usually have some random people submitting apps, like medical doctors that think they should now be a professor in a completely unrelated field. The next 1/3 is usually missing something big, like pubs or teaching experience. The last 1/3 are where most of the attention is focused, and the difference between those applicants is usually quite nuanced.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "People who hire faculty and postdocs, out of the “200 applicants for 1 position” how many were never serious contenders to begin with? And the ones who aren’t serious contenders, what tends to disqualify them? Wrong subfield? Wrong field entirely? Not enough pubs? Low rank university?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "100-150. We scan the list based on university, CVs, references, and bear in mind candidates who come particularly highly recommended. So, you can be considered from a low ranked institution if someone is willing to make calls for you to say you're the best thing since sliced bread, and we also won't really consider people from the top universities either unless they have something special going for them (a comment from faculty or great references/pubs). Field matters for some searches, but not all.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "People who hire faculty and postdocs, out of the “200 applicants for 1 position” how many were never serious contenders to begin with? And the ones who aren’t serious contenders, what tends to disqualify them? Wrong subfield? Wrong field entirely? Not enough pubs? Low rank university?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "In my experience, half of the applications are irrelevant or just too stretched (e.g. I asked for an expert in bamboo basket weaving, the candidate has seen a bamboo basket once in their lives or they are an expert in bamboo planting). The next chopping block is on institutional fit. I have worked at teaching institutions almost exclusively. So over-emphasis of research / not talking enough about teaching in cover letter cut candidates out. Then we go with alma mater, experience, research, and - more important than anything else - potential for growth.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "People who hire faculty and postdocs, out of the “200 applicants for 1 position” how many were never serious contenders to begin with? And the ones who aren’t serious contenders, what tends to disqualify them? Wrong subfield? Wrong field entirely? Not enough pubs? Low rank university?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "100+ for one position at an R1, open call for assistant profs (with the possibility we can make up to 2-3 hires off the position, to be clear). Many got knocked out of my pile for wrong angling of the materials for the department in the cover letter, poor CVs (like badly organized or misleading), poorly articulated research vision, and god awful teaching or diversity statements. We asked explicitly for the candidate's best three papers to help resist bean counting, and there is a soft cut if most don't appear in top venues. In CS, students very frequently first author multiple papers and if the best aren't in top conferences or journals, then it's a tough sell. There is worry that the potential faculty member won't produce enough to pass muster for tenure evaluations.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "People who hire faculty and postdocs, out of the “200 applicants for 1 position” how many were never serious contenders to begin with? And the ones who aren’t serious contenders, what tends to disqualify them? Wrong subfield? Wrong field entirely? Not enough pubs? Low rank university?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I’ve been on med school faculty search committees for a few years. We get 200-400 applications for open calls, with the vast majority applying for their first faculty job. There’s usually around 75-100 “reasonable” applications - a complete application, post-doc experience, reasonable evidence of research productivity (med school so teaching is less important). These are usually easy to narrow down to 10-15 with really good past research (number and quality of papers) and reference letters, with maybe half of those having a truly competitive research statement. We interview 5-10, and offer second visits to 1-3 depending on the year. Most get through the scripted talk on their past research just fine, but fail at the chalk talk where they have to give a reasonable account of what they want to work on, why they think it’s important, and some outline of what they think they should tackle first. These are usually candidates whose research statements weren’t particularly strong, but who we thought worth looking at more carefully. It’s the damnedest thing, but in a pile of several hundred applications from a lot of smart and driven people, you can usually find a handful whose ideas stand head and shoulders above the rest. TL;DR it’s usually the research statement. Very few people can give a coherent account of an interesting problem, explain why they think this is a deep issue, and propose some reasonable approaches.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "People who hire faculty and postdocs, out of the “200 applicants for 1 position” how many were never serious contenders to begin with? And the ones who aren’t serious contenders, what tends to disqualify them? Wrong subfield? Wrong field entirely? Not enough pubs? Low rank university?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I did two postdocs, the first one had 5 applicants, the second was 3 lmao. (Also, both insitutes are great, the 3 applicant one is number 4 in the world for my field... It's just so niche within the field that no one really does it. It's good that whenever I apply it'll probably be less than 10 people, but bad because I only see a handful of jobs per year.)", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "People who hire faculty and postdocs, out of the “200 applicants for 1 position” how many were never serious contenders to begin with? And the ones who aren’t serious contenders, what tends to disqualify them? Wrong subfield? Wrong field entirely? Not enough pubs? Low rank university?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "In my experience, it's usually 1/3. We usually have some random people submitting apps, like medical doctors that think they should now be a professor in a completely unrelated field. The next 1/3 is usually missing something big, like pubs or teaching experience. The last 1/3 are where most of the attention is focused, and the difference between those applicants is usually quite nuanced.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "People who hire faculty and postdocs, out of the “200 applicants for 1 position” how many were never serious contenders to begin with? And the ones who aren’t serious contenders, what tends to disqualify them? Wrong subfield? Wrong field entirely? Not enough pubs? Low rank university?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I served on a search committee as an advanced student and we had about 40 applicants. 6 made it to phone interviews and 3 to on-campus lectures. Our search was a joint appointment between two schools so we had to find the best fit for the joint placement, an increasingly difficult task. We had candidates from multiple subfields within psychology. Two of the finalists had next to no teaching experience and the winner has next to none. They had quite a few publications though. Some of the phone interview finalists did not have many publications/came from lower ranking universities. It all depends on the search and search committee on disqualifications. One of the biggest ones was incomplete applications or applications that seemed like a one-size-fits-all (reused for many positions and not much thought into tailoring it to the specific search). Our university is a public state university with ~15k students.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What secret unspoken reasons did your hiring committee choose one candidate over another? Grant writing potential? Color of skin? Length of responses? Interview just a formality so the nepotism isn't as obvious? We all know it exists, but perhaps not specifically. Any details you'd like to share about yours?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Wasn't on the committee but when I was a candidate for a TT position at one of the schools where I adjunct, I was told by two separate people who were on the committee (although I can't imagine they were allowed to tell me this but they did) that the committee was divided over whether or not to hire me or someone else because I am a single Mom and several committee members didn't think a single Mom could handle a full time TT position. One of the people who voted against me was my Department Chair at the time (also a Mom). She asked me to stop by her office so she could be the one to tell me I wasn't chosen and why because she thought it would make me feel better to know that it wasn't *me* they didn't like. Narrator: It did not. ​ edited: typo", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What secret unspoken reasons did your hiring committee choose one candidate over another? Grant writing potential? Color of skin? Length of responses? Interview just a formality so the nepotism isn't as obvious? We all know it exists, but perhaps not specifically. Any details you'd like to share about yours?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I think we actually speak everything and then someone yells “you’re not supposed to say that!” So all of our bad reasons are actually spoken.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What secret unspoken reasons did your hiring committee choose one candidate over another? Grant writing potential? Color of skin? Length of responses? Interview just a formality so the nepotism isn't as obvious? We all know it exists, but perhaps not specifically. Any details you'd like to share about yours?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "We were told the admin said “don’t hire another white male”. It would have been “unspoken” but we are a tight group.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What secret unspoken reasons did your hiring committee choose one candidate over another? Grant writing potential? Color of skin? Length of responses? Interview just a formality so the nepotism isn't as obvious? We all know it exists, but perhaps not specifically. Any details you'd like to share about yours?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Administrative pressure, sigh", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What secret unspoken reasons did your hiring committee choose one candidate over another? Grant writing potential? Color of skin? Length of responses? Interview just a formality so the nepotism isn't as obvious? We all know it exists, but perhaps not specifically. Any details you'd like to share about yours?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "We were deciding between two candidates. One was a postdoc with an impressive set of publications and grants working at an prestigious university. The other was an assistant professor on the tenure track at a teaching-focused institution with far less publications and no grants. No issues with fit for either one and both were hoping to move to the area for family reasons. Our chair (who wasn't on the committee but was advising) wrote in that he'd prefer to restart the search before giving it to the postdoc. His reasoning? That the postdoc wouldn't be happy long-term at our R2. We ended up selecting the assistant professor and will have to see how it works out, but the postdoc still doesn't have a job. I assume other interviews/offers may have been pulled due to covid. It's tough out there, even for really qualified candidates.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What secret unspoken reasons did your hiring committee choose one candidate over another? Grant writing potential? Color of skin? Length of responses? Interview just a formality so the nepotism isn't as obvious? We all know it exists, but perhaps not specifically. Any details you'd like to share about yours?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Administrative pressure, sigh", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What secret unspoken reasons did your hiring committee choose one candidate over another? Grant writing potential? Color of skin? Length of responses? Interview just a formality so the nepotism isn't as obvious? We all know it exists, but perhaps not specifically. Any details you'd like to share about yours?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I've been on over two dozen search committees at multiple schools over the years. In my experience they've all not only been fair, but pretty transparent as well. Every one has been an open, international search, and while we've had a few internal candidates none of them ever made the shortlist. The one thing I have seen complicate decisions has been a desire for gender balance-- like all-male departments hoping to hire a female (or the opposite, which we've had too). You obviously can't write that into an ad but it happens all the time. That aside, I've had no interference from deans and as a frequent department chair have not interfered myself. That said, there have been *plenty* of reasons we've dropped people based on their applications or interview performance. For example, I've seen dozens of lawyers apply for academic jobs saying they \"would like a change of pace and a lighter workload\" and suggesting that since they have a JD and read a few books they'd be great professors. Those are always good for a laugh. Then there were the ones who said overtly sexist or even racist things during their on-campus interviews. Or the guy who we took to dinner with several faculty, ordered a nice steak dinner but told them not to bring anything but the meat, and proceeded to talk about comic books for two hours (and only comic books) despite repeated efforts to bring the conversation around to his research and/or teaching interests (neither of which were related to comic books).", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What secret unspoken reasons did your hiring committee choose one candidate over another? Grant writing potential? Color of skin? Length of responses? Interview just a formality so the nepotism isn't as obvious? We all know it exists, but perhaps not specifically. Any details you'd like to share about yours?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Spouses on top of spouses with a diversity topper.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What secret unspoken reasons did your hiring committee choose one candidate over another? Grant writing potential? Color of skin? Length of responses? Interview just a formality so the nepotism isn't as obvious? We all know it exists, but perhaps not specifically. Any details you'd like to share about yours?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Wasn't on the committee but when I was a candidate for a TT position at one of the schools where I adjunct, I was told by two separate people who were on the committee (although I can't imagine they were allowed to tell me this but they did) that the committee was divided over whether or not to hire me or someone else because I am a single Mom and several committee members didn't think a single Mom could handle a full time TT position. One of the people who voted against me was my Department Chair at the time (also a Mom). She asked me to stop by her office so she could be the one to tell me I wasn't chosen and why because she thought it would make me feel better to know that it wasn't *me* they didn't like. Narrator: It did not. ​ edited: typo", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "What secret unspoken reasons did your hiring committee choose one candidate over another? Grant writing potential? Color of skin? Length of responses? Interview just a formality so the nepotism isn't as obvious? We all know it exists, but perhaps not specifically. Any details you'd like to share about yours?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Dean’s old phd student - not a bad candidate at all but still didn’t feel right.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Is it normal to become more convinced your discipline is detached from practical reality the more you study it? I know this might read as a trollish post, but I *promise* I'm serious. So, I'm currently halfway through my Adv. MSc. International Relations & Diplomacy, and while my undergrad was a Liberal Arts BA, that was also heavily IR-focused. Honestly? I love it, but only in the context of academic bickering about pointless minutae that do not matter outside the walls of the faculty - the more I've studied IR theories, the less my remarks of \"we're a humanities field trying to masquerade as a hard science\" and \"if you open the dictionary to 'Ivory Tower Academia' you'll find a picture of our faculty\" have become jokes. I know there's always going to be a difference between academic theory and practices in reality - you clearly *need* to perform abstractions when creating a theory, but several of the main theories in my field just feel like they fall apart at the first dose of being exposed to the outside. I've always had this feeling to some extent, but it's grown rather than diminished, and I'm now actually worried whether or not I'll be able to put any conviction whatsoever in my master's thesis next year. Is this just a natural side effect of learning more about your field's theoretical frameworks and therefore being exposed to case studies where they *don't* work more, or am I just seriously disillusioned/too cynical? TL;DR starting to feel like my entire field desperately needs to go touch grass and talk to people, is that normal?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I'm not in IR, I'm an American and a historian trying to wrap up my dissertation, and while the theories and methodology we use make sense to me, I'm working on something rather obscure to Americans and I can't help but feel like it *doesn't mean anything* when I compare my work to Americanists whose subjects deal with the most politically charged debates of the day. I can't help but admire those who work on the American West, American South, and the Civil Rights Movement. That isn't to say that I don't love my topic--I work on French colonialism in North Africa--nor that it lacks continuing relevance in the Mediterranean, but it just *feels* unimportant from my vantage point, and that's ok. Knowing that I feel this way, my aim is to get a job outside of research when I finish it, whether in teaching or some other, non-academic field. I know that it's normal to feel this about our research and work, but it's not something that I can digest as easily as many other academics can.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Is it normal to become more convinced your discipline is detached from practical reality the more you study it? I know this might read as a trollish post, but I *promise* I'm serious. So, I'm currently halfway through my Adv. MSc. International Relations & Diplomacy, and while my undergrad was a Liberal Arts BA, that was also heavily IR-focused. Honestly? I love it, but only in the context of academic bickering about pointless minutae that do not matter outside the walls of the faculty - the more I've studied IR theories, the less my remarks of \"we're a humanities field trying to masquerade as a hard science\" and \"if you open the dictionary to 'Ivory Tower Academia' you'll find a picture of our faculty\" have become jokes. I know there's always going to be a difference between academic theory and practices in reality - you clearly *need* to perform abstractions when creating a theory, but several of the main theories in my field just feel like they fall apart at the first dose of being exposed to the outside. I've always had this feeling to some extent, but it's grown rather than diminished, and I'm now actually worried whether or not I'll be able to put any conviction whatsoever in my master's thesis next year. Is this just a natural side effect of learning more about your field's theoretical frameworks and therefore being exposed to case studies where they *don't* work more, or am I just seriously disillusioned/too cynical? TL;DR starting to feel like my entire field desperately needs to go touch grass and talk to people, is that normal?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I think most in the field are probably aware and working towards creating better theories, or more predictable ones. Based on a theory, we can expect something to happen, but even a cancer doctor has to make the treatment based on the type of cancer, the body of the person, and cancer response to treatment. It is a human making decisions, not a theory.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Is it normal to become more convinced your discipline is detached from practical reality the more you study it? I know this might read as a trollish post, but I *promise* I'm serious. So, I'm currently halfway through my Adv. MSc. International Relations & Diplomacy, and while my undergrad was a Liberal Arts BA, that was also heavily IR-focused. Honestly? I love it, but only in the context of academic bickering about pointless minutae that do not matter outside the walls of the faculty - the more I've studied IR theories, the less my remarks of \"we're a humanities field trying to masquerade as a hard science\" and \"if you open the dictionary to 'Ivory Tower Academia' you'll find a picture of our faculty\" have become jokes. I know there's always going to be a difference between academic theory and practices in reality - you clearly *need* to perform abstractions when creating a theory, but several of the main theories in my field just feel like they fall apart at the first dose of being exposed to the outside. I've always had this feeling to some extent, but it's grown rather than diminished, and I'm now actually worried whether or not I'll be able to put any conviction whatsoever in my master's thesis next year. Is this just a natural side effect of learning more about your field's theoretical frameworks and therefore being exposed to case studies where they *don't* work more, or am I just seriously disillusioned/too cynical? TL;DR starting to feel like my entire field desperately needs to go touch grass and talk to people, is that normal?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "You are right, but nearly all fields are detached from practical reality. There would be something wrong with you if you *didn’t* start to think that after a while.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Is it normal to become more convinced your discipline is detached from practical reality the more you study it? I know this might read as a trollish post, but I *promise* I'm serious. So, I'm currently halfway through my Adv. MSc. International Relations & Diplomacy, and while my undergrad was a Liberal Arts BA, that was also heavily IR-focused. Honestly? I love it, but only in the context of academic bickering about pointless minutae that do not matter outside the walls of the faculty - the more I've studied IR theories, the less my remarks of \"we're a humanities field trying to masquerade as a hard science\" and \"if you open the dictionary to 'Ivory Tower Academia' you'll find a picture of our faculty\" have become jokes. I know there's always going to be a difference between academic theory and practices in reality - you clearly *need* to perform abstractions when creating a theory, but several of the main theories in my field just feel like they fall apart at the first dose of being exposed to the outside. I've always had this feeling to some extent, but it's grown rather than diminished, and I'm now actually worried whether or not I'll be able to put any conviction whatsoever in my master's thesis next year. Is this just a natural side effect of learning more about your field's theoretical frameworks and therefore being exposed to case studies where they *don't* work more, or am I just seriously disillusioned/too cynical? TL;DR starting to feel like my entire field desperately needs to go touch grass and talk to people, is that normal?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I think most in the field are probably aware and working towards creating better theories, or more predictable ones. Based on a theory, we can expect something to happen, but even a cancer doctor has to make the treatment based on the type of cancer, the body of the person, and cancer response to treatment. It is a human making decisions, not a theory.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Is it normal to become more convinced your discipline is detached from practical reality the more you study it? I know this might read as a trollish post, but I *promise* I'm serious. So, I'm currently halfway through my Adv. MSc. International Relations & Diplomacy, and while my undergrad was a Liberal Arts BA, that was also heavily IR-focused. Honestly? I love it, but only in the context of academic bickering about pointless minutae that do not matter outside the walls of the faculty - the more I've studied IR theories, the less my remarks of \"we're a humanities field trying to masquerade as a hard science\" and \"if you open the dictionary to 'Ivory Tower Academia' you'll find a picture of our faculty\" have become jokes. I know there's always going to be a difference between academic theory and practices in reality - you clearly *need* to perform abstractions when creating a theory, but several of the main theories in my field just feel like they fall apart at the first dose of being exposed to the outside. I've always had this feeling to some extent, but it's grown rather than diminished, and I'm now actually worried whether or not I'll be able to put any conviction whatsoever in my master's thesis next year. Is this just a natural side effect of learning more about your field's theoretical frameworks and therefore being exposed to case studies where they *don't* work more, or am I just seriously disillusioned/too cynical? TL;DR starting to feel like my entire field desperately needs to go touch grass and talk to people, is that normal?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I've always viewed this kind of academia vs real world as being like haute couture vs high street fashion. You're not supposed to wear haute couture it's an exercise in skill and creativity to the extreme. And although haute couture isn't meant to be worn it does influence what the next high street fashions will be. Academia is kind of the same, it's an exercise in itself but it does influence and trickle down to the real world in real and important, albeit in unpredictable, ways.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Is it normal to become more convinced your discipline is detached from practical reality the more you study it? I know this might read as a trollish post, but I *promise* I'm serious. So, I'm currently halfway through my Adv. MSc. International Relations & Diplomacy, and while my undergrad was a Liberal Arts BA, that was also heavily IR-focused. Honestly? I love it, but only in the context of academic bickering about pointless minutae that do not matter outside the walls of the faculty - the more I've studied IR theories, the less my remarks of \"we're a humanities field trying to masquerade as a hard science\" and \"if you open the dictionary to 'Ivory Tower Academia' you'll find a picture of our faculty\" have become jokes. I know there's always going to be a difference between academic theory and practices in reality - you clearly *need* to perform abstractions when creating a theory, but several of the main theories in my field just feel like they fall apart at the first dose of being exposed to the outside. I've always had this feeling to some extent, but it's grown rather than diminished, and I'm now actually worried whether or not I'll be able to put any conviction whatsoever in my master's thesis next year. Is this just a natural side effect of learning more about your field's theoretical frameworks and therefore being exposed to case studies where they *don't* work more, or am I just seriously disillusioned/too cynical? TL;DR starting to feel like my entire field desperately needs to go touch grass and talk to people, is that normal?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I'm not in IR, I'm an American and a historian trying to wrap up my dissertation, and while the theories and methodology we use make sense to me, I'm working on something rather obscure to Americans and I can't help but feel like it *doesn't mean anything* when I compare my work to Americanists whose subjects deal with the most politically charged debates of the day. I can't help but admire those who work on the American West, American South, and the Civil Rights Movement. That isn't to say that I don't love my topic--I work on French colonialism in North Africa--nor that it lacks continuing relevance in the Mediterranean, but it just *feels* unimportant from my vantage point, and that's ok. Knowing that I feel this way, my aim is to get a job outside of research when I finish it, whether in teaching or some other, non-academic field. I know that it's normal to feel this about our research and work, but it's not something that I can digest as easily as many other academics can.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Is it normal to become more convinced your discipline is detached from practical reality the more you study it? I know this might read as a trollish post, but I *promise* I'm serious. So, I'm currently halfway through my Adv. MSc. International Relations & Diplomacy, and while my undergrad was a Liberal Arts BA, that was also heavily IR-focused. Honestly? I love it, but only in the context of academic bickering about pointless minutae that do not matter outside the walls of the faculty - the more I've studied IR theories, the less my remarks of \"we're a humanities field trying to masquerade as a hard science\" and \"if you open the dictionary to 'Ivory Tower Academia' you'll find a picture of our faculty\" have become jokes. I know there's always going to be a difference between academic theory and practices in reality - you clearly *need* to perform abstractions when creating a theory, but several of the main theories in my field just feel like they fall apart at the first dose of being exposed to the outside. I've always had this feeling to some extent, but it's grown rather than diminished, and I'm now actually worried whether or not I'll be able to put any conviction whatsoever in my master's thesis next year. Is this just a natural side effect of learning more about your field's theoretical frameworks and therefore being exposed to case studies where they *don't* work more, or am I just seriously disillusioned/too cynical? TL;DR starting to feel like my entire field desperately needs to go touch grass and talk to people, is that normal?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Well the main problem is IR, which is not only detached but also theoretically, methodologically, and normatively bankrupt lollll", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Is it normal to become more convinced your discipline is detached from practical reality the more you study it? I know this might read as a trollish post, but I *promise* I'm serious. So, I'm currently halfway through my Adv. MSc. International Relations & Diplomacy, and while my undergrad was a Liberal Arts BA, that was also heavily IR-focused. Honestly? I love it, but only in the context of academic bickering about pointless minutae that do not matter outside the walls of the faculty - the more I've studied IR theories, the less my remarks of \"we're a humanities field trying to masquerade as a hard science\" and \"if you open the dictionary to 'Ivory Tower Academia' you'll find a picture of our faculty\" have become jokes. I know there's always going to be a difference between academic theory and practices in reality - you clearly *need* to perform abstractions when creating a theory, but several of the main theories in my field just feel like they fall apart at the first dose of being exposed to the outside. I've always had this feeling to some extent, but it's grown rather than diminished, and I'm now actually worried whether or not I'll be able to put any conviction whatsoever in my master's thesis next year. Is this just a natural side effect of learning more about your field's theoretical frameworks and therefore being exposed to case studies where they *don't* work more, or am I just seriously disillusioned/too cynical? TL;DR starting to feel like my entire field desperately needs to go touch grass and talk to people, is that normal?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I think most in the field are probably aware and working towards creating better theories, or more predictable ones. Based on a theory, we can expect something to happen, but even a cancer doctor has to make the treatment based on the type of cancer, the body of the person, and cancer response to treatment. It is a human making decisions, not a theory.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Is it normal to become more convinced your discipline is detached from practical reality the more you study it? I know this might read as a trollish post, but I *promise* I'm serious. So, I'm currently halfway through my Adv. MSc. International Relations & Diplomacy, and while my undergrad was a Liberal Arts BA, that was also heavily IR-focused. Honestly? I love it, but only in the context of academic bickering about pointless minutae that do not matter outside the walls of the faculty - the more I've studied IR theories, the less my remarks of \"we're a humanities field trying to masquerade as a hard science\" and \"if you open the dictionary to 'Ivory Tower Academia' you'll find a picture of our faculty\" have become jokes. I know there's always going to be a difference between academic theory and practices in reality - you clearly *need* to perform abstractions when creating a theory, but several of the main theories in my field just feel like they fall apart at the first dose of being exposed to the outside. I've always had this feeling to some extent, but it's grown rather than diminished, and I'm now actually worried whether or not I'll be able to put any conviction whatsoever in my master's thesis next year. Is this just a natural side effect of learning more about your field's theoretical frameworks and therefore being exposed to case studies where they *don't* work more, or am I just seriously disillusioned/too cynical? TL;DR starting to feel like my entire field desperately needs to go touch grass and talk to people, is that normal?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I've always viewed this kind of academia vs real world as being like haute couture vs high street fashion. You're not supposed to wear haute couture it's an exercise in skill and creativity to the extreme. And although haute couture isn't meant to be worn it does influence what the next high street fashions will be. Academia is kind of the same, it's an exercise in itself but it does influence and trickle down to the real world in real and important, albeit in unpredictable, ways.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Is it normal to become more convinced your discipline is detached from practical reality the more you study it? I know this might read as a trollish post, but I *promise* I'm serious. So, I'm currently halfway through my Adv. MSc. International Relations & Diplomacy, and while my undergrad was a Liberal Arts BA, that was also heavily IR-focused. Honestly? I love it, but only in the context of academic bickering about pointless minutae that do not matter outside the walls of the faculty - the more I've studied IR theories, the less my remarks of \"we're a humanities field trying to masquerade as a hard science\" and \"if you open the dictionary to 'Ivory Tower Academia' you'll find a picture of our faculty\" have become jokes. I know there's always going to be a difference between academic theory and practices in reality - you clearly *need* to perform abstractions when creating a theory, but several of the main theories in my field just feel like they fall apart at the first dose of being exposed to the outside. I've always had this feeling to some extent, but it's grown rather than diminished, and I'm now actually worried whether or not I'll be able to put any conviction whatsoever in my master's thesis next year. Is this just a natural side effect of learning more about your field's theoretical frameworks and therefore being exposed to case studies where they *don't* work more, or am I just seriously disillusioned/too cynical? TL;DR starting to feel like my entire field desperately needs to go touch grass and talk to people, is that normal?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I think most in the field are probably aware and working towards creating better theories, or more predictable ones. Based on a theory, we can expect something to happen, but even a cancer doctor has to make the treatment based on the type of cancer, the body of the person, and cancer response to treatment. It is a human making decisions, not a theory.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Just saw that the research paper I have been working on for a year is published by someone else. Whats should I do? I have been told to post on this subreddit. Looking for advice on what should be the best course of action and if any one ever faced this issue I would like to learn from their experience. I have been working on a project and hoping to publish a paper for more then a year. I have been often asking about advice regarding it on a fee subreddits because my uni professors did not had expertise in this field. As a result I made mistake of asking stranger in internet if they could go over my paper and review it since I could not get it reviewed from my uni. I shared the paper with 2 people via email but they are the not the one to publish. Today I saw someone has it published on Hindawi.com I am shocked and heartbroken. The paper contains images of my home. It mentions a custom dataset that I never made public and only reside with me. I have pushed this paper to a private github repo before it was submitted here. I also own the overleaf doc on which it was written and it contains history of it. I have also have history of conversation with a researcher on whose method it was inspired from. I planned to submit my paper to upcoming CVPR. What would be the best course of action for me to take it down and claim ownership? Thank you", "role": "user" }, { "content": "You should talk to your university's legal department. They might be able to help.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Just saw that the research paper I have been working on for a year is published by someone else. Whats should I do? I have been told to post on this subreddit. Looking for advice on what should be the best course of action and if any one ever faced this issue I would like to learn from their experience. I have been working on a project and hoping to publish a paper for more then a year. I have been often asking about advice regarding it on a fee subreddits because my uni professors did not had expertise in this field. As a result I made mistake of asking stranger in internet if they could go over my paper and review it since I could not get it reviewed from my uni. I shared the paper with 2 people via email but they are the not the one to publish. Today I saw someone has it published on Hindawi.com I am shocked and heartbroken. The paper contains images of my home. It mentions a custom dataset that I never made public and only reside with me. I have pushed this paper to a private github repo before it was submitted here. I also own the overleaf doc on which it was written and it contains history of it. I have also have history of conversation with a researcher on whose method it was inspired from. I planned to submit my paper to upcoming CVPR. What would be the best course of action for me to take it down and claim ownership? Thank you", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Had something similar happen to a colleague. Being brief, your chances are slim. Do not ever share your research with anyone not involved, the academic community is usually not so morally inclined as some make it to be.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Discussing Stagnant PhD Stipends I've been talking with my fellow PhD students recently about grad student pay, specifically why its viewed as normal to be so much less than minimum wage. We are at a supposedly top-tier Canadian research university in a city where the official poverty line is now >$28,000, roughly equal to full-time minimum wage, but our program's minimum stipends are $17,000 (which is actually LOWER than it was 5 years ago). Many of us don't get additional pay despite winning fellowships (I get 20k/year from external funds and not an extra cent from my lab), and because we're in a graduate-only program there are no classes to TA for extra money. We are only required to take 16 credits for the entire program so we are very much expected to be spending at least 40 hours / week in the lab. There's a common sentiment that we are having to make greater and greater sacrifices to survive on these wages - cutting out meals, moving into seriously sub-standard housing, taking out loans. Part-time jobs are also forbidden by the program (students have been threatened with expulsion for taking jobs), and spending time on things other than our research feels like it will ruin our career chances. The burden also feels worse as the average time to graduate is >5 years, and will certainly be longer for us due to covid, meaning those of us who did MSc's beforehand will be 30 with at least half a decade of lab experience, but will still be paid the same as new students almost a decade ago. With the rapidly increasing cost of living, lengthening degree durations, and awful career prospects for graduates, I believe the current stipend is unsustainable and unjustified. I brought these points up (as well as the fact that I've brought in over $80 000 in fellowships) with my PI and asked for a raise and he tentatively agreed, but he has brushed me off every time I've tried to bring it up the past few weeks and I'm getting increasingly agitated. I absolutely need him as a reference so I feel I have no leverage, as is the case for most students. I'm curious how this compares with other students' situations as it seems like PhDs are better off in other countries, and the perspective of PIs as to whether low student stipends are still justified. If anyone has examples of successful campaigns to increase stipends, or relevant statistics or other readings, that would also be great. We don't have a student union but are currently recruiting as many students as we can to a Facebook group to share information and grievances, and hopefully organize some action in the future.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I can only speak from an American perspective, but I am sure the Canadian academic situation has the same problem. A big obstacle is that NSF/NIH grants haven't really increased over time (in fact, the NIH modular grant has been $250,000 for over 2 decades, giving you a 2021 purchasing power that is ~50% of your 2001 purchasing power). As a result, PIs have only a couple of options with respect to trainee salaries: 1. Increase salaries but hire less trainees (decreasing scientific output) 2. Increase salaries and obtain more grants 3. Maintain salaries and try to survive while inflation chips away at everything else. Unfortunately, most PIs (by choice or, more often, by circumstance) choose option #3. What I have noticed is that many of the \"top\" institutions (by whatever metric you want to choose) have been slowly but surely increasing trainee salary (Columbia graduate students in STEM can make well over $40k if you include summer stipends) and providing subsidizing housing for their PhD students. I expect this to continue for those types of institutions while the \"other\" institutions get left behind. I think we can all agree this bifurcation of graduate education is not a good thing but it seems rather inevitable at this point. The only options graduate students have is to *not* join institutions that do not pay their trainees a living wage, or to join a union. Unfortunately, I think there are limits to joining a union due to external funding difficulties.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Discussing Stagnant PhD Stipends I've been talking with my fellow PhD students recently about grad student pay, specifically why its viewed as normal to be so much less than minimum wage. We are at a supposedly top-tier Canadian research university in a city where the official poverty line is now >$28,000, roughly equal to full-time minimum wage, but our program's minimum stipends are $17,000 (which is actually LOWER than it was 5 years ago). Many of us don't get additional pay despite winning fellowships (I get 20k/year from external funds and not an extra cent from my lab), and because we're in a graduate-only program there are no classes to TA for extra money. We are only required to take 16 credits for the entire program so we are very much expected to be spending at least 40 hours / week in the lab. There's a common sentiment that we are having to make greater and greater sacrifices to survive on these wages - cutting out meals, moving into seriously sub-standard housing, taking out loans. Part-time jobs are also forbidden by the program (students have been threatened with expulsion for taking jobs), and spending time on things other than our research feels like it will ruin our career chances. The burden also feels worse as the average time to graduate is >5 years, and will certainly be longer for us due to covid, meaning those of us who did MSc's beforehand will be 30 with at least half a decade of lab experience, but will still be paid the same as new students almost a decade ago. With the rapidly increasing cost of living, lengthening degree durations, and awful career prospects for graduates, I believe the current stipend is unsustainable and unjustified. I brought these points up (as well as the fact that I've brought in over $80 000 in fellowships) with my PI and asked for a raise and he tentatively agreed, but he has brushed me off every time I've tried to bring it up the past few weeks and I'm getting increasingly agitated. I absolutely need him as a reference so I feel I have no leverage, as is the case for most students. I'm curious how this compares with other students' situations as it seems like PhDs are better off in other countries, and the perspective of PIs as to whether low student stipends are still justified. If anyone has examples of successful campaigns to increase stipends, or relevant statistics or other readings, that would also be great. We don't have a student union but are currently recruiting as many students as we can to a Facebook group to share information and grievances, and hopefully organize some action in the future.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "As a reference: in Austria, where I did my PhD, PhD students are usually employed under a collective agreement contract as a \"project assisstant\", but officially only 30h / week. This still amounts to \\~30k € (\\~45k CAD) per year before tax/social insurance. So, luckily, fairly decent for PhD. In Austria we have very strong unions (in this case, not only for students, but for all university employees), which is why these collective agreements are possible. I don't know the situation in Canada, but I guess that similar agreements via unions (for university of public sector in general) would be ideal.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Discussing Stagnant PhD Stipends I've been talking with my fellow PhD students recently about grad student pay, specifically why its viewed as normal to be so much less than minimum wage. We are at a supposedly top-tier Canadian research university in a city where the official poverty line is now >$28,000, roughly equal to full-time minimum wage, but our program's minimum stipends are $17,000 (which is actually LOWER than it was 5 years ago). Many of us don't get additional pay despite winning fellowships (I get 20k/year from external funds and not an extra cent from my lab), and because we're in a graduate-only program there are no classes to TA for extra money. We are only required to take 16 credits for the entire program so we are very much expected to be spending at least 40 hours / week in the lab. There's a common sentiment that we are having to make greater and greater sacrifices to survive on these wages - cutting out meals, moving into seriously sub-standard housing, taking out loans. Part-time jobs are also forbidden by the program (students have been threatened with expulsion for taking jobs), and spending time on things other than our research feels like it will ruin our career chances. The burden also feels worse as the average time to graduate is >5 years, and will certainly be longer for us due to covid, meaning those of us who did MSc's beforehand will be 30 with at least half a decade of lab experience, but will still be paid the same as new students almost a decade ago. With the rapidly increasing cost of living, lengthening degree durations, and awful career prospects for graduates, I believe the current stipend is unsustainable and unjustified. I brought these points up (as well as the fact that I've brought in over $80 000 in fellowships) with my PI and asked for a raise and he tentatively agreed, but he has brushed me off every time I've tried to bring it up the past few weeks and I'm getting increasingly agitated. I absolutely need him as a reference so I feel I have no leverage, as is the case for most students. I'm curious how this compares with other students' situations as it seems like PhDs are better off in other countries, and the perspective of PIs as to whether low student stipends are still justified. If anyone has examples of successful campaigns to increase stipends, or relevant statistics or other readings, that would also be great. We don't have a student union but are currently recruiting as many students as we can to a Facebook group to share information and grievances, and hopefully organize some action in the future.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Others have gone into funding barriers, but let's not forget there is some toxic classism inherent in academia. A few years ago when I was still a postdoc, I was in a discussion about the pending unionization of postdocs and how they and the grad student union were fighting for increases in wages. It was disheartening and astounding to hear a postdoc in the department claim that \"postdoc wages aren't meant to be self-sufficient\" and go on about how we're trainees so we deserve to be paid less, the work is it's own reward, and how raising trainee salaries would \"ruin\" labs so we should all be willing to sacrifice for the greater good, etc. Then you have higher ups chiding us that \"if you're looking for money, you shouldn't be in science.\" Never mind that we're not asking for six figures or anything outrageous, just enough that we're not constantly living paycheck to paycheck and on the verge of crisis when something unexpected happens. I'm constantly bumping into these attitudes more and more when I bring up things like paying undergraduates, increasing funding for grad students and postdocs, etc and it's infuriating.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Discussing Stagnant PhD Stipends I've been talking with my fellow PhD students recently about grad student pay, specifically why its viewed as normal to be so much less than minimum wage. We are at a supposedly top-tier Canadian research university in a city where the official poverty line is now >$28,000, roughly equal to full-time minimum wage, but our program's minimum stipends are $17,000 (which is actually LOWER than it was 5 years ago). Many of us don't get additional pay despite winning fellowships (I get 20k/year from external funds and not an extra cent from my lab), and because we're in a graduate-only program there are no classes to TA for extra money. We are only required to take 16 credits for the entire program so we are very much expected to be spending at least 40 hours / week in the lab. There's a common sentiment that we are having to make greater and greater sacrifices to survive on these wages - cutting out meals, moving into seriously sub-standard housing, taking out loans. Part-time jobs are also forbidden by the program (students have been threatened with expulsion for taking jobs), and spending time on things other than our research feels like it will ruin our career chances. The burden also feels worse as the average time to graduate is >5 years, and will certainly be longer for us due to covid, meaning those of us who did MSc's beforehand will be 30 with at least half a decade of lab experience, but will still be paid the same as new students almost a decade ago. With the rapidly increasing cost of living, lengthening degree durations, and awful career prospects for graduates, I believe the current stipend is unsustainable and unjustified. I brought these points up (as well as the fact that I've brought in over $80 000 in fellowships) with my PI and asked for a raise and he tentatively agreed, but he has brushed me off every time I've tried to bring it up the past few weeks and I'm getting increasingly agitated. I absolutely need him as a reference so I feel I have no leverage, as is the case for most students. I'm curious how this compares with other students' situations as it seems like PhDs are better off in other countries, and the perspective of PIs as to whether low student stipends are still justified. If anyone has examples of successful campaigns to increase stipends, or relevant statistics or other readings, that would also be great. We don't have a student union but are currently recruiting as many students as we can to a Facebook group to share information and grievances, and hopefully organize some action in the future.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "It’s hard for PIs to make ends meet. Consider that PIs are managing many students, resources, costs and budgets, income flows, and projects—the research enterprise is very much like running a small to medium-sized business and it is something most PIs are not trained in specifically (most are interested in their field, not management). So, although I agree with you that good performers should get raises (especially after a long period like you describe), also remember that the whole thing (everyone’s job and all the lab resources) are often literally held together by a shoestring and the overall funding structure may be fragile. My perspective is also coming from the US side, where many PIs have to contend with the additional cost of paying for the tuition of our graduate students as well.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Discussing Stagnant PhD Stipends I've been talking with my fellow PhD students recently about grad student pay, specifically why its viewed as normal to be so much less than minimum wage. We are at a supposedly top-tier Canadian research university in a city where the official poverty line is now >$28,000, roughly equal to full-time minimum wage, but our program's minimum stipends are $17,000 (which is actually LOWER than it was 5 years ago). Many of us don't get additional pay despite winning fellowships (I get 20k/year from external funds and not an extra cent from my lab), and because we're in a graduate-only program there are no classes to TA for extra money. We are only required to take 16 credits for the entire program so we are very much expected to be spending at least 40 hours / week in the lab. There's a common sentiment that we are having to make greater and greater sacrifices to survive on these wages - cutting out meals, moving into seriously sub-standard housing, taking out loans. Part-time jobs are also forbidden by the program (students have been threatened with expulsion for taking jobs), and spending time on things other than our research feels like it will ruin our career chances. The burden also feels worse as the average time to graduate is >5 years, and will certainly be longer for us due to covid, meaning those of us who did MSc's beforehand will be 30 with at least half a decade of lab experience, but will still be paid the same as new students almost a decade ago. With the rapidly increasing cost of living, lengthening degree durations, and awful career prospects for graduates, I believe the current stipend is unsustainable and unjustified. I brought these points up (as well as the fact that I've brought in over $80 000 in fellowships) with my PI and asked for a raise and he tentatively agreed, but he has brushed me off every time I've tried to bring it up the past few weeks and I'm getting increasingly agitated. I absolutely need him as a reference so I feel I have no leverage, as is the case for most students. I'm curious how this compares with other students' situations as it seems like PhDs are better off in other countries, and the perspective of PIs as to whether low student stipends are still justified. If anyone has examples of successful campaigns to increase stipends, or relevant statistics or other readings, that would also be great. We don't have a student union but are currently recruiting as many students as we can to a Facebook group to share information and grievances, and hopefully organize some action in the future.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I say this with the utmost sympathy, but this is hugely a consequence of insufficient funding at the lab level. The average NSERC Discovery grant is about 33 000 CAD. That is supposed to pay for most, if not all, of a graduate student, as well as lab operating expenses (not capital, that's CFI or other sources). The only large labs that I'm familiar with either have *massive* external funding sources (e.g. Herzberg awards), industrial partners, or a culture where nearly everyone holds a PGS-D or other external funding source. All of the Canadian PIs I know would love to be able to provide more funding for their students, but it's a very tight budget. None of this is acceptable, nor justifies your treatment; but realistically, short of a massive federal funding injection, the only way this changes is for the bubble to pop by grad students refusing to accept the Ponzi scheme that is academia. I hope you're not left holding the bag. Good luck, and defend ASAP.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Discussing Stagnant PhD Stipends I've been talking with my fellow PhD students recently about grad student pay, specifically why its viewed as normal to be so much less than minimum wage. We are at a supposedly top-tier Canadian research university in a city where the official poverty line is now >$28,000, roughly equal to full-time minimum wage, but our program's minimum stipends are $17,000 (which is actually LOWER than it was 5 years ago). Many of us don't get additional pay despite winning fellowships (I get 20k/year from external funds and not an extra cent from my lab), and because we're in a graduate-only program there are no classes to TA for extra money. We are only required to take 16 credits for the entire program so we are very much expected to be spending at least 40 hours / week in the lab. There's a common sentiment that we are having to make greater and greater sacrifices to survive on these wages - cutting out meals, moving into seriously sub-standard housing, taking out loans. Part-time jobs are also forbidden by the program (students have been threatened with expulsion for taking jobs), and spending time on things other than our research feels like it will ruin our career chances. The burden also feels worse as the average time to graduate is >5 years, and will certainly be longer for us due to covid, meaning those of us who did MSc's beforehand will be 30 with at least half a decade of lab experience, but will still be paid the same as new students almost a decade ago. With the rapidly increasing cost of living, lengthening degree durations, and awful career prospects for graduates, I believe the current stipend is unsustainable and unjustified. I brought these points up (as well as the fact that I've brought in over $80 000 in fellowships) with my PI and asked for a raise and he tentatively agreed, but he has brushed me off every time I've tried to bring it up the past few weeks and I'm getting increasingly agitated. I absolutely need him as a reference so I feel I have no leverage, as is the case for most students. I'm curious how this compares with other students' situations as it seems like PhDs are better off in other countries, and the perspective of PIs as to whether low student stipends are still justified. If anyone has examples of successful campaigns to increase stipends, or relevant statistics or other readings, that would also be great. We don't have a student union but are currently recruiting as many students as we can to a Facebook group to share information and grievances, and hopefully organize some action in the future.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I definitely understand this sentiment. I had offers from all three schools I applied to for my PhD (UBC—my BSc alma mater, Toronto, and McGill). I honestly would have loved to stay in Vancouver, it’s maybe my favorite place in the world. I also probably would have been more comfortable with the culture (and for my partner’s job prospects) in Toronto, another English speaking city. But I ultimately chose McGill, significantly in part due to the relatively cheap cost of living in Montréal compared to the other two cities. I didn’t start my PhD with any external funding and didn’t have the seniority to TA immediately so I don’t think I would have survived in either of the other two places on ~$20k/yr.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Discussing Stagnant PhD Stipends I've been talking with my fellow PhD students recently about grad student pay, specifically why its viewed as normal to be so much less than minimum wage. We are at a supposedly top-tier Canadian research university in a city where the official poverty line is now >$28,000, roughly equal to full-time minimum wage, but our program's minimum stipends are $17,000 (which is actually LOWER than it was 5 years ago). Many of us don't get additional pay despite winning fellowships (I get 20k/year from external funds and not an extra cent from my lab), and because we're in a graduate-only program there are no classes to TA for extra money. We are only required to take 16 credits for the entire program so we are very much expected to be spending at least 40 hours / week in the lab. There's a common sentiment that we are having to make greater and greater sacrifices to survive on these wages - cutting out meals, moving into seriously sub-standard housing, taking out loans. Part-time jobs are also forbidden by the program (students have been threatened with expulsion for taking jobs), and spending time on things other than our research feels like it will ruin our career chances. The burden also feels worse as the average time to graduate is >5 years, and will certainly be longer for us due to covid, meaning those of us who did MSc's beforehand will be 30 with at least half a decade of lab experience, but will still be paid the same as new students almost a decade ago. With the rapidly increasing cost of living, lengthening degree durations, and awful career prospects for graduates, I believe the current stipend is unsustainable and unjustified. I brought these points up (as well as the fact that I've brought in over $80 000 in fellowships) with my PI and asked for a raise and he tentatively agreed, but he has brushed me off every time I've tried to bring it up the past few weeks and I'm getting increasingly agitated. I absolutely need him as a reference so I feel I have no leverage, as is the case for most students. I'm curious how this compares with other students' situations as it seems like PhDs are better off in other countries, and the perspective of PIs as to whether low student stipends are still justified. If anyone has examples of successful campaigns to increase stipends, or relevant statistics or other readings, that would also be great. We don't have a student union but are currently recruiting as many students as we can to a Facebook group to share information and grievances, and hopefully organize some action in the future.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Others have gone into funding barriers, but let's not forget there is some toxic classism inherent in academia. A few years ago when I was still a postdoc, I was in a discussion about the pending unionization of postdocs and how they and the grad student union were fighting for increases in wages. It was disheartening and astounding to hear a postdoc in the department claim that \"postdoc wages aren't meant to be self-sufficient\" and go on about how we're trainees so we deserve to be paid less, the work is it's own reward, and how raising trainee salaries would \"ruin\" labs so we should all be willing to sacrifice for the greater good, etc. Then you have higher ups chiding us that \"if you're looking for money, you shouldn't be in science.\" Never mind that we're not asking for six figures or anything outrageous, just enough that we're not constantly living paycheck to paycheck and on the verge of crisis when something unexpected happens. I'm constantly bumping into these attitudes more and more when I bring up things like paying undergraduates, increasing funding for grad students and postdocs, etc and it's infuriating.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Discussing Stagnant PhD Stipends I've been talking with my fellow PhD students recently about grad student pay, specifically why its viewed as normal to be so much less than minimum wage. We are at a supposedly top-tier Canadian research university in a city where the official poverty line is now >$28,000, roughly equal to full-time minimum wage, but our program's minimum stipends are $17,000 (which is actually LOWER than it was 5 years ago). Many of us don't get additional pay despite winning fellowships (I get 20k/year from external funds and not an extra cent from my lab), and because we're in a graduate-only program there are no classes to TA for extra money. We are only required to take 16 credits for the entire program so we are very much expected to be spending at least 40 hours / week in the lab. There's a common sentiment that we are having to make greater and greater sacrifices to survive on these wages - cutting out meals, moving into seriously sub-standard housing, taking out loans. Part-time jobs are also forbidden by the program (students have been threatened with expulsion for taking jobs), and spending time on things other than our research feels like it will ruin our career chances. The burden also feels worse as the average time to graduate is >5 years, and will certainly be longer for us due to covid, meaning those of us who did MSc's beforehand will be 30 with at least half a decade of lab experience, but will still be paid the same as new students almost a decade ago. With the rapidly increasing cost of living, lengthening degree durations, and awful career prospects for graduates, I believe the current stipend is unsustainable and unjustified. I brought these points up (as well as the fact that I've brought in over $80 000 in fellowships) with my PI and asked for a raise and he tentatively agreed, but he has brushed me off every time I've tried to bring it up the past few weeks and I'm getting increasingly agitated. I absolutely need him as a reference so I feel I have no leverage, as is the case for most students. I'm curious how this compares with other students' situations as it seems like PhDs are better off in other countries, and the perspective of PIs as to whether low student stipends are still justified. If anyone has examples of successful campaigns to increase stipends, or relevant statistics or other readings, that would also be great. We don't have a student union but are currently recruiting as many students as we can to a Facebook group to share information and grievances, and hopefully organize some action in the future.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "As a reference: in Austria, where I did my PhD, PhD students are usually employed under a collective agreement contract as a \"project assisstant\", but officially only 30h / week. This still amounts to \\~30k € (\\~45k CAD) per year before tax/social insurance. So, luckily, fairly decent for PhD. In Austria we have very strong unions (in this case, not only for students, but for all university employees), which is why these collective agreements are possible. I don't know the situation in Canada, but I guess that similar agreements via unions (for university of public sector in general) would be ideal.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Discussing Stagnant PhD Stipends I've been talking with my fellow PhD students recently about grad student pay, specifically why its viewed as normal to be so much less than minimum wage. We are at a supposedly top-tier Canadian research university in a city where the official poverty line is now >$28,000, roughly equal to full-time minimum wage, but our program's minimum stipends are $17,000 (which is actually LOWER than it was 5 years ago). Many of us don't get additional pay despite winning fellowships (I get 20k/year from external funds and not an extra cent from my lab), and because we're in a graduate-only program there are no classes to TA for extra money. We are only required to take 16 credits for the entire program so we are very much expected to be spending at least 40 hours / week in the lab. There's a common sentiment that we are having to make greater and greater sacrifices to survive on these wages - cutting out meals, moving into seriously sub-standard housing, taking out loans. Part-time jobs are also forbidden by the program (students have been threatened with expulsion for taking jobs), and spending time on things other than our research feels like it will ruin our career chances. The burden also feels worse as the average time to graduate is >5 years, and will certainly be longer for us due to covid, meaning those of us who did MSc's beforehand will be 30 with at least half a decade of lab experience, but will still be paid the same as new students almost a decade ago. With the rapidly increasing cost of living, lengthening degree durations, and awful career prospects for graduates, I believe the current stipend is unsustainable and unjustified. I brought these points up (as well as the fact that I've brought in over $80 000 in fellowships) with my PI and asked for a raise and he tentatively agreed, but he has brushed me off every time I've tried to bring it up the past few weeks and I'm getting increasingly agitated. I absolutely need him as a reference so I feel I have no leverage, as is the case for most students. I'm curious how this compares with other students' situations as it seems like PhDs are better off in other countries, and the perspective of PIs as to whether low student stipends are still justified. If anyone has examples of successful campaigns to increase stipends, or relevant statistics or other readings, that would also be great. We don't have a student union but are currently recruiting as many students as we can to a Facebook group to share information and grievances, and hopefully organize some action in the future.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Others have gone into funding barriers, but let's not forget there is some toxic classism inherent in academia. A few years ago when I was still a postdoc, I was in a discussion about the pending unionization of postdocs and how they and the grad student union were fighting for increases in wages. It was disheartening and astounding to hear a postdoc in the department claim that \"postdoc wages aren't meant to be self-sufficient\" and go on about how we're trainees so we deserve to be paid less, the work is it's own reward, and how raising trainee salaries would \"ruin\" labs so we should all be willing to sacrifice for the greater good, etc. Then you have higher ups chiding us that \"if you're looking for money, you shouldn't be in science.\" Never mind that we're not asking for six figures or anything outrageous, just enough that we're not constantly living paycheck to paycheck and on the verge of crisis when something unexpected happens. I'm constantly bumping into these attitudes more and more when I bring up things like paying undergraduates, increasing funding for grad students and postdocs, etc and it's infuriating.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Discussing Stagnant PhD Stipends I've been talking with my fellow PhD students recently about grad student pay, specifically why its viewed as normal to be so much less than minimum wage. We are at a supposedly top-tier Canadian research university in a city where the official poverty line is now >$28,000, roughly equal to full-time minimum wage, but our program's minimum stipends are $17,000 (which is actually LOWER than it was 5 years ago). Many of us don't get additional pay despite winning fellowships (I get 20k/year from external funds and not an extra cent from my lab), and because we're in a graduate-only program there are no classes to TA for extra money. We are only required to take 16 credits for the entire program so we are very much expected to be spending at least 40 hours / week in the lab. There's a common sentiment that we are having to make greater and greater sacrifices to survive on these wages - cutting out meals, moving into seriously sub-standard housing, taking out loans. Part-time jobs are also forbidden by the program (students have been threatened with expulsion for taking jobs), and spending time on things other than our research feels like it will ruin our career chances. The burden also feels worse as the average time to graduate is >5 years, and will certainly be longer for us due to covid, meaning those of us who did MSc's beforehand will be 30 with at least half a decade of lab experience, but will still be paid the same as new students almost a decade ago. With the rapidly increasing cost of living, lengthening degree durations, and awful career prospects for graduates, I believe the current stipend is unsustainable and unjustified. I brought these points up (as well as the fact that I've brought in over $80 000 in fellowships) with my PI and asked for a raise and he tentatively agreed, but he has brushed me off every time I've tried to bring it up the past few weeks and I'm getting increasingly agitated. I absolutely need him as a reference so I feel I have no leverage, as is the case for most students. I'm curious how this compares with other students' situations as it seems like PhDs are better off in other countries, and the perspective of PIs as to whether low student stipends are still justified. If anyone has examples of successful campaigns to increase stipends, or relevant statistics or other readings, that would also be great. We don't have a student union but are currently recruiting as many students as we can to a Facebook group to share information and grievances, and hopefully organize some action in the future.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Yes grad student stipends are a joke in most universities in most countries. In my university (public R1 in the southeast US) the standardized stipend for Microbiology PhD students is $18,000 USD a year minus $2,400 a year in required fees that are not covered under our tuition waiver, so basically $15,600 a year salary. I helped write a $500,000 grant but it still did not change my stipend. 2 years ago the program had a vote for a new graduate program chair. Two finalists gave presentations on how they saw the program moving forward and specifically how they would prioritize future funding. One professor said they would use the money to buy more equipment while the other said they would prioritize increasing grad student stipends both to provide a living wage and to be more competitive for top applicants. The tenured professors voted and guess who won? Professor A who wanted to use money on equipment in a landslide. It was clearly about this one issue as professor B had been in the program longer (25+ years), is loved by the grad students (is on basically ever PhD committee I know of) and about a year later was chosen for a senior administrative role for the grant funding program for the entire college after securing a $8 million grant. Oh yeah and our graduate student association tried to unionize but was blocked by the not just the university but the actual state because we are technically not employees and therefore have no rights to unionize.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "UPDATE: LWIFU. How did I recover? (Translation: Last Week I Fucked Up.) I posted this last week and got a ton of good advice, and some requests for an update. Long story short, I \"met\" (remotely) with my PI and some muckety-mucks from my graduate program, and it was painfully awkward but ultimately fine. They had a \"not angry, just disappointed\" tone. Most of the meeting was logistics about how to recoup the lost money. It turns out I have some funds from a fellowship that I didn't realize could be used this way, and they made sure I had all the necessary permissions to get reimbursed that way. But each one of them made sure to remind me how important it is to maintain composure, to represent the program well, etc. They presented it like \"just trying to help you out here\" as if I had no idea that I had fucked up. But I just took the note and didn't argue with them. There was one more uncomfortable but nice(ish) coda to the whole situation. An even higher higher-up called me on the phone after the meeting. He said my email debacle had made its way to him. At first my stomach sank and I thought this was the moment they were going to actually reprimand me in some way. Instead, he said he had no idea I was going through so much, and asked if he could help. I nearly started crying but I just thanked him and tried to get off the phone as quickly as possibly. I know he meant it kindly but to be honest I just want the whole thing to go away and I felt even more embarrassed that it clearly was getting forwarded around. But it is nice to know there are some actual human beings running this show. Anyway, thanks for all the advice. Now to put this all behind me.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Just an FYI - you are acting human. What you did may not have “sounded pretty” but it was an honest moment. Fuck the conference for tattling on you and fuck your department. I’m fact, fuck academia. I’m totally bitter and refuse to keep bending over to them.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "UPDATE: LWIFU. How did I recover? (Translation: Last Week I Fucked Up.) I posted this last week and got a ton of good advice, and some requests for an update. Long story short, I \"met\" (remotely) with my PI and some muckety-mucks from my graduate program, and it was painfully awkward but ultimately fine. They had a \"not angry, just disappointed\" tone. Most of the meeting was logistics about how to recoup the lost money. It turns out I have some funds from a fellowship that I didn't realize could be used this way, and they made sure I had all the necessary permissions to get reimbursed that way. But each one of them made sure to remind me how important it is to maintain composure, to represent the program well, etc. They presented it like \"just trying to help you out here\" as if I had no idea that I had fucked up. But I just took the note and didn't argue with them. There was one more uncomfortable but nice(ish) coda to the whole situation. An even higher higher-up called me on the phone after the meeting. He said my email debacle had made its way to him. At first my stomach sank and I thought this was the moment they were going to actually reprimand me in some way. Instead, he said he had no idea I was going through so much, and asked if he could help. I nearly started crying but I just thanked him and tried to get off the phone as quickly as possibly. I know he meant it kindly but to be honest I just want the whole thing to go away and I felt even more embarrassed that it clearly was getting forwarded around. But it is nice to know there are some actual human beings running this show. Anyway, thanks for all the advice. Now to put this all behind me.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Glad it worked out. Thanks for the follow up.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "UPDATE: LWIFU. How did I recover? (Translation: Last Week I Fucked Up.) I posted this last week and got a ton of good advice, and some requests for an update. Long story short, I \"met\" (remotely) with my PI and some muckety-mucks from my graduate program, and it was painfully awkward but ultimately fine. They had a \"not angry, just disappointed\" tone. Most of the meeting was logistics about how to recoup the lost money. It turns out I have some funds from a fellowship that I didn't realize could be used this way, and they made sure I had all the necessary permissions to get reimbursed that way. But each one of them made sure to remind me how important it is to maintain composure, to represent the program well, etc. They presented it like \"just trying to help you out here\" as if I had no idea that I had fucked up. But I just took the note and didn't argue with them. There was one more uncomfortable but nice(ish) coda to the whole situation. An even higher higher-up called me on the phone after the meeting. He said my email debacle had made its way to him. At first my stomach sank and I thought this was the moment they were going to actually reprimand me in some way. Instead, he said he had no idea I was going through so much, and asked if he could help. I nearly started crying but I just thanked him and tried to get off the phone as quickly as possibly. I know he meant it kindly but to be honest I just want the whole thing to go away and I felt even more embarrassed that it clearly was getting forwarded around. But it is nice to know there are some actual human beings running this show. Anyway, thanks for all the advice. Now to put this all behind me.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Quite frankly, the higher up is the only one who seems like a decent human being. I know you feel like you got off lightly but if I was your advisor my concerns would be (in order): 1. Your well-being. 2. Impressing on you the fact that you didn’t do anything wrong (even if it would be polite to pretend you did). 3. Dragging the conference chairs’ ass over hot coals. **They used a national disaster as an excuse to steal money from grad students.** I know you said that they had legalese to cover their asses, but all that means is that you can’t sue them. It definitely doesn’t mean you can’t drag their names all over the academic world. They used a national disaster as an excuse to steal money from grad students, and then used a moment of weakness to make the student they were stealing from feel like shit. They’re the bad guys in this story.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "UPDATE: LWIFU. How did I recover? (Translation: Last Week I Fucked Up.) I posted this last week and got a ton of good advice, and some requests for an update. Long story short, I \"met\" (remotely) with my PI and some muckety-mucks from my graduate program, and it was painfully awkward but ultimately fine. They had a \"not angry, just disappointed\" tone. Most of the meeting was logistics about how to recoup the lost money. It turns out I have some funds from a fellowship that I didn't realize could be used this way, and they made sure I had all the necessary permissions to get reimbursed that way. But each one of them made sure to remind me how important it is to maintain composure, to represent the program well, etc. They presented it like \"just trying to help you out here\" as if I had no idea that I had fucked up. But I just took the note and didn't argue with them. There was one more uncomfortable but nice(ish) coda to the whole situation. An even higher higher-up called me on the phone after the meeting. He said my email debacle had made its way to him. At first my stomach sank and I thought this was the moment they were going to actually reprimand me in some way. Instead, he said he had no idea I was going through so much, and asked if he could help. I nearly started crying but I just thanked him and tried to get off the phone as quickly as possibly. I know he meant it kindly but to be honest I just want the whole thing to go away and I felt even more embarrassed that it clearly was getting forwarded around. But it is nice to know there are some actual human beings running this show. Anyway, thanks for all the advice. Now to put this all behind me.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Glad to hear that you were able to recuperate the funds and that they were generally understanding. Remember you're still learning your way around academia, so hopefully you'll know how to better approach this kind of situation if it comes up in the future.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "UPDATE: LWIFU. How did I recover? (Translation: Last Week I Fucked Up.) I posted this last week and got a ton of good advice, and some requests for an update. Long story short, I \"met\" (remotely) with my PI and some muckety-mucks from my graduate program, and it was painfully awkward but ultimately fine. They had a \"not angry, just disappointed\" tone. Most of the meeting was logistics about how to recoup the lost money. It turns out I have some funds from a fellowship that I didn't realize could be used this way, and they made sure I had all the necessary permissions to get reimbursed that way. But each one of them made sure to remind me how important it is to maintain composure, to represent the program well, etc. They presented it like \"just trying to help you out here\" as if I had no idea that I had fucked up. But I just took the note and didn't argue with them. There was one more uncomfortable but nice(ish) coda to the whole situation. An even higher higher-up called me on the phone after the meeting. He said my email debacle had made its way to him. At first my stomach sank and I thought this was the moment they were going to actually reprimand me in some way. Instead, he said he had no idea I was going through so much, and asked if he could help. I nearly started crying but I just thanked him and tried to get off the phone as quickly as possibly. I know he meant it kindly but to be honest I just want the whole thing to go away and I felt even more embarrassed that it clearly was getting forwarded around. But it is nice to know there are some actual human beings running this show. Anyway, thanks for all the advice. Now to put this all behind me.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Just an FYI - you are acting human. What you did may not have “sounded pretty” but it was an honest moment. Fuck the conference for tattling on you and fuck your department. I’m fact, fuck academia. I’m totally bitter and refuse to keep bending over to them.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "UPDATE: LWIFU. How did I recover? (Translation: Last Week I Fucked Up.) I posted this last week and got a ton of good advice, and some requests for an update. Long story short, I \"met\" (remotely) with my PI and some muckety-mucks from my graduate program, and it was painfully awkward but ultimately fine. They had a \"not angry, just disappointed\" tone. Most of the meeting was logistics about how to recoup the lost money. It turns out I have some funds from a fellowship that I didn't realize could be used this way, and they made sure I had all the necessary permissions to get reimbursed that way. But each one of them made sure to remind me how important it is to maintain composure, to represent the program well, etc. They presented it like \"just trying to help you out here\" as if I had no idea that I had fucked up. But I just took the note and didn't argue with them. There was one more uncomfortable but nice(ish) coda to the whole situation. An even higher higher-up called me on the phone after the meeting. He said my email debacle had made its way to him. At first my stomach sank and I thought this was the moment they were going to actually reprimand me in some way. Instead, he said he had no idea I was going through so much, and asked if he could help. I nearly started crying but I just thanked him and tried to get off the phone as quickly as possibly. I know he meant it kindly but to be honest I just want the whole thing to go away and I felt even more embarrassed that it clearly was getting forwarded around. But it is nice to know there are some actual human beings running this show. Anyway, thanks for all the advice. Now to put this all behind me.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Glad to hear that you were able to recuperate the funds and that they were generally understanding. Remember you're still learning your way around academia, so hopefully you'll know how to better approach this kind of situation if it comes up in the future.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "UPDATE: LWIFU. How did I recover? (Translation: Last Week I Fucked Up.) I posted this last week and got a ton of good advice, and some requests for an update. Long story short, I \"met\" (remotely) with my PI and some muckety-mucks from my graduate program, and it was painfully awkward but ultimately fine. They had a \"not angry, just disappointed\" tone. Most of the meeting was logistics about how to recoup the lost money. It turns out I have some funds from a fellowship that I didn't realize could be used this way, and they made sure I had all the necessary permissions to get reimbursed that way. But each one of them made sure to remind me how important it is to maintain composure, to represent the program well, etc. They presented it like \"just trying to help you out here\" as if I had no idea that I had fucked up. But I just took the note and didn't argue with them. There was one more uncomfortable but nice(ish) coda to the whole situation. An even higher higher-up called me on the phone after the meeting. He said my email debacle had made its way to him. At first my stomach sank and I thought this was the moment they were going to actually reprimand me in some way. Instead, he said he had no idea I was going through so much, and asked if he could help. I nearly started crying but I just thanked him and tried to get off the phone as quickly as possibly. I know he meant it kindly but to be honest I just want the whole thing to go away and I felt even more embarrassed that it clearly was getting forwarded around. But it is nice to know there are some actual human beings running this show. Anyway, thanks for all the advice. Now to put this all behind me.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Just an FYI - you are acting human. What you did may not have “sounded pretty” but it was an honest moment. Fuck the conference for tattling on you and fuck your department. I’m fact, fuck academia. I’m totally bitter and refuse to keep bending over to them.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "UPDATE: LWIFU. How did I recover? (Translation: Last Week I Fucked Up.) I posted this last week and got a ton of good advice, and some requests for an update. Long story short, I \"met\" (remotely) with my PI and some muckety-mucks from my graduate program, and it was painfully awkward but ultimately fine. They had a \"not angry, just disappointed\" tone. Most of the meeting was logistics about how to recoup the lost money. It turns out I have some funds from a fellowship that I didn't realize could be used this way, and they made sure I had all the necessary permissions to get reimbursed that way. But each one of them made sure to remind me how important it is to maintain composure, to represent the program well, etc. They presented it like \"just trying to help you out here\" as if I had no idea that I had fucked up. But I just took the note and didn't argue with them. There was one more uncomfortable but nice(ish) coda to the whole situation. An even higher higher-up called me on the phone after the meeting. He said my email debacle had made its way to him. At first my stomach sank and I thought this was the moment they were going to actually reprimand me in some way. Instead, he said he had no idea I was going through so much, and asked if he could help. I nearly started crying but I just thanked him and tried to get off the phone as quickly as possibly. I know he meant it kindly but to be honest I just want the whole thing to go away and I felt even more embarrassed that it clearly was getting forwarded around. But it is nice to know there are some actual human beings running this show. Anyway, thanks for all the advice. Now to put this all behind me.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Glad to hear that things sorted out at the end. Good luck with everything that comes now and thanks for the follow up!", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "UPDATE: LWIFU. How did I recover? (Translation: Last Week I Fucked Up.) I posted this last week and got a ton of good advice, and some requests for an update. Long story short, I \"met\" (remotely) with my PI and some muckety-mucks from my graduate program, and it was painfully awkward but ultimately fine. They had a \"not angry, just disappointed\" tone. Most of the meeting was logistics about how to recoup the lost money. It turns out I have some funds from a fellowship that I didn't realize could be used this way, and they made sure I had all the necessary permissions to get reimbursed that way. But each one of them made sure to remind me how important it is to maintain composure, to represent the program well, etc. They presented it like \"just trying to help you out here\" as if I had no idea that I had fucked up. But I just took the note and didn't argue with them. There was one more uncomfortable but nice(ish) coda to the whole situation. An even higher higher-up called me on the phone after the meeting. He said my email debacle had made its way to him. At first my stomach sank and I thought this was the moment they were going to actually reprimand me in some way. Instead, he said he had no idea I was going through so much, and asked if he could help. I nearly started crying but I just thanked him and tried to get off the phone as quickly as possibly. I know he meant it kindly but to be honest I just want the whole thing to go away and I felt even more embarrassed that it clearly was getting forwarded around. But it is nice to know there are some actual human beings running this show. Anyway, thanks for all the advice. Now to put this all behind me.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Good for you. For what it's worth, the higher up is the only one who seems human. Are you I'm the US? This is such odd behaviour to me, maybe I'm just lucky but all the supervisors I've had would focus on the personal first and ensure your okay mentally before advising you gently on how to better conduct yourself in emails. Bottom of the priorities is how you represent the programme. You're human, you were grieving, for apologised, now forgive yourself and move on. Good luck!", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "UPDATE: LWIFU. How did I recover? (Translation: Last Week I Fucked Up.) I posted this last week and got a ton of good advice, and some requests for an update. Long story short, I \"met\" (remotely) with my PI and some muckety-mucks from my graduate program, and it was painfully awkward but ultimately fine. They had a \"not angry, just disappointed\" tone. Most of the meeting was logistics about how to recoup the lost money. It turns out I have some funds from a fellowship that I didn't realize could be used this way, and they made sure I had all the necessary permissions to get reimbursed that way. But each one of them made sure to remind me how important it is to maintain composure, to represent the program well, etc. They presented it like \"just trying to help you out here\" as if I had no idea that I had fucked up. But I just took the note and didn't argue with them. There was one more uncomfortable but nice(ish) coda to the whole situation. An even higher higher-up called me on the phone after the meeting. He said my email debacle had made its way to him. At first my stomach sank and I thought this was the moment they were going to actually reprimand me in some way. Instead, he said he had no idea I was going through so much, and asked if he could help. I nearly started crying but I just thanked him and tried to get off the phone as quickly as possibly. I know he meant it kindly but to be honest I just want the whole thing to go away and I felt even more embarrassed that it clearly was getting forwarded around. But it is nice to know there are some actual human beings running this show. Anyway, thanks for all the advice. Now to put this all behind me.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Glad to hear that you were able to recuperate the funds and that they were generally understanding. Remember you're still learning your way around academia, so hopefully you'll know how to better approach this kind of situation if it comes up in the future.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Got my PhD almost a year ago, struggling to find a job. Hey /r/AskAcademia , Australian PhD graduate here. My doctorate was (broadly) in risk communication and natural hazards research. I started when I was 23 straight after undergrad and was awarded last year at 29. I worked as a sessional/casual academic during that period, mostly teaching management science at my university. I'm 30 now. At the start of this year, I took the savings I had and called it quits with the university. I never wanted to be a teacher and I couldn't take the institutional exploitation by the university anymore. It's also a fairly bad time to be a non-STEM academic in Australia. I've been applying for jobs full time, but I can't even get so much as an interview for a position. I applied for a position at the CFA (Country Fire Authority, the main body for fire management in my state) that was almost a natural extension of the work I did in my doctorate. The application was ignored for six weeks until I emailed asking for an update, at which point they updated the application from \"In Progress\" to \"Finished\" and told me they wouldn't be inviting me to interview. I suspect they had an internal candidate in mind and the job posting was just a legal requirement and never actually checked. Still, it hurts to not have even had the opportunity to interview, after all that time building an expertise on the subject. I've also been applying for any and every researcher or consultant role I can find, but I'm turned down at the first stage every time. To be honest, I'm starting to get really scared. It's been almost 12 months since I graduated and I don't feel like I'm any closer to a career. I spent six years in some truly awful conditions, sacrificing a lot to get my doctorate finished. The thing that kept me going the whole time was the idea that a PhD would be valuable, prestigious, and make it easier to find a job. Now I look at my testamur and I just want to burn it. It feels like all the suffering was meaningless and has no context. My self-worth, mental state and finances are rapidly deteriorating and I'm not sure what to do next. Is anyone able to give me some advice on leaving academia and finding a job?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Can you get someone who's familiar with hiring PhDs into non-academia jobs to review your CV and a sample of your cover letters? You'll need to include the job ads with the cover letters for review, because each cover letter needs to be tailored specifically to the job, especially if you're applying for things that aren't the 100% obvious next step for your career path. You talk about applying but not about networking. If you haven't already, I'd suggest you put some of this effort into finding out what professional associations or meetings are relevant to the people you want to work for and attend those. Ask them what they need from candidates in these roles. Lastly, if you haven't already, you should be looking up the people who currently do the kinds of jobs you're applying for. Check out their educational path and experience and see if you can spot something that you're missing.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Got my PhD almost a year ago, struggling to find a job. Hey /r/AskAcademia , Australian PhD graduate here. My doctorate was (broadly) in risk communication and natural hazards research. I started when I was 23 straight after undergrad and was awarded last year at 29. I worked as a sessional/casual academic during that period, mostly teaching management science at my university. I'm 30 now. At the start of this year, I took the savings I had and called it quits with the university. I never wanted to be a teacher and I couldn't take the institutional exploitation by the university anymore. It's also a fairly bad time to be a non-STEM academic in Australia. I've been applying for jobs full time, but I can't even get so much as an interview for a position. I applied for a position at the CFA (Country Fire Authority, the main body for fire management in my state) that was almost a natural extension of the work I did in my doctorate. The application was ignored for six weeks until I emailed asking for an update, at which point they updated the application from \"In Progress\" to \"Finished\" and told me they wouldn't be inviting me to interview. I suspect they had an internal candidate in mind and the job posting was just a legal requirement and never actually checked. Still, it hurts to not have even had the opportunity to interview, after all that time building an expertise on the subject. I've also been applying for any and every researcher or consultant role I can find, but I'm turned down at the first stage every time. To be honest, I'm starting to get really scared. It's been almost 12 months since I graduated and I don't feel like I'm any closer to a career. I spent six years in some truly awful conditions, sacrificing a lot to get my doctorate finished. The thing that kept me going the whole time was the idea that a PhD would be valuable, prestigious, and make it easier to find a job. Now I look at my testamur and I just want to burn it. It feels like all the suffering was meaningless and has no context. My self-worth, mental state and finances are rapidly deteriorating and I'm not sure what to do next. Is anyone able to give me some advice on leaving academia and finding a job?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Hey, I'm in the same boat right now. Don't have anything too helpful to say unfortunately, but hit me up if you want to practice consulting cases for the interviews. And try to post your CV to r/resumes for feedback.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Got my PhD almost a year ago, struggling to find a job. Hey /r/AskAcademia , Australian PhD graduate here. My doctorate was (broadly) in risk communication and natural hazards research. I started when I was 23 straight after undergrad and was awarded last year at 29. I worked as a sessional/casual academic during that period, mostly teaching management science at my university. I'm 30 now. At the start of this year, I took the savings I had and called it quits with the university. I never wanted to be a teacher and I couldn't take the institutional exploitation by the university anymore. It's also a fairly bad time to be a non-STEM academic in Australia. I've been applying for jobs full time, but I can't even get so much as an interview for a position. I applied for a position at the CFA (Country Fire Authority, the main body for fire management in my state) that was almost a natural extension of the work I did in my doctorate. The application was ignored for six weeks until I emailed asking for an update, at which point they updated the application from \"In Progress\" to \"Finished\" and told me they wouldn't be inviting me to interview. I suspect they had an internal candidate in mind and the job posting was just a legal requirement and never actually checked. Still, it hurts to not have even had the opportunity to interview, after all that time building an expertise on the subject. I've also been applying for any and every researcher or consultant role I can find, but I'm turned down at the first stage every time. To be honest, I'm starting to get really scared. It's been almost 12 months since I graduated and I don't feel like I'm any closer to a career. I spent six years in some truly awful conditions, sacrificing a lot to get my doctorate finished. The thing that kept me going the whole time was the idea that a PhD would be valuable, prestigious, and make it easier to find a job. Now I look at my testamur and I just want to burn it. It feels like all the suffering was meaningless and has no context. My self-worth, mental state and finances are rapidly deteriorating and I'm not sure what to do next. Is anyone able to give me some advice on leaving academia and finding a job?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Hey, I am a social science Ph.D. as well and had no intention of staying in academia. I basically sold my analytics ability in the market. I did my Ph.D. on a completely unrelated topic as I now work in peace and development research. The think tank I work in has absolutely no connection to my Ph.D. except that the questionnaire uses a lot of subjective indicators. It's kind of ironic because most of the places I used to send manuscripts to turned them down because I used subjective indicators. However, that got me the job! I don't have a clear-cut solution but this is what I did. I was desperate, just had got married and my wife was also a Ph.D. student in the US then. I cast a really wide net, a really really wide net. I must have applied to close to 600 jobs from December 2019 (kind of semi-desperate) to June 2020 (full-blown desperation) end (my stipend had ended in May) and I started my job in July. So to start with I applied to a lot of places, a lot of them not even directly related to what I do but even if there was a small niche I could make myself relevant in, I would apply. I didn't network at all. I find academic gatherings fake - I can't stand them, so I went to Linkedin and I kept following pages, organizations, and people whose jobs I liked. I kept adding them, kept following pages, and finally, I started getting a lot of job openings. Not just those that come up on the normal search but general people posting and talking about stuff. Finally in the middle of the pandemic - I got three calls. 1. Position for a volunteer in IRC - somewhere in NY/NJ, USA 2. A really small NGO which was opening up a data team - starting with two people. 3. A really cool think tank in Europe, where I thought I had no chance. I got rejected as a volunteer by IRC. In the interview with the NGO, I got a rejection as well. Guess, I didn't quite fit in the mould they were looking for. Eventually, the think tank in Europe gave me a job in July. Pay is not that great but they take care of health and don't make work like indentured labour. They have a good reputation and I hope to stay for 2-3 years and then make a transition to monitoring and evals in NGOs. Maybe IRC can finally stop rejecting me for volunteer positions with a Ph.D. and actually offer me a job. ; ) Point is that I was lucky, right place and right time but the issue is you have to talk to people, within academia, on LinkedIn, apply to a hundred thousand places. I can't deal with the fake atmosphere of academia, so that option was closed for me but I contacted people on Linkedin, asked them for advice, and kept applying. It would be helpful if you ask help with resumes and cover letters and also make sure that your applications are steered to the job.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Got my PhD almost a year ago, struggling to find a job. Hey /r/AskAcademia , Australian PhD graduate here. My doctorate was (broadly) in risk communication and natural hazards research. I started when I was 23 straight after undergrad and was awarded last year at 29. I worked as a sessional/casual academic during that period, mostly teaching management science at my university. I'm 30 now. At the start of this year, I took the savings I had and called it quits with the university. I never wanted to be a teacher and I couldn't take the institutional exploitation by the university anymore. It's also a fairly bad time to be a non-STEM academic in Australia. I've been applying for jobs full time, but I can't even get so much as an interview for a position. I applied for a position at the CFA (Country Fire Authority, the main body for fire management in my state) that was almost a natural extension of the work I did in my doctorate. The application was ignored for six weeks until I emailed asking for an update, at which point they updated the application from \"In Progress\" to \"Finished\" and told me they wouldn't be inviting me to interview. I suspect they had an internal candidate in mind and the job posting was just a legal requirement and never actually checked. Still, it hurts to not have even had the opportunity to interview, after all that time building an expertise on the subject. I've also been applying for any and every researcher or consultant role I can find, but I'm turned down at the first stage every time. To be honest, I'm starting to get really scared. It's been almost 12 months since I graduated and I don't feel like I'm any closer to a career. I spent six years in some truly awful conditions, sacrificing a lot to get my doctorate finished. The thing that kept me going the whole time was the idea that a PhD would be valuable, prestigious, and make it easier to find a job. Now I look at my testamur and I just want to burn it. It feels like all the suffering was meaningless and has no context. My self-worth, mental state and finances are rapidly deteriorating and I'm not sure what to do next. Is anyone able to give me some advice on leaving academia and finding a job?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I did my PhD in Australia and it was drummed into me that I would probably have to leave Australia to get a job. So I did. Sorry if that's nto an option for you, it sucks. I have been out of Australia over 10 years now and the job market there still sucks for my line of work. (I'm in the UK now in a permanent position, but did a postdoc in Belgium.)", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Those of you who don't fit into the typical profile of someone in your area of study, have you had others show skepticism about your knowledge or abilities due to your age, race, gender, etc? One of my friends from undergraduate is a super bubbly blonde girly girl (think Reese Witherspoon from Legally Blonde) who also happened to graduate valedictorian in engineering and then went on to a top graduate school. She would get some funny reactions when telling people what she did for a living, but the neat thing about engineering is its objectivity: she could *prove* her competence. How about you?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Another woman in engineering here. While the apparent objectivity of engineering is nice in theory, in reality people's opinions of you are subjective anyways. As a woman, the bar for you to \"prove your competence\" is often higher than it is for your male colleagues regardless of any objective facts. I've had new staff ask if I was from HR; I've heard many times that I only got a job offer because I was a woman; I've had plenty of experiences where I suggest something and then, when a male colleague agrees with me, everyone around the table starts referring to it as \"his\" idea. Also, *so many* experiences of men who simply cannot believe that I know what I'm talking about. Even when I've literally published papers on a topic - and they know that! - I've had to cajole and argue and provide sources just to convince some men of the most basic, uncontroversial technical facts in an area they've never even worked in. And then there's the few specific men in the field who the other women warn you not to get too close to because they're a bit handsy, and the men who shake the hands of the other men but just sort of... gloss over me. And conferences, oh my god. It's a regular occurrence that I ask a poster presenter a question and they then direct their answer to some random man who happens to be standing next to me. Or I'm discussing my own work with someone and a male colleague of mine happens to walk past and says hello... and then the person I was talking with immediately starts asking my male colleague questions about *my* work apropos of nothing. I would love to go to even just one conference where neither of those things happens but alas, in well over a decade of conference attendance, it has not occurred yet.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Those of you who don't fit into the typical profile of someone in your area of study, have you had others show skepticism about your knowledge or abilities due to your age, race, gender, etc? One of my friends from undergraduate is a super bubbly blonde girly girl (think Reese Witherspoon from Legally Blonde) who also happened to graduate valedictorian in engineering and then went on to a top graduate school. She would get some funny reactions when telling people what she did for a living, but the neat thing about engineering is its objectivity: she could *prove* her competence. How about you?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I'm gay and in linguistics. My home department has a number of gays in it, but I believe this is not the case in many other institutions. I too have some 'bubbliness' that I've tried to (in response to external and internal forces) suppress for the sake of 'professionalism'. Additionally, when I'm clean-shaven I look younger than my age. There is a big difference between how some specific people treat me before vs. after my presentation at conferences, and I dread presenting late into a conference because it will quite simply cease to be a networking opportunity for me. Linguistics as a field is halfway between a) having points that can be definitively proven, and thus, a way to stand up to people who are clearly not taking you seriously ad hominem; and b) deferring to claims from big names and trends in the field, leaving your fate to established cliques and how well you regurgitate dogma. The frameworks are particularly bad for this: do an analysis with Optimality Theory and it will by and large not provide any further insight into whatever you're working on (if the analysis pans out at all given OT's toolbox), but you'll certainly make friends in certain circles, and vice versa. I've had a run in or two with a big name who dislikes me (am currently ABD), and they threw everything at me from \"I don't think your data exists\" to \"I've met your participants and they don't agree\". So even when you can prove what you're saying, some people will have decided whether they like you or not, and have no qualms hiding behind their tenure to act unprofessionally and attack you. At least our journals/conferences are generally reviewed blind. I can't imagine having to navigate the fields where it matters who wrote what. Oh, and fieldwork in some regions is gatekept by missionaries (SIL), who require you to be straight and married to work with them. Happy Pride!", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Those of you who don't fit into the typical profile of someone in your area of study, have you had others show skepticism about your knowledge or abilities due to your age, race, gender, etc? One of my friends from undergraduate is a super bubbly blonde girly girl (think Reese Witherspoon from Legally Blonde) who also happened to graduate valedictorian in engineering and then went on to a top graduate school. She would get some funny reactions when telling people what she did for a living, but the neat thing about engineering is its objectivity: she could *prove* her competence. How about you?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Queer woman in engineering - I don't think engineering is as objective as you say. In classes where I've had to do group work, I've made suggestions that were completely ignored only for someone else to propose *the exact same thing* an hour later and get exclamations of what a good idea it was. I once asked a question in class and the professor answered it, and after class one of the (younger) male grad students decided to come up to me and give an unsolicited explanation to 'help' me get it - but his explanation didn't even address my question! The environment in engineering sucks.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Those of you who don't fit into the typical profile of someone in your area of study, have you had others show skepticism about your knowledge or abilities due to your age, race, gender, etc? One of my friends from undergraduate is a super bubbly blonde girly girl (think Reese Witherspoon from Legally Blonde) who also happened to graduate valedictorian in engineering and then went on to a top graduate school. She would get some funny reactions when telling people what she did for a living, but the neat thing about engineering is its objectivity: she could *prove* her competence. How about you?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I'm gay and in linguistics. My home department has a number of gays in it, but I believe this is not the case in many other institutions. I too have some 'bubbliness' that I've tried to (in response to external and internal forces) suppress for the sake of 'professionalism'. Additionally, when I'm clean-shaven I look younger than my age. There is a big difference between how some specific people treat me before vs. after my presentation at conferences, and I dread presenting late into a conference because it will quite simply cease to be a networking opportunity for me. Linguistics as a field is halfway between a) having points that can be definitively proven, and thus, a way to stand up to people who are clearly not taking you seriously ad hominem; and b) deferring to claims from big names and trends in the field, leaving your fate to established cliques and how well you regurgitate dogma. The frameworks are particularly bad for this: do an analysis with Optimality Theory and it will by and large not provide any further insight into whatever you're working on (if the analysis pans out at all given OT's toolbox), but you'll certainly make friends in certain circles, and vice versa. I've had a run in or two with a big name who dislikes me (am currently ABD), and they threw everything at me from \"I don't think your data exists\" to \"I've met your participants and they don't agree\". So even when you can prove what you're saying, some people will have decided whether they like you or not, and have no qualms hiding behind their tenure to act unprofessionally and attack you. At least our journals/conferences are generally reviewed blind. I can't imagine having to navigate the fields where it matters who wrote what. Oh, and fieldwork in some regions is gatekept by missionaries (SIL), who require you to be straight and married to work with them. Happy Pride!", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Those of you who don't fit into the typical profile of someone in your area of study, have you had others show skepticism about your knowledge or abilities due to your age, race, gender, etc? One of my friends from undergraduate is a super bubbly blonde girly girl (think Reese Witherspoon from Legally Blonde) who also happened to graduate valedictorian in engineering and then went on to a top graduate school. She would get some funny reactions when telling people what she did for a living, but the neat thing about engineering is its objectivity: she could *prove* her competence. How about you?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I’m a (white, cis) woman in Computer Science. My favorite example: Toward the end of grad school, I was chatting with some male labmates at a multidisciplinary conference when a very friendly first year grad student from another university came to introduce himself. He was in one of the non-computational disciplines that fit the conference and was very excited to hear that my labmates were in CS and who their advisor was (never gave me a chance to introduce myself). He started asking them about a particular algorithm he’d heard of that might be useful for modeling his work. My labmates suggested something else might work better—at which point the student turned to me. “So XYZ algorithm is a computational technique...” I interrupted him, told him that I knew very well what that algorithm was, and finally introduced myself. He was clearly surprised and embarrassed. He may have even apologized. But that incident really made it clear to me that the default assumption would never be that I am an expert in my field.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Those of you who don't fit into the typical profile of someone in your area of study, have you had others show skepticism about your knowledge or abilities due to your age, race, gender, etc? One of my friends from undergraduate is a super bubbly blonde girly girl (think Reese Witherspoon from Legally Blonde) who also happened to graduate valedictorian in engineering and then went on to a top graduate school. She would get some funny reactions when telling people what she did for a living, but the neat thing about engineering is its objectivity: she could *prove* her competence. How about you?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Yes absolutely, I'm a latinx woman in a predominantly white, male field. I've been sidelined on math/technical heavy projects (despite years of significant, successful coursework in both) and when I've earned honors or competitions or awards I've had at least one peer suggest that it's either a) because of my racial/gender identity or b) impressive because of my racial/gender identity", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Those of you who don't fit into the typical profile of someone in your area of study, have you had others show skepticism about your knowledge or abilities due to your age, race, gender, etc? One of my friends from undergraduate is a super bubbly blonde girly girl (think Reese Witherspoon from Legally Blonde) who also happened to graduate valedictorian in engineering and then went on to a top graduate school. She would get some funny reactions when telling people what she did for a living, but the neat thing about engineering is its objectivity: she could *prove* her competence. How about you?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I’m a (white, cis) woman in Computer Science. My favorite example: Toward the end of grad school, I was chatting with some male labmates at a multidisciplinary conference when a very friendly first year grad student from another university came to introduce himself. He was in one of the non-computational disciplines that fit the conference and was very excited to hear that my labmates were in CS and who their advisor was (never gave me a chance to introduce myself). He started asking them about a particular algorithm he’d heard of that might be useful for modeling his work. My labmates suggested something else might work better—at which point the student turned to me. “So XYZ algorithm is a computational technique...” I interrupted him, told him that I knew very well what that algorithm was, and finally introduced myself. He was clearly surprised and embarrassed. He may have even apologized. But that incident really made it clear to me that the default assumption would never be that I am an expert in my field.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Those of you who don't fit into the typical profile of someone in your area of study, have you had others show skepticism about your knowledge or abilities due to your age, race, gender, etc? One of my friends from undergraduate is a super bubbly blonde girly girl (think Reese Witherspoon from Legally Blonde) who also happened to graduate valedictorian in engineering and then went on to a top graduate school. She would get some funny reactions when telling people what she did for a living, but the neat thing about engineering is its objectivity: she could *prove* her competence. How about you?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Yes, I’m a mathematician. No, I’m not socially incompetent. Yes, I’m autistic. No, whatever it is that you’re thinking right now is wrong. Also, if you say the word “rain man” I might punch you. Yes, I’m very good at what I do. No, I’m not a savant and I’m not only good at mathematics because I have autism superpowers. I have these other superpowers called “hard work” “studiousness” and “intelligence.”", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Those of you who don't fit into the typical profile of someone in your area of study, have you had others show skepticism about your knowledge or abilities due to your age, race, gender, etc? One of my friends from undergraduate is a super bubbly blonde girly girl (think Reese Witherspoon from Legally Blonde) who also happened to graduate valedictorian in engineering and then went on to a top graduate school. She would get some funny reactions when telling people what she did for a living, but the neat thing about engineering is its objectivity: she could *prove* her competence. How about you?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Another woman in engineering here. While the apparent objectivity of engineering is nice in theory, in reality people's opinions of you are subjective anyways. As a woman, the bar for you to \"prove your competence\" is often higher than it is for your male colleagues regardless of any objective facts. I've had new staff ask if I was from HR; I've heard many times that I only got a job offer because I was a woman; I've had plenty of experiences where I suggest something and then, when a male colleague agrees with me, everyone around the table starts referring to it as \"his\" idea. Also, *so many* experiences of men who simply cannot believe that I know what I'm talking about. Even when I've literally published papers on a topic - and they know that! - I've had to cajole and argue and provide sources just to convince some men of the most basic, uncontroversial technical facts in an area they've never even worked in. And then there's the few specific men in the field who the other women warn you not to get too close to because they're a bit handsy, and the men who shake the hands of the other men but just sort of... gloss over me. And conferences, oh my god. It's a regular occurrence that I ask a poster presenter a question and they then direct their answer to some random man who happens to be standing next to me. Or I'm discussing my own work with someone and a male colleague of mine happens to walk past and says hello... and then the person I was talking with immediately starts asking my male colleague questions about *my* work apropos of nothing. I would love to go to even just one conference where neither of those things happens but alas, in well over a decade of conference attendance, it has not occurred yet.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Those of you who don't fit into the typical profile of someone in your area of study, have you had others show skepticism about your knowledge or abilities due to your age, race, gender, etc? One of my friends from undergraduate is a super bubbly blonde girly girl (think Reese Witherspoon from Legally Blonde) who also happened to graduate valedictorian in engineering and then went on to a top graduate school. She would get some funny reactions when telling people what she did for a living, but the neat thing about engineering is its objectivity: she could *prove* her competence. How about you?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "By first appearances I'm pretty generic for my field (computational evolutionary biology) -- white, male, multilingual, young-ish, in a heterosexual marriage, etc. My most distinguishing feature might be physique, being pretty buff / active from a decade of strength training, enough so that it's commented on unprompted frequently, where everyone else tends to be not very muscular and more sedentary. But I'm not sure if that's not representative of the broader population. I'm also rather visibly Eastern European in terms of e.g. craniofacial morphology -- which again, might still be sampling uniformly from the US, but certainly prompts lots of halfway-indelicate comments and jokes. And I grew up pretty poor, and so have been made fun of a bit for having “poor” tastes. Dunno how much these all bear upon perceptions of my intellectual competence, though — any gopnik-y “slavic street thug” stereotypes tend not to survive too long past initial interactions. Am also pretty tall and frequently sport a buzzcut and stubble, and so have been called “intimidating” on many occasions (e.g. in undergrad I lived in a big city and would often take long walks outside around midnight — people would often cross the street or turn around instead of passing within 50 feet of me lol).", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Stock phrases to answer talk questions Just met with a graduate student who was concerned that a recent talk had been derailed by a persistent questioner. I told them that question management is a skill that develops over time, but also provided a few stock phrases that can be used to deflect questions when you don't have a good answer. Here are some of mine - any suggestions? * For interrupters: \"I might address that later in the talk - could you ask me again at the end if I haven't answered the question by then?\" * For repeated questioners who won't stop: \"This is a really interesting exchange but just because we're short on time and I want to give others a chance to ask questions, can we talk about it afterwards?\" * For people who offer dumb criticisms of your methods: \"That's an interesting point, what would you have done differently?\" * For questions that are nonsensical: \"That's an interesting point, what are your thoughts?\" * For questions that point out limitations: \"That's something I've thought a lot. Although this study wasn't set up to address that comprehensively, it's something we're going to look at in future studies.\" For context, I'm in social psychology and do quantitative research.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Some advice I got early on as a grad student was the following. When someone asks you a completely stupid question, find some way to \"misunderstand\" it as a good question and answer that instead.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Stock phrases to answer talk questions Just met with a graduate student who was concerned that a recent talk had been derailed by a persistent questioner. I told them that question management is a skill that develops over time, but also provided a few stock phrases that can be used to deflect questions when you don't have a good answer. Here are some of mine - any suggestions? * For interrupters: \"I might address that later in the talk - could you ask me again at the end if I haven't answered the question by then?\" * For repeated questioners who won't stop: \"This is a really interesting exchange but just because we're short on time and I want to give others a chance to ask questions, can we talk about it afterwards?\" * For people who offer dumb criticisms of your methods: \"That's an interesting point, what would you have done differently?\" * For questions that are nonsensical: \"That's an interesting point, what are your thoughts?\" * For questions that point out limitations: \"That's something I've thought a lot. Although this study wasn't set up to address that comprehensively, it's something we're going to look at in future studies.\" For context, I'm in social psychology and do quantitative research.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Here's the other thing. If someone is doing this to a speaker, esp. a junior speaker, tell them to STFU. Esp. if you're a senior academic.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Stock phrases to answer talk questions Just met with a graduate student who was concerned that a recent talk had been derailed by a persistent questioner. I told them that question management is a skill that develops over time, but also provided a few stock phrases that can be used to deflect questions when you don't have a good answer. Here are some of mine - any suggestions? * For interrupters: \"I might address that later in the talk - could you ask me again at the end if I haven't answered the question by then?\" * For repeated questioners who won't stop: \"This is a really interesting exchange but just because we're short on time and I want to give others a chance to ask questions, can we talk about it afterwards?\" * For people who offer dumb criticisms of your methods: \"That's an interesting point, what would you have done differently?\" * For questions that are nonsensical: \"That's an interesting point, what are your thoughts?\" * For questions that point out limitations: \"That's something I've thought a lot. Although this study wasn't set up to address that comprehensively, it's something we're going to look at in future studies.\" For context, I'm in social psychology and do quantitative research.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Some advice I got early on as a grad student was the following. When someone asks you a completely stupid question, find some way to \"misunderstand\" it as a good question and answer that instead.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Stock phrases to answer talk questions Just met with a graduate student who was concerned that a recent talk had been derailed by a persistent questioner. I told them that question management is a skill that develops over time, but also provided a few stock phrases that can be used to deflect questions when you don't have a good answer. Here are some of mine - any suggestions? * For interrupters: \"I might address that later in the talk - could you ask me again at the end if I haven't answered the question by then?\" * For repeated questioners who won't stop: \"This is a really interesting exchange but just because we're short on time and I want to give others a chance to ask questions, can we talk about it afterwards?\" * For people who offer dumb criticisms of your methods: \"That's an interesting point, what would you have done differently?\" * For questions that are nonsensical: \"That's an interesting point, what are your thoughts?\" * For questions that point out limitations: \"That's something I've thought a lot. Although this study wasn't set up to address that comprehensively, it's something we're going to look at in future studies.\" For context, I'm in social psychology and do quantitative research.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I certainly agree that asking or suggesting that they discuss with you after the talk can be a good idea if the questioner is persistent, or the answer genuinely requires a long technical explanation. But I do find it rather annoying when some speakers immediate response to an interesting question is to discuss it after the talk. That's all well and good but I also wanted to know the answer. It sometimes seems to be prepared as a stock response to avoid embarassment.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Stock phrases to answer talk questions Just met with a graduate student who was concerned that a recent talk had been derailed by a persistent questioner. I told them that question management is a skill that develops over time, but also provided a few stock phrases that can be used to deflect questions when you don't have a good answer. Here are some of mine - any suggestions? * For interrupters: \"I might address that later in the talk - could you ask me again at the end if I haven't answered the question by then?\" * For repeated questioners who won't stop: \"This is a really interesting exchange but just because we're short on time and I want to give others a chance to ask questions, can we talk about it afterwards?\" * For people who offer dumb criticisms of your methods: \"That's an interesting point, what would you have done differently?\" * For questions that are nonsensical: \"That's an interesting point, what are your thoughts?\" * For questions that point out limitations: \"That's something I've thought a lot. Although this study wasn't set up to address that comprehensively, it's something we're going to look at in future studies.\" For context, I'm in social psychology and do quantitative research.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Some advice I got early on as a grad student was the following. When someone asks you a completely stupid question, find some way to \"misunderstand\" it as a good question and answer that instead.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Stock phrases to answer talk questions Just met with a graduate student who was concerned that a recent talk had been derailed by a persistent questioner. I told them that question management is a skill that develops over time, but also provided a few stock phrases that can be used to deflect questions when you don't have a good answer. Here are some of mine - any suggestions? * For interrupters: \"I might address that later in the talk - could you ask me again at the end if I haven't answered the question by then?\" * For repeated questioners who won't stop: \"This is a really interesting exchange but just because we're short on time and I want to give others a chance to ask questions, can we talk about it afterwards?\" * For people who offer dumb criticisms of your methods: \"That's an interesting point, what would you have done differently?\" * For questions that are nonsensical: \"That's an interesting point, what are your thoughts?\" * For questions that point out limitations: \"That's something I've thought a lot. Although this study wasn't set up to address that comprehensively, it's something we're going to look at in future studies.\" For context, I'm in social psychology and do quantitative research.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Another strategy is to preemptively explain how you will deal with questions. Sometimes the person introducing the speaker will do that formally other times it's left up to the speaker to say something like \"Today I'll be sharing some developments in Advanced Basket Weaving. My presentation will be about 15 minutes and then we'll have time for questions at the end. If you have clarification questions, please let me know, but other discussion we'll save for the after the presentation.\" \\[or not include that last sentence\\]", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Stock phrases to answer talk questions Just met with a graduate student who was concerned that a recent talk had been derailed by a persistent questioner. I told them that question management is a skill that develops over time, but also provided a few stock phrases that can be used to deflect questions when you don't have a good answer. Here are some of mine - any suggestions? * For interrupters: \"I might address that later in the talk - could you ask me again at the end if I haven't answered the question by then?\" * For repeated questioners who won't stop: \"This is a really interesting exchange but just because we're short on time and I want to give others a chance to ask questions, can we talk about it afterwards?\" * For people who offer dumb criticisms of your methods: \"That's an interesting point, what would you have done differently?\" * For questions that are nonsensical: \"That's an interesting point, what are your thoughts?\" * For questions that point out limitations: \"That's something I've thought a lot. Although this study wasn't set up to address that comprehensively, it's something we're going to look at in future studies.\" For context, I'm in social psychology and do quantitative research.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "This is why I like engineering conferences, as they always seem to have moderators. For interrupters, you don't have to say anything, you let the conference organizers skin them alive for the interruption.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Stock phrases to answer talk questions Just met with a graduate student who was concerned that a recent talk had been derailed by a persistent questioner. I told them that question management is a skill that develops over time, but also provided a few stock phrases that can be used to deflect questions when you don't have a good answer. Here are some of mine - any suggestions? * For interrupters: \"I might address that later in the talk - could you ask me again at the end if I haven't answered the question by then?\" * For repeated questioners who won't stop: \"This is a really interesting exchange but just because we're short on time and I want to give others a chance to ask questions, can we talk about it afterwards?\" * For people who offer dumb criticisms of your methods: \"That's an interesting point, what would you have done differently?\" * For questions that are nonsensical: \"That's an interesting point, what are your thoughts?\" * For questions that point out limitations: \"That's something I've thought a lot. Although this study wasn't set up to address that comprehensively, it's something we're going to look at in future studies.\" For context, I'm in social psychology and do quantitative research.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Another strategy is to preemptively explain how you will deal with questions. Sometimes the person introducing the speaker will do that formally other times it's left up to the speaker to say something like \"Today I'll be sharing some developments in Advanced Basket Weaving. My presentation will be about 15 minutes and then we'll have time for questions at the end. If you have clarification questions, please let me know, but other discussion we'll save for the after the presentation.\" \\[or not include that last sentence\\]", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Stock phrases to answer talk questions Just met with a graduate student who was concerned that a recent talk had been derailed by a persistent questioner. I told them that question management is a skill that develops over time, but also provided a few stock phrases that can be used to deflect questions when you don't have a good answer. Here are some of mine - any suggestions? * For interrupters: \"I might address that later in the talk - could you ask me again at the end if I haven't answered the question by then?\" * For repeated questioners who won't stop: \"This is a really interesting exchange but just because we're short on time and I want to give others a chance to ask questions, can we talk about it afterwards?\" * For people who offer dumb criticisms of your methods: \"That's an interesting point, what would you have done differently?\" * For questions that are nonsensical: \"That's an interesting point, what are your thoughts?\" * For questions that point out limitations: \"That's something I've thought a lot. Although this study wasn't set up to address that comprehensively, it's something we're going to look at in future studies.\" For context, I'm in social psychology and do quantitative research.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Some advice I got early on as a grad student was the following. When someone asks you a completely stupid question, find some way to \"misunderstand\" it as a good question and answer that instead.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Stock phrases to answer talk questions Just met with a graduate student who was concerned that a recent talk had been derailed by a persistent questioner. I told them that question management is a skill that develops over time, but also provided a few stock phrases that can be used to deflect questions when you don't have a good answer. Here are some of mine - any suggestions? * For interrupters: \"I might address that later in the talk - could you ask me again at the end if I haven't answered the question by then?\" * For repeated questioners who won't stop: \"This is a really interesting exchange but just because we're short on time and I want to give others a chance to ask questions, can we talk about it afterwards?\" * For people who offer dumb criticisms of your methods: \"That's an interesting point, what would you have done differently?\" * For questions that are nonsensical: \"That's an interesting point, what are your thoughts?\" * For questions that point out limitations: \"That's something I've thought a lot. Although this study wasn't set up to address that comprehensively, it's something we're going to look at in future studies.\" For context, I'm in social psychology and do quantitative research.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "\"that's a good question, here is a better one: \" then say something that will lead on to your next point. 'how does this affect the energy spectrum? which is shown here in the next figure'.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Conducted my first lecture today. It did not go well I’m a TA and this term I am conducting classes for one of the intro lectures for first years. It’s like a general knowledge module on my country (so we cover history, econ, politics etc). I had my first independent lecture today on a topic I’m not familiar with at all. And it was so bad. I couldn’t pronounce a few names (it was on the origin of our language), my explanations were all over the place and I couldn’t answer a question a student had (I did answer it later though). I found out the topic yesterday so I didn’t have enough time to prepare. I’m not sure how to deal with this. This was their first impression of me and I’m a little worried that I’ll make things worse for them. Was anyone ever in a similar situation? How do I recover from this?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Hopefully this is reassuring. I remember being a student when what you described happened to an T.A. (I'm sure everyone else forgot it, but it was a field I was thinking of going into and I wanted to know what the heck a first job looked like.) I thought \"Wow, I feel kinda bad for them.\" And then two days later they got up again, did fine, and they became one of my favorite people to learn from. So the first impression doesn't stick. Students'll remember how well you went on to do.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Conducted my first lecture today. It did not go well I’m a TA and this term I am conducting classes for one of the intro lectures for first years. It’s like a general knowledge module on my country (so we cover history, econ, politics etc). I had my first independent lecture today on a topic I’m not familiar with at all. And it was so bad. I couldn’t pronounce a few names (it was on the origin of our language), my explanations were all over the place and I couldn’t answer a question a student had (I did answer it later though). I found out the topic yesterday so I didn’t have enough time to prepare. I’m not sure how to deal with this. This was their first impression of me and I’m a little worried that I’ll make things worse for them. Was anyone ever in a similar situation? How do I recover from this?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I've been teaching for years and still have the occasional train wreck lecture. Sometimes it's even on material I've covered hundreds of times. The best advice I can give is be honest with your students and laugh it off. It's amazing how a little self-deprecating humor can diffuse an awkward classroom. Especially when you mispronounce something. I'm super bad about that. As for not being able to answer all questions off the top of your head... someone else already mentioned admitting that you're not sure but promising you'll look it up and get back to them. This is great advice. Not only does it ensure you give them the proper information it's teaching your students that's it's okay not to have all the answers all the time. My mentor in grad school taught me a lot but the thing that has stuck with me all these years is that unless you have a photographic memory you're never going to remember every little thing about your subject. What you need to learn is what questions you should be asking and where to find the answers. It's a philosophy I live by both in research and teaching.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Conducted my first lecture today. It did not go well I’m a TA and this term I am conducting classes for one of the intro lectures for first years. It’s like a general knowledge module on my country (so we cover history, econ, politics etc). I had my first independent lecture today on a topic I’m not familiar with at all. And it was so bad. I couldn’t pronounce a few names (it was on the origin of our language), my explanations were all over the place and I couldn’t answer a question a student had (I did answer it later though). I found out the topic yesterday so I didn’t have enough time to prepare. I’m not sure how to deal with this. This was their first impression of me and I’m a little worried that I’ll make things worse for them. Was anyone ever in a similar situation? How do I recover from this?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I just finished my PhD in curriculum studies, and have continued teaching high school during grad school. When I became a teacher 15 years ago, it was through an accelerated process, that involved a ton of mentoring during my first year of teaching. One of my mentors mentioned, kind of off-handedly, that it was somewhere around his 7th year of teaching the same, narrow subject (chemistry, in his case) that he was able to walk into the room and teach pretty well, without doing several hours of prep for each hour of class. As others have said above, you were put into an unreasonable position, because you didn't have time to prep. Hopefully, you know (or have control over) the content of the second class, and can put the prep in. There's lots of good advice above (even though the suggestions move in several very different directions) on how to address day 1. Pick the one that most appeals to you, and include it as part of how you prepare for the second class. I'll just add to that advice: It's okay to tell your students that you weren't given enough time to prep the first class, and you have prepared much more thoroughly for the second. That can help your students reconcile the different experiences, if they were concerned about your trustworthiness as a TA after that first class, and to recognize that you're better than that first impression might have left.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Conducted my first lecture today. It did not go well I’m a TA and this term I am conducting classes for one of the intro lectures for first years. It’s like a general knowledge module on my country (so we cover history, econ, politics etc). I had my first independent lecture today on a topic I’m not familiar with at all. And it was so bad. I couldn’t pronounce a few names (it was on the origin of our language), my explanations were all over the place and I couldn’t answer a question a student had (I did answer it later though). I found out the topic yesterday so I didn’t have enough time to prepare. I’m not sure how to deal with this. This was their first impression of me and I’m a little worried that I’ll make things worse for them. Was anyone ever in a similar situation? How do I recover from this?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "It happens. Reflect on what you could do differently or something that would have helped given the circumstances. Remember that and do a little better next time. Your first lecture is a starting point, not representative of your ability as a lecturer.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Conducted my first lecture today. It did not go well I’m a TA and this term I am conducting classes for one of the intro lectures for first years. It’s like a general knowledge module on my country (so we cover history, econ, politics etc). I had my first independent lecture today on a topic I’m not familiar with at all. And it was so bad. I couldn’t pronounce a few names (it was on the origin of our language), my explanations were all over the place and I couldn’t answer a question a student had (I did answer it later though). I found out the topic yesterday so I didn’t have enough time to prepare. I’m not sure how to deal with this. This was their first impression of me and I’m a little worried that I’ll make things worse for them. Was anyone ever in a similar situation? How do I recover from this?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I just finished my PhD in curriculum studies, and have continued teaching high school during grad school. When I became a teacher 15 years ago, it was through an accelerated process, that involved a ton of mentoring during my first year of teaching. One of my mentors mentioned, kind of off-handedly, that it was somewhere around his 7th year of teaching the same, narrow subject (chemistry, in his case) that he was able to walk into the room and teach pretty well, without doing several hours of prep for each hour of class. As others have said above, you were put into an unreasonable position, because you didn't have time to prep. Hopefully, you know (or have control over) the content of the second class, and can put the prep in. There's lots of good advice above (even though the suggestions move in several very different directions) on how to address day 1. Pick the one that most appeals to you, and include it as part of how you prepare for the second class. I'll just add to that advice: It's okay to tell your students that you weren't given enough time to prep the first class, and you have prepared much more thoroughly for the second. That can help your students reconcile the different experiences, if they were concerned about your trustworthiness as a TA after that first class, and to recognize that you're better than that first impression might have left.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Conducted my first lecture today. It did not go well I’m a TA and this term I am conducting classes for one of the intro lectures for first years. It’s like a general knowledge module on my country (so we cover history, econ, politics etc). I had my first independent lecture today on a topic I’m not familiar with at all. And it was so bad. I couldn’t pronounce a few names (it was on the origin of our language), my explanations were all over the place and I couldn’t answer a question a student had (I did answer it later though). I found out the topic yesterday so I didn’t have enough time to prepare. I’m not sure how to deal with this. This was their first impression of me and I’m a little worried that I’ll make things worse for them. Was anyone ever in a similar situation? How do I recover from this?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Teaching is difficult. It takes time to learn what techniques work best for you and the population of students you are teaching. Think of teaching like research. You are probably going to be bad at it at first. As you put time in, you will get better. Don’t beat yourself up about a bad class. Think about how to use your experience to do better next time. If you would like, you can address the first class with your students. I don’t even like to think of my first class or really first couple years of teaching. After 15 years, my bad lectures are few and far between.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Conducted my first lecture today. It did not go well I’m a TA and this term I am conducting classes for one of the intro lectures for first years. It’s like a general knowledge module on my country (so we cover history, econ, politics etc). I had my first independent lecture today on a topic I’m not familiar with at all. And it was so bad. I couldn’t pronounce a few names (it was on the origin of our language), my explanations were all over the place and I couldn’t answer a question a student had (I did answer it later though). I found out the topic yesterday so I didn’t have enough time to prepare. I’m not sure how to deal with this. This was their first impression of me and I’m a little worried that I’ll make things worse for them. Was anyone ever in a similar situation? How do I recover from this?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I just finished my PhD in curriculum studies, and have continued teaching high school during grad school. When I became a teacher 15 years ago, it was through an accelerated process, that involved a ton of mentoring during my first year of teaching. One of my mentors mentioned, kind of off-handedly, that it was somewhere around his 7th year of teaching the same, narrow subject (chemistry, in his case) that he was able to walk into the room and teach pretty well, without doing several hours of prep for each hour of class. As others have said above, you were put into an unreasonable position, because you didn't have time to prep. Hopefully, you know (or have control over) the content of the second class, and can put the prep in. There's lots of good advice above (even though the suggestions move in several very different directions) on how to address day 1. Pick the one that most appeals to you, and include it as part of how you prepare for the second class. I'll just add to that advice: It's okay to tell your students that you weren't given enough time to prep the first class, and you have prepared much more thoroughly for the second. That can help your students reconcile the different experiences, if they were concerned about your trustworthiness as a TA after that first class, and to recognize that you're better than that first impression might have left.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Conducted my first lecture today. It did not go well I’m a TA and this term I am conducting classes for one of the intro lectures for first years. It’s like a general knowledge module on my country (so we cover history, econ, politics etc). I had my first independent lecture today on a topic I’m not familiar with at all. And it was so bad. I couldn’t pronounce a few names (it was on the origin of our language), my explanations were all over the place and I couldn’t answer a question a student had (I did answer it later though). I found out the topic yesterday so I didn’t have enough time to prepare. I’m not sure how to deal with this. This was their first impression of me and I’m a little worried that I’ll make things worse for them. Was anyone ever in a similar situation? How do I recover from this?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Honestly: no one will remember. one lecture over the course of an academic year? they hear literally hundreds of lectures, it all blurs together. they won't have any recall of it in two weeks. Just be better moving forward.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Conducted my first lecture today. It did not go well I’m a TA and this term I am conducting classes for one of the intro lectures for first years. It’s like a general knowledge module on my country (so we cover history, econ, politics etc). I had my first independent lecture today on a topic I’m not familiar with at all. And it was so bad. I couldn’t pronounce a few names (it was on the origin of our language), my explanations were all over the place and I couldn’t answer a question a student had (I did answer it later though). I found out the topic yesterday so I didn’t have enough time to prepare. I’m not sure how to deal with this. This was their first impression of me and I’m a little worried that I’ll make things worse for them. Was anyone ever in a similar situation? How do I recover from this?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I just finished my PhD in curriculum studies, and have continued teaching high school during grad school. When I became a teacher 15 years ago, it was through an accelerated process, that involved a ton of mentoring during my first year of teaching. One of my mentors mentioned, kind of off-handedly, that it was somewhere around his 7th year of teaching the same, narrow subject (chemistry, in his case) that he was able to walk into the room and teach pretty well, without doing several hours of prep for each hour of class. As others have said above, you were put into an unreasonable position, because you didn't have time to prep. Hopefully, you know (or have control over) the content of the second class, and can put the prep in. There's lots of good advice above (even though the suggestions move in several very different directions) on how to address day 1. Pick the one that most appeals to you, and include it as part of how you prepare for the second class. I'll just add to that advice: It's okay to tell your students that you weren't given enough time to prep the first class, and you have prepared much more thoroughly for the second. That can help your students reconcile the different experiences, if they were concerned about your trustworthiness as a TA after that first class, and to recognize that you're better than that first impression might have left.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Conducted my first lecture today. It did not go well I’m a TA and this term I am conducting classes for one of the intro lectures for first years. It’s like a general knowledge module on my country (so we cover history, econ, politics etc). I had my first independent lecture today on a topic I’m not familiar with at all. And it was so bad. I couldn’t pronounce a few names (it was on the origin of our language), my explanations were all over the place and I couldn’t answer a question a student had (I did answer it later though). I found out the topic yesterday so I didn’t have enough time to prepare. I’m not sure how to deal with this. This was their first impression of me and I’m a little worried that I’ll make things worse for them. Was anyone ever in a similar situation? How do I recover from this?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I've been teaching for years and still have the occasional train wreck lecture. Sometimes it's even on material I've covered hundreds of times. The best advice I can give is be honest with your students and laugh it off. It's amazing how a little self-deprecating humor can diffuse an awkward classroom. Especially when you mispronounce something. I'm super bad about that. As for not being able to answer all questions off the top of your head... someone else already mentioned admitting that you're not sure but promising you'll look it up and get back to them. This is great advice. Not only does it ensure you give them the proper information it's teaching your students that's it's okay not to have all the answers all the time. My mentor in grad school taught me a lot but the thing that has stuck with me all these years is that unless you have a photographic memory you're never going to remember every little thing about your subject. What you need to learn is what questions you should be asking and where to find the answers. It's a philosophy I live by both in research and teaching.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Why am I slacking off days even in my post-PhD life? Background: I recently received my PhD (30F). I worked very hard to secure a good postdoc fellowship during my PhD. Now that I am here, I am finding myself in some patterns and old habits of slacking off that I am quite alarmed by. During graduate school I had a cycles that once every few weeks I had developed a habit of just lazing around and binge watching or slacking off. This was true even I managed to shutt off all SM on phone and laptop. I would find just some way to surf the internet and search random stuff...the day(s) would just pass by. Until, I snapped out of it and back to work. Somehow this cycle felt more acceptable in graduate school because I was just a \"student\" after all. Now that I am officially in a postdoc position, for the first time it's hitting me that this is goddamn real job with real money. It's hitting me that there are other 30 year olds in other fields working their ass of 10 -12hours a day for a living, with a serious work ethic. I guess part of being an academic is that you set your own milestones and there is a very little accountability to others. Everyone in my work place kinda works remotely (theoretical astrophysics) and so I don't have a community around me. I am not lonely. I am currently staying with parents (Asian fam here), eat well and excercise regularly. Yet, this last 10 days, when I go back to my computer I have found every excuse to not work (even with all SM blocked). I am sitting here feeling so alarmed because I realize this is an unhealthy work ethic. Don't get me wrong - I am good at what I do..I've published in top journals, won many awards, and this prestigious postdoc fellowship - but I've come to realize that I am appalled by the sloth and inconsistency with which I approach it. I feel ashamed of talking about this with anyone else. I feel like I'm in 30s (and not an undergrad) and I should have figured out this by now. I get so queasy thinking..if I were in a tenure tracked job as an assistant professor and continued with these habits, that would be simply be awful! I'm just wondering if anyone has had a similar experience and how they turned it around. More importantly, how they remained consistent about it.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "In my culture there is a story about a legendary grass harvester, known to be able to cut the grass of two other men with ease. A wealthy farmer challenges him to cut the grass of three men, and promises him the pay of four men for his effort. When the grass cutting season begins, the men each start harvesting their portion of the field, except the legend. He sits in the grass, chews straws, and takes naps. The farmer complains but the man does not move. This goes on for a full week, until grass season is almost over. The farmer is livid, makes threats to withhold is pay etc. On the last day, the legend stands up and says to the farmer \"you are paying me to cut grass, not listen to insults\", and proceeds to cut down his three shares within that day. The farmer, remorseful, pays him extra for his bad behavior. There are many parallels with academia there. At the end of the day, we are evaluated by our outputs, not the inputs. I find myself going through cycles of doing less some weeks. Sometimes I go days mostly procrastinating, and it can be mentally challenging because of guilt etc. But I've realized that these days are fine as long as I get my work done. I don't think my coworkers have stamina for 14 hours of productive work. I think they might spend these hours, but not productively. I also have days where everything clicks. I think my brain is just processing stuff, or resting between bouts of effort. In those days I'm like the grasscutter and get very much done. This year I've submitted a large grant application and authored multiple papers, second only in productivity to full professors that arent first authors. I've done that not despite cycles of procrastination but because I respect that this is how I operate and I work with it, not against it. I would not compete in hours spent against anyone, just in outputs. Who cares if you chew grass for 10 days so long as you cut the grass in time.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Why am I slacking off days even in my post-PhD life? Background: I recently received my PhD (30F). I worked very hard to secure a good postdoc fellowship during my PhD. Now that I am here, I am finding myself in some patterns and old habits of slacking off that I am quite alarmed by. During graduate school I had a cycles that once every few weeks I had developed a habit of just lazing around and binge watching or slacking off. This was true even I managed to shutt off all SM on phone and laptop. I would find just some way to surf the internet and search random stuff...the day(s) would just pass by. Until, I snapped out of it and back to work. Somehow this cycle felt more acceptable in graduate school because I was just a \"student\" after all. Now that I am officially in a postdoc position, for the first time it's hitting me that this is goddamn real job with real money. It's hitting me that there are other 30 year olds in other fields working their ass of 10 -12hours a day for a living, with a serious work ethic. I guess part of being an academic is that you set your own milestones and there is a very little accountability to others. Everyone in my work place kinda works remotely (theoretical astrophysics) and so I don't have a community around me. I am not lonely. I am currently staying with parents (Asian fam here), eat well and excercise regularly. Yet, this last 10 days, when I go back to my computer I have found every excuse to not work (even with all SM blocked). I am sitting here feeling so alarmed because I realize this is an unhealthy work ethic. Don't get me wrong - I am good at what I do..I've published in top journals, won many awards, and this prestigious postdoc fellowship - but I've come to realize that I am appalled by the sloth and inconsistency with which I approach it. I feel ashamed of talking about this with anyone else. I feel like I'm in 30s (and not an undergrad) and I should have figured out this by now. I get so queasy thinking..if I were in a tenure tracked job as an assistant professor and continued with these habits, that would be simply be awful! I'm just wondering if anyone has had a similar experience and how they turned it around. More importantly, how they remained consistent about it.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "It seems to me that you are working fine. You have a problem of judging yourself very hard. Maybe it calms you that I am reading your problems while I could really spend my time better, but I try not to care too much. You can't be perfect, you won't be perfect. You judge yourself because you feel obligated to spend your time better. It is also important to waste time and not feeling bad about it.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Why am I slacking off days even in my post-PhD life? Background: I recently received my PhD (30F). I worked very hard to secure a good postdoc fellowship during my PhD. Now that I am here, I am finding myself in some patterns and old habits of slacking off that I am quite alarmed by. During graduate school I had a cycles that once every few weeks I had developed a habit of just lazing around and binge watching or slacking off. This was true even I managed to shutt off all SM on phone and laptop. I would find just some way to surf the internet and search random stuff...the day(s) would just pass by. Until, I snapped out of it and back to work. Somehow this cycle felt more acceptable in graduate school because I was just a \"student\" after all. Now that I am officially in a postdoc position, for the first time it's hitting me that this is goddamn real job with real money. It's hitting me that there are other 30 year olds in other fields working their ass of 10 -12hours a day for a living, with a serious work ethic. I guess part of being an academic is that you set your own milestones and there is a very little accountability to others. Everyone in my work place kinda works remotely (theoretical astrophysics) and so I don't have a community around me. I am not lonely. I am currently staying with parents (Asian fam here), eat well and excercise regularly. Yet, this last 10 days, when I go back to my computer I have found every excuse to not work (even with all SM blocked). I am sitting here feeling so alarmed because I realize this is an unhealthy work ethic. Don't get me wrong - I am good at what I do..I've published in top journals, won many awards, and this prestigious postdoc fellowship - but I've come to realize that I am appalled by the sloth and inconsistency with which I approach it. I feel ashamed of talking about this with anyone else. I feel like I'm in 30s (and not an undergrad) and I should have figured out this by now. I get so queasy thinking..if I were in a tenure tracked job as an assistant professor and continued with these habits, that would be simply be awful! I'm just wondering if anyone has had a similar experience and how they turned it around. More importantly, how they remained consistent about it.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Humanities professor here. Keep in mind that the postdoc is pretty much the last time you'll be able to focus exclusively on the research. After that it's teaching, committees, supervision of grad students, not to mention family commitments, parenting etc. My point is that 'slacking off' is a must. You need it to stay balanced and it will result in better work later. The mind works even when you're off so you're doing yourself a good service by just taking time off to chill. Otherwise it's burnout, like everyone else here has said. I still make time for aimless scrolling, naps etc.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Why am I slacking off days even in my post-PhD life? Background: I recently received my PhD (30F). I worked very hard to secure a good postdoc fellowship during my PhD. Now that I am here, I am finding myself in some patterns and old habits of slacking off that I am quite alarmed by. During graduate school I had a cycles that once every few weeks I had developed a habit of just lazing around and binge watching or slacking off. This was true even I managed to shutt off all SM on phone and laptop. I would find just some way to surf the internet and search random stuff...the day(s) would just pass by. Until, I snapped out of it and back to work. Somehow this cycle felt more acceptable in graduate school because I was just a \"student\" after all. Now that I am officially in a postdoc position, for the first time it's hitting me that this is goddamn real job with real money. It's hitting me that there are other 30 year olds in other fields working their ass of 10 -12hours a day for a living, with a serious work ethic. I guess part of being an academic is that you set your own milestones and there is a very little accountability to others. Everyone in my work place kinda works remotely (theoretical astrophysics) and so I don't have a community around me. I am not lonely. I am currently staying with parents (Asian fam here), eat well and excercise regularly. Yet, this last 10 days, when I go back to my computer I have found every excuse to not work (even with all SM blocked). I am sitting here feeling so alarmed because I realize this is an unhealthy work ethic. Don't get me wrong - I am good at what I do..I've published in top journals, won many awards, and this prestigious postdoc fellowship - but I've come to realize that I am appalled by the sloth and inconsistency with which I approach it. I feel ashamed of talking about this with anyone else. I feel like I'm in 30s (and not an undergrad) and I should have figured out this by now. I get so queasy thinking..if I were in a tenure tracked job as an assistant professor and continued with these habits, that would be simply be awful! I'm just wondering if anyone has had a similar experience and how they turned it around. More importantly, how they remained consistent about it.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Hey have you considered PMDD? It is very common for mensturating women to go through changes in motivation, energy throughout their cycle and it can be quiet drastic for women with PMDD. I find it very hard to stay focused or exert energy in the 7-10 days before my period and even my cognitive skills drop a few notches during this time. Often resorting to low energy activities like scrolling the internet etc.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Why am I slacking off days even in my post-PhD life? Background: I recently received my PhD (30F). I worked very hard to secure a good postdoc fellowship during my PhD. Now that I am here, I am finding myself in some patterns and old habits of slacking off that I am quite alarmed by. During graduate school I had a cycles that once every few weeks I had developed a habit of just lazing around and binge watching or slacking off. This was true even I managed to shutt off all SM on phone and laptop. I would find just some way to surf the internet and search random stuff...the day(s) would just pass by. Until, I snapped out of it and back to work. Somehow this cycle felt more acceptable in graduate school because I was just a \"student\" after all. Now that I am officially in a postdoc position, for the first time it's hitting me that this is goddamn real job with real money. It's hitting me that there are other 30 year olds in other fields working their ass of 10 -12hours a day for a living, with a serious work ethic. I guess part of being an academic is that you set your own milestones and there is a very little accountability to others. Everyone in my work place kinda works remotely (theoretical astrophysics) and so I don't have a community around me. I am not lonely. I am currently staying with parents (Asian fam here), eat well and excercise regularly. Yet, this last 10 days, when I go back to my computer I have found every excuse to not work (even with all SM blocked). I am sitting here feeling so alarmed because I realize this is an unhealthy work ethic. Don't get me wrong - I am good at what I do..I've published in top journals, won many awards, and this prestigious postdoc fellowship - but I've come to realize that I am appalled by the sloth and inconsistency with which I approach it. I feel ashamed of talking about this with anyone else. I feel like I'm in 30s (and not an undergrad) and I should have figured out this by now. I get so queasy thinking..if I were in a tenure tracked job as an assistant professor and continued with these habits, that would be simply be awful! I'm just wondering if anyone has had a similar experience and how they turned it around. More importantly, how they remained consistent about it.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "A few phrases caught my attention: \"every few weeks\"... \"cycle\"... \"30F\" While I don't have experience with ADHD, I do have experience with PMS as a grad student. I'm 37 and my cycle symptoms definitely changed in my early 30s. What you're describing reminds me of my \"slack week\" I experience every month (around the 2nd-3rd week of my cycle). My drive, motivation, and interest are zapped. I started tracking my symptoms with an app that tells me what my hormones levels might look like on any day of my cycle and what effects the fluctuation migh have. It showed me that my slack week is directly related to the big drop in estrogen that occurs toward the end of my 2nd week. It helped me understand why I felt like I had no control. It helps me plan things that require my peak performance, too. Hormone Horoscope (no astrology involved) https://www.myhormonology.com/apps/", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Why am I slacking off days even in my post-PhD life? Background: I recently received my PhD (30F). I worked very hard to secure a good postdoc fellowship during my PhD. Now that I am here, I am finding myself in some patterns and old habits of slacking off that I am quite alarmed by. During graduate school I had a cycles that once every few weeks I had developed a habit of just lazing around and binge watching or slacking off. This was true even I managed to shutt off all SM on phone and laptop. I would find just some way to surf the internet and search random stuff...the day(s) would just pass by. Until, I snapped out of it and back to work. Somehow this cycle felt more acceptable in graduate school because I was just a \"student\" after all. Now that I am officially in a postdoc position, for the first time it's hitting me that this is goddamn real job with real money. It's hitting me that there are other 30 year olds in other fields working their ass of 10 -12hours a day for a living, with a serious work ethic. I guess part of being an academic is that you set your own milestones and there is a very little accountability to others. Everyone in my work place kinda works remotely (theoretical astrophysics) and so I don't have a community around me. I am not lonely. I am currently staying with parents (Asian fam here), eat well and excercise regularly. Yet, this last 10 days, when I go back to my computer I have found every excuse to not work (even with all SM blocked). I am sitting here feeling so alarmed because I realize this is an unhealthy work ethic. Don't get me wrong - I am good at what I do..I've published in top journals, won many awards, and this prestigious postdoc fellowship - but I've come to realize that I am appalled by the sloth and inconsistency with which I approach it. I feel ashamed of talking about this with anyone else. I feel like I'm in 30s (and not an undergrad) and I should have figured out this by now. I get so queasy thinking..if I were in a tenure tracked job as an assistant professor and continued with these habits, that would be simply be awful! I'm just wondering if anyone has had a similar experience and how they turned it around. More importantly, how they remained consistent about it.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Also keep in mind that for every hour of actual writing, there are often many hours of thinking involved including a lot of times outside of those 9-5 hours and even sometimes at night. As for those lawyers and surgeons pulling 12 hour shifts on paper, that's just stupid. Outside of mindless tasks, everything beyond a certain point is done at an insufficient level of concentration. That's why there are so many medical malpractice lawsuits in the US. At top law firms where lawyers MUST bill a certain amount of hours to keep their job, you don't think some of those hours are seriously fudged at the end of the month? If they just think about a case and work through it in their head, they are billing that time. It workers IT theory work a lot of hours per week, but a lot of their time is being \"on-call\", so let's not pretend that most of them aren't playing video games at home when the systems are up and running fine and nobody is calling. A goof friend of mine worked a normal 9-5 office job. He explained that yes, they have to be there the whole time, but everyone just knows that nobody does any work on Monday mornings, Friday afternoons, or the first hours of each work day. In short, hours logged is a shit metric for productivity. Some of the countries with the highest productivity rates, have some of the shortest working weeks. That may seem strange at first, but of course that is the way it is -- after a certain point each extra hour of course has diminishing returns. Big companies sell their services as if the people working for them as super-humans, but none of them are -- we all have limits to the time we can spend concentrating and staring at a screen. For us academics, it just looks like we are not that productive because we are not sitting at a desk writing for 8-10 hours a day, but that doesn't give you the whole picture. My wife sat down and wrote 2 hours a day 5 days a week during her PhD. That's it. The rest of the time was just to think and read and be involved in things. She just won a prize for the best article by a young researcher at her university.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Why am I slacking off days even in my post-PhD life? Background: I recently received my PhD (30F). I worked very hard to secure a good postdoc fellowship during my PhD. Now that I am here, I am finding myself in some patterns and old habits of slacking off that I am quite alarmed by. During graduate school I had a cycles that once every few weeks I had developed a habit of just lazing around and binge watching or slacking off. This was true even I managed to shutt off all SM on phone and laptop. I would find just some way to surf the internet and search random stuff...the day(s) would just pass by. Until, I snapped out of it and back to work. Somehow this cycle felt more acceptable in graduate school because I was just a \"student\" after all. Now that I am officially in a postdoc position, for the first time it's hitting me that this is goddamn real job with real money. It's hitting me that there are other 30 year olds in other fields working their ass of 10 -12hours a day for a living, with a serious work ethic. I guess part of being an academic is that you set your own milestones and there is a very little accountability to others. Everyone in my work place kinda works remotely (theoretical astrophysics) and so I don't have a community around me. I am not lonely. I am currently staying with parents (Asian fam here), eat well and excercise regularly. Yet, this last 10 days, when I go back to my computer I have found every excuse to not work (even with all SM blocked). I am sitting here feeling so alarmed because I realize this is an unhealthy work ethic. Don't get me wrong - I am good at what I do..I've published in top journals, won many awards, and this prestigious postdoc fellowship - but I've come to realize that I am appalled by the sloth and inconsistency with which I approach it. I feel ashamed of talking about this with anyone else. I feel like I'm in 30s (and not an undergrad) and I should have figured out this by now. I get so queasy thinking..if I were in a tenure tracked job as an assistant professor and continued with these habits, that would be simply be awful! I'm just wondering if anyone has had a similar experience and how they turned it around. More importantly, how they remained consistent about it.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "A few phrases caught my attention: \"every few weeks\"... \"cycle\"... \"30F\" While I don't have experience with ADHD, I do have experience with PMS as a grad student. I'm 37 and my cycle symptoms definitely changed in my early 30s. What you're describing reminds me of my \"slack week\" I experience every month (around the 2nd-3rd week of my cycle). My drive, motivation, and interest are zapped. I started tracking my symptoms with an app that tells me what my hormones levels might look like on any day of my cycle and what effects the fluctuation migh have. It showed me that my slack week is directly related to the big drop in estrogen that occurs toward the end of my 2nd week. It helped me understand why I felt like I had no control. It helps me plan things that require my peak performance, too. Hormone Horoscope (no astrology involved) https://www.myhormonology.com/apps/", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Why am I slacking off days even in my post-PhD life? Background: I recently received my PhD (30F). I worked very hard to secure a good postdoc fellowship during my PhD. Now that I am here, I am finding myself in some patterns and old habits of slacking off that I am quite alarmed by. During graduate school I had a cycles that once every few weeks I had developed a habit of just lazing around and binge watching or slacking off. This was true even I managed to shutt off all SM on phone and laptop. I would find just some way to surf the internet and search random stuff...the day(s) would just pass by. Until, I snapped out of it and back to work. Somehow this cycle felt more acceptable in graduate school because I was just a \"student\" after all. Now that I am officially in a postdoc position, for the first time it's hitting me that this is goddamn real job with real money. It's hitting me that there are other 30 year olds in other fields working their ass of 10 -12hours a day for a living, with a serious work ethic. I guess part of being an academic is that you set your own milestones and there is a very little accountability to others. Everyone in my work place kinda works remotely (theoretical astrophysics) and so I don't have a community around me. I am not lonely. I am currently staying with parents (Asian fam here), eat well and excercise regularly. Yet, this last 10 days, when I go back to my computer I have found every excuse to not work (even with all SM blocked). I am sitting here feeling so alarmed because I realize this is an unhealthy work ethic. Don't get me wrong - I am good at what I do..I've published in top journals, won many awards, and this prestigious postdoc fellowship - but I've come to realize that I am appalled by the sloth and inconsistency with which I approach it. I feel ashamed of talking about this with anyone else. I feel like I'm in 30s (and not an undergrad) and I should have figured out this by now. I get so queasy thinking..if I were in a tenure tracked job as an assistant professor and continued with these habits, that would be simply be awful! I'm just wondering if anyone has had a similar experience and how they turned it around. More importantly, how they remained consistent about it.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I'm just an undergraduate with no plans to go I to academia, but is it really that much of a problem? I do pretty much the same thing and don't find it too difficult to work around, so especially if your job is flexible you should simply keep doing it. You're a professional theoretical astrophysicist (!) maybe your brain just needs to rest sometimes.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Why am I slacking off days even in my post-PhD life? Background: I recently received my PhD (30F). I worked very hard to secure a good postdoc fellowship during my PhD. Now that I am here, I am finding myself in some patterns and old habits of slacking off that I am quite alarmed by. During graduate school I had a cycles that once every few weeks I had developed a habit of just lazing around and binge watching or slacking off. This was true even I managed to shutt off all SM on phone and laptop. I would find just some way to surf the internet and search random stuff...the day(s) would just pass by. Until, I snapped out of it and back to work. Somehow this cycle felt more acceptable in graduate school because I was just a \"student\" after all. Now that I am officially in a postdoc position, for the first time it's hitting me that this is goddamn real job with real money. It's hitting me that there are other 30 year olds in other fields working their ass of 10 -12hours a day for a living, with a serious work ethic. I guess part of being an academic is that you set your own milestones and there is a very little accountability to others. Everyone in my work place kinda works remotely (theoretical astrophysics) and so I don't have a community around me. I am not lonely. I am currently staying with parents (Asian fam here), eat well and excercise regularly. Yet, this last 10 days, when I go back to my computer I have found every excuse to not work (even with all SM blocked). I am sitting here feeling so alarmed because I realize this is an unhealthy work ethic. Don't get me wrong - I am good at what I do..I've published in top journals, won many awards, and this prestigious postdoc fellowship - but I've come to realize that I am appalled by the sloth and inconsistency with which I approach it. I feel ashamed of talking about this with anyone else. I feel like I'm in 30s (and not an undergrad) and I should have figured out this by now. I get so queasy thinking..if I were in a tenure tracked job as an assistant professor and continued with these habits, that would be simply be awful! I'm just wondering if anyone has had a similar experience and how they turned it around. More importantly, how they remained consistent about it.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "In my culture there is a story about a legendary grass harvester, known to be able to cut the grass of two other men with ease. A wealthy farmer challenges him to cut the grass of three men, and promises him the pay of four men for his effort. When the grass cutting season begins, the men each start harvesting their portion of the field, except the legend. He sits in the grass, chews straws, and takes naps. The farmer complains but the man does not move. This goes on for a full week, until grass season is almost over. The farmer is livid, makes threats to withhold is pay etc. On the last day, the legend stands up and says to the farmer \"you are paying me to cut grass, not listen to insults\", and proceeds to cut down his three shares within that day. The farmer, remorseful, pays him extra for his bad behavior. There are many parallels with academia there. At the end of the day, we are evaluated by our outputs, not the inputs. I find myself going through cycles of doing less some weeks. Sometimes I go days mostly procrastinating, and it can be mentally challenging because of guilt etc. But I've realized that these days are fine as long as I get my work done. I don't think my coworkers have stamina for 14 hours of productive work. I think they might spend these hours, but not productively. I also have days where everything clicks. I think my brain is just processing stuff, or resting between bouts of effort. In those days I'm like the grasscutter and get very much done. This year I've submitted a large grant application and authored multiple papers, second only in productivity to full professors that arent first authors. I've done that not despite cycles of procrastination but because I respect that this is how I operate and I work with it, not against it. I would not compete in hours spent against anyone, just in outputs. Who cares if you chew grass for 10 days so long as you cut the grass in time.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Why am I slacking off days even in my post-PhD life? Background: I recently received my PhD (30F). I worked very hard to secure a good postdoc fellowship during my PhD. Now that I am here, I am finding myself in some patterns and old habits of slacking off that I am quite alarmed by. During graduate school I had a cycles that once every few weeks I had developed a habit of just lazing around and binge watching or slacking off. This was true even I managed to shutt off all SM on phone and laptop. I would find just some way to surf the internet and search random stuff...the day(s) would just pass by. Until, I snapped out of it and back to work. Somehow this cycle felt more acceptable in graduate school because I was just a \"student\" after all. Now that I am officially in a postdoc position, for the first time it's hitting me that this is goddamn real job with real money. It's hitting me that there are other 30 year olds in other fields working their ass of 10 -12hours a day for a living, with a serious work ethic. I guess part of being an academic is that you set your own milestones and there is a very little accountability to others. Everyone in my work place kinda works remotely (theoretical astrophysics) and so I don't have a community around me. I am not lonely. I am currently staying with parents (Asian fam here), eat well and excercise regularly. Yet, this last 10 days, when I go back to my computer I have found every excuse to not work (even with all SM blocked). I am sitting here feeling so alarmed because I realize this is an unhealthy work ethic. Don't get me wrong - I am good at what I do..I've published in top journals, won many awards, and this prestigious postdoc fellowship - but I've come to realize that I am appalled by the sloth and inconsistency with which I approach it. I feel ashamed of talking about this with anyone else. I feel like I'm in 30s (and not an undergrad) and I should have figured out this by now. I get so queasy thinking..if I were in a tenure tracked job as an assistant professor and continued with these habits, that would be simply be awful! I'm just wondering if anyone has had a similar experience and how they turned it around. More importantly, how they remained consistent about it.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Oh gosh! I can feel you because I suffer from the same problem. I am constantly finding myself caught in procrastination. Somedays I struggle with focusing on work, reading and experiments. I asked myself several times if I hqve ADHD.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you ever feel \"reviewer's guilt\"? Recently reviewed a paper and couldn't help but give it a very critical review with a recommendation to the editor to reject. I gave a very detailed review with both specific and general comments, and tried to write something constructive. I can't help but empathize with the writer. Probably a PhD student trying to get published, worked hard and did what his advisor suggested and likely poured his guts in to it. I couldn't suggest to accept it but I can't help feeling guilty for \"being mean\" to the authors and ruining their day/week/month. Anyone else feel this? How do you deal with it?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I hate it. I want to be the generous, helpful reviewer that I rarely get on my own submissions. And then I read the paper, and probably three out of four times, I have to argue for either substantial changes or outright rejection. I always do a lot of \"are we the baddies?\" soul-searching after this. And I try to write very helpful feedback, which shows that I took their work _very_ seriously. But I know what it feels like to be on the other end of that. It's still rough. But necessary.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you ever feel \"reviewer's guilt\"? Recently reviewed a paper and couldn't help but give it a very critical review with a recommendation to the editor to reject. I gave a very detailed review with both specific and general comments, and tried to write something constructive. I can't help but empathize with the writer. Probably a PhD student trying to get published, worked hard and did what his advisor suggested and likely poured his guts in to it. I couldn't suggest to accept it but I can't help feeling guilty for \"being mean\" to the authors and ruining their day/week/month. Anyone else feel this? How do you deal with it?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I’m surprised more people don’t feel this way. I do, even though I know being critical where necessary is the right thing to do.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you ever feel \"reviewer's guilt\"? Recently reviewed a paper and couldn't help but give it a very critical review with a recommendation to the editor to reject. I gave a very detailed review with both specific and general comments, and tried to write something constructive. I can't help but empathize with the writer. Probably a PhD student trying to get published, worked hard and did what his advisor suggested and likely poured his guts in to it. I couldn't suggest to accept it but I can't help feeling guilty for \"being mean\" to the authors and ruining their day/week/month. Anyone else feel this? How do you deal with it?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I don't feel too guilty, but I'm also not a total dick when I review (I don't mean to imply you are, or others who feel guilty are - Just that I know I was being constructive, and careful in my wording, so there's no reason, personally, for me to feel guilty). I think as long as you are constructive, kind, patient, and thorough, that's all that matters. Offer helpful suggestions; ask for clarification; raise concerns, and don't be overconfident (!) that your criticisms are correct \\[seriously, how many times I've seen reviewers cite some 'major problem' that is 100%, factually incorrect; yet they treat it as though it's 100% a correct criticism, and use it to beat the paper down\\]. I also tend to couch my criticism in a 'niceties' sandwich. Start by reiterating the purpose of the paper; mention positive thoughts you had going into it. Bring up major concerns first (appropriately calibrated to your confidence in those concerns). Bring up minor concerns second. Editorial notes third (misspellings, flow problems, reorganization tips). Then end with what you think was good about the paper; these can still be couched as 'critical', in the sense of \"I really enjoyed sections X, Y, and Z; I think section A would be improved if it came after section X.\" Make it clear that you hope the review can help improve the paper and future projects; and that the review isn't inherently meant to be pissy. I sometimes even say \"I apologize if my terse review reads as harsher than intended; I enjoyed many aspects of this paper, and feel it could be improved by my comments above.\" \\[literally, because sometimes I have terse sentences that indeed could be read by someone as aggressive\\]. I review others' papers as I wish they'd review mine. I'm thorough, careful, and helpful; I try to be nice, because there's no need to be cruel in a review, despite what some asses think. As long as I do that, I feel confident in whatever recommendation I give, and I don't feel guilty for it.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you ever feel \"reviewer's guilt\"? Recently reviewed a paper and couldn't help but give it a very critical review with a recommendation to the editor to reject. I gave a very detailed review with both specific and general comments, and tried to write something constructive. I can't help but empathize with the writer. Probably a PhD student trying to get published, worked hard and did what his advisor suggested and likely poured his guts in to it. I couldn't suggest to accept it but I can't help feeling guilty for \"being mean\" to the authors and ruining their day/week/month. Anyone else feel this? How do you deal with it?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I don’t ever feel guilty, but I do occasionally feel sad when it is apparent that someone had a good idea and worked hard, but really missed the mark for some reason. The job of a reviewer is to support the editor in making an appropriate decision, not manage the feelings of the authors. A really good review can give the authors valuable feedback that will enable them to not only improve the paper, but become better scientists and writers. Either way, how they feel about it is their business. It should not factor into your thinking when writing your review, beyond perhaps tempering your language to make it easier for them to understand and appreciate your feedback, but that is more about compassion and effective communication.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you ever feel \"reviewer's guilt\"? Recently reviewed a paper and couldn't help but give it a very critical review with a recommendation to the editor to reject. I gave a very detailed review with both specific and general comments, and tried to write something constructive. I can't help but empathize with the writer. Probably a PhD student trying to get published, worked hard and did what his advisor suggested and likely poured his guts in to it. I couldn't suggest to accept it but I can't help feeling guilty for \"being mean\" to the authors and ruining their day/week/month. Anyone else feel this? How do you deal with it?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "My favorite review I got as a grad student: \"this result is almost certainly false, but if it is valid, I already published it 30 years ago\" yours was certainly more useful than that.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you ever feel \"reviewer's guilt\"? Recently reviewed a paper and couldn't help but give it a very critical review with a recommendation to the editor to reject. I gave a very detailed review with both specific and general comments, and tried to write something constructive. I can't help but empathize with the writer. Probably a PhD student trying to get published, worked hard and did what his advisor suggested and likely poured his guts in to it. I couldn't suggest to accept it but I can't help feeling guilty for \"being mean\" to the authors and ruining their day/week/month. Anyone else feel this? How do you deal with it?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Yes. Especially with reviewing proposals for funding that you know could really establish someone’s career. I have been guided that you saying no to one person allows a yes to someone else. It’s not fair to either to feel bound to rate something positively just because you happened to invest time (and, often, emotional energy) into reading and thinking about it.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you ever feel \"reviewer's guilt\"? Recently reviewed a paper and couldn't help but give it a very critical review with a recommendation to the editor to reject. I gave a very detailed review with both specific and general comments, and tried to write something constructive. I can't help but empathize with the writer. Probably a PhD student trying to get published, worked hard and did what his advisor suggested and likely poured his guts in to it. I couldn't suggest to accept it but I can't help feeling guilty for \"being mean\" to the authors and ruining their day/week/month. Anyone else feel this? How do you deal with it?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I once reviewed the worst paper. Not terribly written, but what they were doing was so astonishingly ridiculous and amateurish for the field that it could have passed as a joke in any class. It would be like a chemist putting food coloring into water in their own kitchen and then claiming to have created \"green water\" and thus the water was more environmentally friendly because it was green. At first I was confused, but it was a serious thing so I wrote a review explaining the problems nicely and then a much harsher \"absolutely not\" note to the editor. It never got published, at least in that journal. But I was very sad when I looked up the author and found they were in a legit graduate program (not prestigious, but something where you'd expect training and guidance) and somehow their advisor (who was also an author) had greenlit this project and apparently encouraged it as a thesis. I felt very bad for that poor student.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you ever feel \"reviewer's guilt\"? Recently reviewed a paper and couldn't help but give it a very critical review with a recommendation to the editor to reject. I gave a very detailed review with both specific and general comments, and tried to write something constructive. I can't help but empathize with the writer. Probably a PhD student trying to get published, worked hard and did what his advisor suggested and likely poured his guts in to it. I couldn't suggest to accept it but I can't help feeling guilty for \"being mean\" to the authors and ruining their day/week/month. Anyone else feel this? How do you deal with it?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I’m surprised more people don’t feel this way. I do, even though I know being critical where necessary is the right thing to do.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you ever feel \"reviewer's guilt\"? Recently reviewed a paper and couldn't help but give it a very critical review with a recommendation to the editor to reject. I gave a very detailed review with both specific and general comments, and tried to write something constructive. I can't help but empathize with the writer. Probably a PhD student trying to get published, worked hard and did what his advisor suggested and likely poured his guts in to it. I couldn't suggest to accept it but I can't help feeling guilty for \"being mean\" to the authors and ruining their day/week/month. Anyone else feel this? How do you deal with it?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I am the student you speak of. As long as there is feedback I can use please don't feel guilty. Obviosuly publishing is the best outcome for me, but having someone read your paper, actually care and provide feedback is a good 2nd.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Do you ever feel \"reviewer's guilt\"? Recently reviewed a paper and couldn't help but give it a very critical review with a recommendation to the editor to reject. I gave a very detailed review with both specific and general comments, and tried to write something constructive. I can't help but empathize with the writer. Probably a PhD student trying to get published, worked hard and did what his advisor suggested and likely poured his guts in to it. I couldn't suggest to accept it but I can't help feeling guilty for \"being mean\" to the authors and ruining their day/week/month. Anyone else feel this? How do you deal with it?", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I often feel guilt for not understanding a paper well enough or not having spent enough time on a paper to give it a very helpful review. Most of the time I still recommend acceptance or if not, then I give the authors the opportunity to resubmit their work. This probably does not apply to you, but perhaps it can help. I have a mental health condition (OCD) that makes me prone to guilt. I sometimes tell myself this and remind myself that the guilt is not real. Of course, it is not possible to be 100% certain if guilt is warranted or not. The idea is to accept that uncertainty and do/think about something else in the present moment", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "My advisor might be dying and I don't know what to do. I'm a 4th year PhD student in the natural sciences, USA. I'm trying to be vague for privacy reasons; if you need clarification, please ask. My advisor's health took a turn for the worse in May. He's not doing well. We're a very small group - 3 grad students, of which I'm the oldest, 2 post-docs, and my advisor - working on a multi-institution project. We're the only group in the collaboration responsible for our component, and it's pretty mission-critical. I am, to put it bluntly, terrified. The most experienced post-doc, who helms the group when our advisor isn't available and holds a major leadership role in the collaboration, is in a tenuous position w.r.t. their visa. The other post-doc will leave for industry if our advisor passes. Neither of the other grad students have finished their qual or formed an advisory committee, the youngest barely has her project started. No one else at my institution can support me staying on this project - I'd have to transfer to another group/institution on our collaboration to have a prayer of finishing my degree, and if our post-doc leaves for industry it *still* may not be possible. This man took a risk on me no one else was willing to take. He's a second father to me. I have never been so scared, I have no idea what I'm doing, I desperately need *any* kind of advice. How do I support the younger grad students? How do I navigate our funding? What do I say to collaboration leadership (who are all in the dark)? How would I even approach an advisor at another institution about picking up the pieces of our shattered little team? Please help me, I feel like I'm drowning.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "As a 4th year, you *should* be able to complete your PhD at that university given these circumstances. The younger students, especially the one that has barely started, may not be able to complete at all. In their cases, (particularly the newer of the two students), they'll likely need to start over or maybe continue what they've started under the guidance of another advisor. Basically, once you're far enough along in a PhD program, even if your advisor dies/leaves/quits, you can often get some grace provided to you from your department and allow you to finish. If you're relatively new to a PhD program (haven't completed quals in particular), you're more likely to have to restart in a new lab.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "My advisor might be dying and I don't know what to do. I'm a 4th year PhD student in the natural sciences, USA. I'm trying to be vague for privacy reasons; if you need clarification, please ask. My advisor's health took a turn for the worse in May. He's not doing well. We're a very small group - 3 grad students, of which I'm the oldest, 2 post-docs, and my advisor - working on a multi-institution project. We're the only group in the collaboration responsible for our component, and it's pretty mission-critical. I am, to put it bluntly, terrified. The most experienced post-doc, who helms the group when our advisor isn't available and holds a major leadership role in the collaboration, is in a tenuous position w.r.t. their visa. The other post-doc will leave for industry if our advisor passes. Neither of the other grad students have finished their qual or formed an advisory committee, the youngest barely has her project started. No one else at my institution can support me staying on this project - I'd have to transfer to another group/institution on our collaboration to have a prayer of finishing my degree, and if our post-doc leaves for industry it *still* may not be possible. This man took a risk on me no one else was willing to take. He's a second father to me. I have never been so scared, I have no idea what I'm doing, I desperately need *any* kind of advice. How do I support the younger grad students? How do I navigate our funding? What do I say to collaboration leadership (who are all in the dark)? How would I even approach an advisor at another institution about picking up the pieces of our shattered little team? Please help me, I feel like I'm drowning.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your advisor should be working on ensuring that all of you will finish. Yes, he has a lot on his plate but if he is an experienced mentor you all are the first thoughts after his family. That said...4th year? Get writing man. I had one of my committee die suddenly and 2 of the remaining 3 were in their 60s. Put the fear of God into me and I holed up and wrote my thesis in 3 weeks after not having been in any hurry for the past 3 years.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "My advisor might be dying and I don't know what to do. I'm a 4th year PhD student in the natural sciences, USA. I'm trying to be vague for privacy reasons; if you need clarification, please ask. My advisor's health took a turn for the worse in May. He's not doing well. We're a very small group - 3 grad students, of which I'm the oldest, 2 post-docs, and my advisor - working on a multi-institution project. We're the only group in the collaboration responsible for our component, and it's pretty mission-critical. I am, to put it bluntly, terrified. The most experienced post-doc, who helms the group when our advisor isn't available and holds a major leadership role in the collaboration, is in a tenuous position w.r.t. their visa. The other post-doc will leave for industry if our advisor passes. Neither of the other grad students have finished their qual or formed an advisory committee, the youngest barely has her project started. No one else at my institution can support me staying on this project - I'd have to transfer to another group/institution on our collaboration to have a prayer of finishing my degree, and if our post-doc leaves for industry it *still* may not be possible. This man took a risk on me no one else was willing to take. He's a second father to me. I have never been so scared, I have no idea what I'm doing, I desperately need *any* kind of advice. How do I support the younger grad students? How do I navigate our funding? What do I say to collaboration leadership (who are all in the dark)? How would I even approach an advisor at another institution about picking up the pieces of our shattered little team? Please help me, I feel like I'm drowning.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "As a 4th year, you *should* be able to complete your PhD at that university given these circumstances. The younger students, especially the one that has barely started, may not be able to complete at all. In their cases, (particularly the newer of the two students), they'll likely need to start over or maybe continue what they've started under the guidance of another advisor. Basically, once you're far enough along in a PhD program, even if your advisor dies/leaves/quits, you can often get some grace provided to you from your department and allow you to finish. If you're relatively new to a PhD program (haven't completed quals in particular), you're more likely to have to restart in a new lab.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "My advisor might be dying and I don't know what to do. I'm a 4th year PhD student in the natural sciences, USA. I'm trying to be vague for privacy reasons; if you need clarification, please ask. My advisor's health took a turn for the worse in May. He's not doing well. We're a very small group - 3 grad students, of which I'm the oldest, 2 post-docs, and my advisor - working on a multi-institution project. We're the only group in the collaboration responsible for our component, and it's pretty mission-critical. I am, to put it bluntly, terrified. The most experienced post-doc, who helms the group when our advisor isn't available and holds a major leadership role in the collaboration, is in a tenuous position w.r.t. their visa. The other post-doc will leave for industry if our advisor passes. Neither of the other grad students have finished their qual or formed an advisory committee, the youngest barely has her project started. No one else at my institution can support me staying on this project - I'd have to transfer to another group/institution on our collaboration to have a prayer of finishing my degree, and if our post-doc leaves for industry it *still* may not be possible. This man took a risk on me no one else was willing to take. He's a second father to me. I have never been so scared, I have no idea what I'm doing, I desperately need *any* kind of advice. How do I support the younger grad students? How do I navigate our funding? What do I say to collaboration leadership (who are all in the dark)? How would I even approach an advisor at another institution about picking up the pieces of our shattered little team? Please help me, I feel like I'm drowning.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I'm sorry you are going through this. Has the Director of the graduate program contacted you? They will likely have a plan in mind for you and the other graduate students. Since you are further along, its possible you can finish your current project while being mentored by another group (weekly meetings with PI and attending lab meetings). I have seen this sort of arrangement happen in the past. Given the other graduate students are early on, they are more likely than not starting over in another lab. You can support them by being there, encouraging them, and perhaps suggesting some labs they could pivot to, if that is what they want. But, its the graduate program administration's job to support the students. They should take care of it. Deep breaths!! It's not your responsibility to figure out funding, or how to break the news to collaborators. The department chair and perhaps the postdocs will take care of these things. I am trully sorry you are going through this- this is just brutal to read. Just know you are not alone!", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "My advisor might be dying and I don't know what to do. I'm a 4th year PhD student in the natural sciences, USA. I'm trying to be vague for privacy reasons; if you need clarification, please ask. My advisor's health took a turn for the worse in May. He's not doing well. We're a very small group - 3 grad students, of which I'm the oldest, 2 post-docs, and my advisor - working on a multi-institution project. We're the only group in the collaboration responsible for our component, and it's pretty mission-critical. I am, to put it bluntly, terrified. The most experienced post-doc, who helms the group when our advisor isn't available and holds a major leadership role in the collaboration, is in a tenuous position w.r.t. their visa. The other post-doc will leave for industry if our advisor passes. Neither of the other grad students have finished their qual or formed an advisory committee, the youngest barely has her project started. No one else at my institution can support me staying on this project - I'd have to transfer to another group/institution on our collaboration to have a prayer of finishing my degree, and if our post-doc leaves for industry it *still* may not be possible. This man took a risk on me no one else was willing to take. He's a second father to me. I have never been so scared, I have no idea what I'm doing, I desperately need *any* kind of advice. How do I support the younger grad students? How do I navigate our funding? What do I say to collaboration leadership (who are all in the dark)? How would I even approach an advisor at another institution about picking up the pieces of our shattered little team? Please help me, I feel like I'm drowning.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "This happened recently in my field. I’m assuming your professor is reasonably well established. Reach out to former students of your professor who are now faculty themselves: you might be surprised by the amount of support you may receive from them.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "My advisor might be dying and I don't know what to do. I'm a 4th year PhD student in the natural sciences, USA. I'm trying to be vague for privacy reasons; if you need clarification, please ask. My advisor's health took a turn for the worse in May. He's not doing well. We're a very small group - 3 grad students, of which I'm the oldest, 2 post-docs, and my advisor - working on a multi-institution project. We're the only group in the collaboration responsible for our component, and it's pretty mission-critical. I am, to put it bluntly, terrified. The most experienced post-doc, who helms the group when our advisor isn't available and holds a major leadership role in the collaboration, is in a tenuous position w.r.t. their visa. The other post-doc will leave for industry if our advisor passes. Neither of the other grad students have finished their qual or formed an advisory committee, the youngest barely has her project started. No one else at my institution can support me staying on this project - I'd have to transfer to another group/institution on our collaboration to have a prayer of finishing my degree, and if our post-doc leaves for industry it *still* may not be possible. This man took a risk on me no one else was willing to take. He's a second father to me. I have never been so scared, I have no idea what I'm doing, I desperately need *any* kind of advice. How do I support the younger grad students? How do I navigate our funding? What do I say to collaboration leadership (who are all in the dark)? How would I even approach an advisor at another institution about picking up the pieces of our shattered little team? Please help me, I feel like I'm drowning.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I'm sorry you are going through this. Has the Director of the graduate program contacted you? They will likely have a plan in mind for you and the other graduate students. Since you are further along, its possible you can finish your current project while being mentored by another group (weekly meetings with PI and attending lab meetings). I have seen this sort of arrangement happen in the past. Given the other graduate students are early on, they are more likely than not starting over in another lab. You can support them by being there, encouraging them, and perhaps suggesting some labs they could pivot to, if that is what they want. But, its the graduate program administration's job to support the students. They should take care of it. Deep breaths!! It's not your responsibility to figure out funding, or how to break the news to collaborators. The department chair and perhaps the postdocs will take care of these things. I am trully sorry you are going through this- this is just brutal to read. Just know you are not alone!", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "My advisor might be dying and I don't know what to do. I'm a 4th year PhD student in the natural sciences, USA. I'm trying to be vague for privacy reasons; if you need clarification, please ask. My advisor's health took a turn for the worse in May. He's not doing well. We're a very small group - 3 grad students, of which I'm the oldest, 2 post-docs, and my advisor - working on a multi-institution project. We're the only group in the collaboration responsible for our component, and it's pretty mission-critical. I am, to put it bluntly, terrified. The most experienced post-doc, who helms the group when our advisor isn't available and holds a major leadership role in the collaboration, is in a tenuous position w.r.t. their visa. The other post-doc will leave for industry if our advisor passes. Neither of the other grad students have finished their qual or formed an advisory committee, the youngest barely has her project started. No one else at my institution can support me staying on this project - I'd have to transfer to another group/institution on our collaboration to have a prayer of finishing my degree, and if our post-doc leaves for industry it *still* may not be possible. This man took a risk on me no one else was willing to take. He's a second father to me. I have never been so scared, I have no idea what I'm doing, I desperately need *any* kind of advice. How do I support the younger grad students? How do I navigate our funding? What do I say to collaboration leadership (who are all in the dark)? How would I even approach an advisor at another institution about picking up the pieces of our shattered little team? Please help me, I feel like I'm drowning.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "This happened recently in my field. I’m assuming your professor is reasonably well established. Reach out to former students of your professor who are now faculty themselves: you might be surprised by the amount of support you may receive from them.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "My advisor might be dying and I don't know what to do. I'm a 4th year PhD student in the natural sciences, USA. I'm trying to be vague for privacy reasons; if you need clarification, please ask. My advisor's health took a turn for the worse in May. He's not doing well. We're a very small group - 3 grad students, of which I'm the oldest, 2 post-docs, and my advisor - working on a multi-institution project. We're the only group in the collaboration responsible for our component, and it's pretty mission-critical. I am, to put it bluntly, terrified. The most experienced post-doc, who helms the group when our advisor isn't available and holds a major leadership role in the collaboration, is in a tenuous position w.r.t. their visa. The other post-doc will leave for industry if our advisor passes. Neither of the other grad students have finished their qual or formed an advisory committee, the youngest barely has her project started. No one else at my institution can support me staying on this project - I'd have to transfer to another group/institution on our collaboration to have a prayer of finishing my degree, and if our post-doc leaves for industry it *still* may not be possible. This man took a risk on me no one else was willing to take. He's a second father to me. I have never been so scared, I have no idea what I'm doing, I desperately need *any* kind of advice. How do I support the younger grad students? How do I navigate our funding? What do I say to collaboration leadership (who are all in the dark)? How would I even approach an advisor at another institution about picking up the pieces of our shattered little team? Please help me, I feel like I'm drowning.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your advisor should be working on ensuring that all of you will finish. Yes, he has a lot on his plate but if he is an experienced mentor you all are the first thoughts after his family. That said...4th year? Get writing man. I had one of my committee die suddenly and 2 of the remaining 3 were in their 60s. Put the fear of God into me and I holed up and wrote my thesis in 3 weeks after not having been in any hurry for the past 3 years.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Should I Speak up About Homophobia in Research Center? **I am a gay graduate student who's part of an NSF research center in the hard sciences. An external evaluator is polling members about the center's climate to send to the administrators and to the NSF. I've been on the receiving end of homophobia on a number of occasions in the center.** In one instance, another grad student learned about me while we were at a conference and spent the next day following me around and calling me gay slurs when others were out of earshot. They also told people not to trust me and that I don't belong at the conference. At a professional lunch with another lab in the center, the other graduate students made horrible gay jokes throughout the meal. Two of them managed to mockingly imitate a gay couple and a third dropped the f-bomb a few times for good measure. I have more examples that I won't list here, but there's an atmosphere around the center that makes me feel unwelcome and at risk of being treated unfairly. Having to hide myself has probably has affected my mental state and therefor my research. The only other gay student in the center ended up leaving because of this environment. **I've been considering anonymously emailing the person evaluating the research center to let them know about my experiences, but have been struggling with the decision.** I want someone to know and for something to be done. On the other hand, I'm worried about danger to my professional life if I speak up and don't think anything will change even if I am heard and go through that risk. Talking to the evaluator could be seen by the administrators as me sabotaging the center's funding, but I am mainly concerned about what would happen if people in my home lab learn that I am gay from the report. They don't know about me, but if people hear about someone complaining in the center then it wouldn't be hard to find out who it is since I'm the only gay one in a tiny research center. My advisor is super catholic and Russian and a lot of the people I work with are also pretty religious. I'm only a year away from graduating and am thinking that I should just suck it up and then leave this bad situation when I get my degree. However, I also feel like such a coward for not being able to speak up about this and having to pretend that everything is great when I am literally fantasizing about leaving the field I am in to be around more accepting researchers. **What do you think Reddit? Has anyone dealt with a similar situation and what did you do?**", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I am an older lesbian working in higher education admin. Here's my take:its not you responsibility to tank your life o er this situation. Survival is key. If it were me, I would probably tough it out while building a case to submit to the institution and government agency after I left. I mean daily documentation of dates and times and actors and passive observers of each incident in the notes in my phone that I would transcribe to a document. Then the hot second I either found a better environment or finished and left off it would go to both of those entities. I'd also find out how to get representation through the aclu and or glaad or whomever. Then I'd go on about my damn life and let those folks Duke it out. At that point you have essentially provided a dossier and insulated yourself from repercussion. But again. You are under no obligation to take any action which threatens your safety or well being if it goes against who you are to do so.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Should I Speak up About Homophobia in Research Center? **I am a gay graduate student who's part of an NSF research center in the hard sciences. An external evaluator is polling members about the center's climate to send to the administrators and to the NSF. I've been on the receiving end of homophobia on a number of occasions in the center.** In one instance, another grad student learned about me while we were at a conference and spent the next day following me around and calling me gay slurs when others were out of earshot. They also told people not to trust me and that I don't belong at the conference. At a professional lunch with another lab in the center, the other graduate students made horrible gay jokes throughout the meal. Two of them managed to mockingly imitate a gay couple and a third dropped the f-bomb a few times for good measure. I have more examples that I won't list here, but there's an atmosphere around the center that makes me feel unwelcome and at risk of being treated unfairly. Having to hide myself has probably has affected my mental state and therefor my research. The only other gay student in the center ended up leaving because of this environment. **I've been considering anonymously emailing the person evaluating the research center to let them know about my experiences, but have been struggling with the decision.** I want someone to know and for something to be done. On the other hand, I'm worried about danger to my professional life if I speak up and don't think anything will change even if I am heard and go through that risk. Talking to the evaluator could be seen by the administrators as me sabotaging the center's funding, but I am mainly concerned about what would happen if people in my home lab learn that I am gay from the report. They don't know about me, but if people hear about someone complaining in the center then it wouldn't be hard to find out who it is since I'm the only gay one in a tiny research center. My advisor is super catholic and Russian and a lot of the people I work with are also pretty religious. I'm only a year away from graduating and am thinking that I should just suck it up and then leave this bad situation when I get my degree. However, I also feel like such a coward for not being able to speak up about this and having to pretend that everything is great when I am literally fantasizing about leaving the field I am in to be around more accepting researchers. **What do you think Reddit? Has anyone dealt with a similar situation and what did you do?**", "role": "user" }, { "content": "I am shocked that this is possible in science in 2020 in a 'civilised' country (the US, right?) :'( In AUS/DE/IT where I worked/studied, the culture is 99% gay/whatever friendly. If anything it might make you more interesting. But generally, these things are personal and have nothing to do with science. Don't let it set you against the field or discourage you from your science! Almost all the scientists I know are 'wierd'/unusual in some way, that's one of of my favorite things about it. If you think you'd be punished, maybe try to document everything and wait a little until your closer to graduating before going public. Then get the hell out. If anything, speaking up and making a stand would be considered a positive attribute by any research institute that you would want to be in.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Should I Speak up About Homophobia in Research Center? **I am a gay graduate student who's part of an NSF research center in the hard sciences. An external evaluator is polling members about the center's climate to send to the administrators and to the NSF. I've been on the receiving end of homophobia on a number of occasions in the center.** In one instance, another grad student learned about me while we were at a conference and spent the next day following me around and calling me gay slurs when others were out of earshot. They also told people not to trust me and that I don't belong at the conference. At a professional lunch with another lab in the center, the other graduate students made horrible gay jokes throughout the meal. Two of them managed to mockingly imitate a gay couple and a third dropped the f-bomb a few times for good measure. I have more examples that I won't list here, but there's an atmosphere around the center that makes me feel unwelcome and at risk of being treated unfairly. Having to hide myself has probably has affected my mental state and therefor my research. The only other gay student in the center ended up leaving because of this environment. **I've been considering anonymously emailing the person evaluating the research center to let them know about my experiences, but have been struggling with the decision.** I want someone to know and for something to be done. On the other hand, I'm worried about danger to my professional life if I speak up and don't think anything will change even if I am heard and go through that risk. Talking to the evaluator could be seen by the administrators as me sabotaging the center's funding, but I am mainly concerned about what would happen if people in my home lab learn that I am gay from the report. They don't know about me, but if people hear about someone complaining in the center then it wouldn't be hard to find out who it is since I'm the only gay one in a tiny research center. My advisor is super catholic and Russian and a lot of the people I work with are also pretty religious. I'm only a year away from graduating and am thinking that I should just suck it up and then leave this bad situation when I get my degree. However, I also feel like such a coward for not being able to speak up about this and having to pretend that everything is great when I am literally fantasizing about leaving the field I am in to be around more accepting researchers. **What do you think Reddit? Has anyone dealt with a similar situation and what did you do?**", "role": "user" }, { "content": "As a queer scholar, my advice is to protect yourself FIRST. Obviously, no one in your lab, not even your PI, is putting any value on your well-being. You must safeguard your well-being in every way possible. Right now, that probably means not risking your position and reputation so close to graduation. I am furious about this, and I am so deeply sorry that your graduate education has been so badly affected (and yes, disrupted) by this hateful climate. And I know you want to identify and help dismantle this toxic environment, and you want to make it safe for you, and for others who might come after you. But as they say on airplanes, you must put your own oxygen mask on first before helping others. Once you are safe (that might mean out of that lab, that might mean after you complete a postdoc and have the assurance of excellent letters of rec -- only you will know when you feel truly safe), then you will be able to act. In the meantime, keep the contact information of the NSF investigator. Keep a meticulous record (with times and dates) of every instance of discrimination and harassment you have faced during your time at this research center. And then later, when you are safe, send that information to the NSF investigators, noting that you were afraid of retaliation while you were still a student there. At that time, you can also decide whether to send this report anonymously. I personally hope you soon achieve such a degree of safety, security, and success that you will be able to file this report with your name signed legibly -- in purple glitter ink. I am rooting for you. Find and draw upon support from friends and loved ones. Keep your mind clear from distractions as much as possible, and do excellent work until you can get out of this vile environment. Then, when you are ready, toss the bomb.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Should I Speak up About Homophobia in Research Center? **I am a gay graduate student who's part of an NSF research center in the hard sciences. An external evaluator is polling members about the center's climate to send to the administrators and to the NSF. I've been on the receiving end of homophobia on a number of occasions in the center.** In one instance, another grad student learned about me while we were at a conference and spent the next day following me around and calling me gay slurs when others were out of earshot. They also told people not to trust me and that I don't belong at the conference. At a professional lunch with another lab in the center, the other graduate students made horrible gay jokes throughout the meal. Two of them managed to mockingly imitate a gay couple and a third dropped the f-bomb a few times for good measure. I have more examples that I won't list here, but there's an atmosphere around the center that makes me feel unwelcome and at risk of being treated unfairly. Having to hide myself has probably has affected my mental state and therefor my research. The only other gay student in the center ended up leaving because of this environment. **I've been considering anonymously emailing the person evaluating the research center to let them know about my experiences, but have been struggling with the decision.** I want someone to know and for something to be done. On the other hand, I'm worried about danger to my professional life if I speak up and don't think anything will change even if I am heard and go through that risk. Talking to the evaluator could be seen by the administrators as me sabotaging the center's funding, but I am mainly concerned about what would happen if people in my home lab learn that I am gay from the report. They don't know about me, but if people hear about someone complaining in the center then it wouldn't be hard to find out who it is since I'm the only gay one in a tiny research center. My advisor is super catholic and Russian and a lot of the people I work with are also pretty religious. I'm only a year away from graduating and am thinking that I should just suck it up and then leave this bad situation when I get my degree. However, I also feel like such a coward for not being able to speak up about this and having to pretend that everything is great when I am literally fantasizing about leaving the field I am in to be around more accepting researchers. **What do you think Reddit? Has anyone dealt with a similar situation and what did you do?**", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your center has a diversity office and/ or a title IX office ( whomever deals with such things in your school). And HR. They are the ones that need to know and can implement change.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Should I Speak up About Homophobia in Research Center? **I am a gay graduate student who's part of an NSF research center in the hard sciences. An external evaluator is polling members about the center's climate to send to the administrators and to the NSF. I've been on the receiving end of homophobia on a number of occasions in the center.** In one instance, another grad student learned about me while we were at a conference and spent the next day following me around and calling me gay slurs when others were out of earshot. They also told people not to trust me and that I don't belong at the conference. At a professional lunch with another lab in the center, the other graduate students made horrible gay jokes throughout the meal. Two of them managed to mockingly imitate a gay couple and a third dropped the f-bomb a few times for good measure. I have more examples that I won't list here, but there's an atmosphere around the center that makes me feel unwelcome and at risk of being treated unfairly. Having to hide myself has probably has affected my mental state and therefor my research. The only other gay student in the center ended up leaving because of this environment. **I've been considering anonymously emailing the person evaluating the research center to let them know about my experiences, but have been struggling with the decision.** I want someone to know and for something to be done. On the other hand, I'm worried about danger to my professional life if I speak up and don't think anything will change even if I am heard and go through that risk. Talking to the evaluator could be seen by the administrators as me sabotaging the center's funding, but I am mainly concerned about what would happen if people in my home lab learn that I am gay from the report. They don't know about me, but if people hear about someone complaining in the center then it wouldn't be hard to find out who it is since I'm the only gay one in a tiny research center. My advisor is super catholic and Russian and a lot of the people I work with are also pretty religious. I'm only a year away from graduating and am thinking that I should just suck it up and then leave this bad situation when I get my degree. However, I also feel like such a coward for not being able to speak up about this and having to pretend that everything is great when I am literally fantasizing about leaving the field I am in to be around more accepting researchers. **What do you think Reddit? Has anyone dealt with a similar situation and what did you do?**", "role": "user" }, { "content": "As a queer scholar, my advice is to protect yourself FIRST. Obviously, no one in your lab, not even your PI, is putting any value on your well-being. You must safeguard your well-being in every way possible. Right now, that probably means not risking your position and reputation so close to graduation. I am furious about this, and I am so deeply sorry that your graduate education has been so badly affected (and yes, disrupted) by this hateful climate. And I know you want to identify and help dismantle this toxic environment, and you want to make it safe for you, and for others who might come after you. But as they say on airplanes, you must put your own oxygen mask on first before helping others. Once you are safe (that might mean out of that lab, that might mean after you complete a postdoc and have the assurance of excellent letters of rec -- only you will know when you feel truly safe), then you will be able to act. In the meantime, keep the contact information of the NSF investigator. Keep a meticulous record (with times and dates) of every instance of discrimination and harassment you have faced during your time at this research center. And then later, when you are safe, send that information to the NSF investigators, noting that you were afraid of retaliation while you were still a student there. At that time, you can also decide whether to send this report anonymously. I personally hope you soon achieve such a degree of safety, security, and success that you will be able to file this report with your name signed legibly -- in purple glitter ink. I am rooting for you. Find and draw upon support from friends and loved ones. Keep your mind clear from distractions as much as possible, and do excellent work until you can get out of this vile environment. Then, when you are ready, toss the bomb.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Should I Speak up About Homophobia in Research Center? **I am a gay graduate student who's part of an NSF research center in the hard sciences. An external evaluator is polling members about the center's climate to send to the administrators and to the NSF. I've been on the receiving end of homophobia on a number of occasions in the center.** In one instance, another grad student learned about me while we were at a conference and spent the next day following me around and calling me gay slurs when others were out of earshot. They also told people not to trust me and that I don't belong at the conference. At a professional lunch with another lab in the center, the other graduate students made horrible gay jokes throughout the meal. Two of them managed to mockingly imitate a gay couple and a third dropped the f-bomb a few times for good measure. I have more examples that I won't list here, but there's an atmosphere around the center that makes me feel unwelcome and at risk of being treated unfairly. Having to hide myself has probably has affected my mental state and therefor my research. The only other gay student in the center ended up leaving because of this environment. **I've been considering anonymously emailing the person evaluating the research center to let them know about my experiences, but have been struggling with the decision.** I want someone to know and for something to be done. On the other hand, I'm worried about danger to my professional life if I speak up and don't think anything will change even if I am heard and go through that risk. Talking to the evaluator could be seen by the administrators as me sabotaging the center's funding, but I am mainly concerned about what would happen if people in my home lab learn that I am gay from the report. They don't know about me, but if people hear about someone complaining in the center then it wouldn't be hard to find out who it is since I'm the only gay one in a tiny research center. My advisor is super catholic and Russian and a lot of the people I work with are also pretty religious. I'm only a year away from graduating and am thinking that I should just suck it up and then leave this bad situation when I get my degree. However, I also feel like such a coward for not being able to speak up about this and having to pretend that everything is great when I am literally fantasizing about leaving the field I am in to be around more accepting researchers. **What do you think Reddit? Has anyone dealt with a similar situation and what did you do?**", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Protect yourself first (mentally also), then denounce the shady shit.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Should I Speak up About Homophobia in Research Center? **I am a gay graduate student who's part of an NSF research center in the hard sciences. An external evaluator is polling members about the center's climate to send to the administrators and to the NSF. I've been on the receiving end of homophobia on a number of occasions in the center.** In one instance, another grad student learned about me while we were at a conference and spent the next day following me around and calling me gay slurs when others were out of earshot. They also told people not to trust me and that I don't belong at the conference. At a professional lunch with another lab in the center, the other graduate students made horrible gay jokes throughout the meal. Two of them managed to mockingly imitate a gay couple and a third dropped the f-bomb a few times for good measure. I have more examples that I won't list here, but there's an atmosphere around the center that makes me feel unwelcome and at risk of being treated unfairly. Having to hide myself has probably has affected my mental state and therefor my research. The only other gay student in the center ended up leaving because of this environment. **I've been considering anonymously emailing the person evaluating the research center to let them know about my experiences, but have been struggling with the decision.** I want someone to know and for something to be done. On the other hand, I'm worried about danger to my professional life if I speak up and don't think anything will change even if I am heard and go through that risk. Talking to the evaluator could be seen by the administrators as me sabotaging the center's funding, but I am mainly concerned about what would happen if people in my home lab learn that I am gay from the report. They don't know about me, but if people hear about someone complaining in the center then it wouldn't be hard to find out who it is since I'm the only gay one in a tiny research center. My advisor is super catholic and Russian and a lot of the people I work with are also pretty religious. I'm only a year away from graduating and am thinking that I should just suck it up and then leave this bad situation when I get my degree. However, I also feel like such a coward for not being able to speak up about this and having to pretend that everything is great when I am literally fantasizing about leaving the field I am in to be around more accepting researchers. **What do you think Reddit? Has anyone dealt with a similar situation and what did you do?**", "role": "user" }, { "content": "Your center has a diversity office and/ or a title IX office ( whomever deals with such things in your school). And HR. They are the ones that need to know and can implement change.", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "Should I Speak up About Homophobia in Research Center? **I am a gay graduate student who's part of an NSF research center in the hard sciences. An external evaluator is polling members about the center's climate to send to the administrators and to the NSF. I've been on the receiving end of homophobia on a number of occasions in the center.** In one instance, another grad student learned about me while we were at a conference and spent the next day following me around and calling me gay slurs when others were out of earshot. They also told people not to trust me and that I don't belong at the conference. At a professional lunch with another lab in the center, the other graduate students made horrible gay jokes throughout the meal. Two of them managed to mockingly imitate a gay couple and a third dropped the f-bomb a few times for good measure. I have more examples that I won't list here, but there's an atmosphere around the center that makes me feel unwelcome and at risk of being treated unfairly. Having to hide myself has probably has affected my mental state and therefor my research. The only other gay student in the center ended up leaving because of this environment. **I've been considering anonymously emailing the person evaluating the research center to let them know about my experiences, but have been struggling with the decision.** I want someone to know and for something to be done. On the other hand, I'm worried about danger to my professional life if I speak up and don't think anything will change even if I am heard and go through that risk. Talking to the evaluator could be seen by the administrators as me sabotaging the center's funding, but I am mainly concerned about what would happen if people in my home lab learn that I am gay from the report. They don't know about me, but if people hear about someone complaining in the center then it wouldn't be hard to find out who it is since I'm the only gay one in a tiny research center. My advisor is super catholic and Russian and a lot of the people I work with are also pretty religious. I'm only a year away from graduating and am thinking that I should just suck it up and then leave this bad situation when I get my degree. However, I also feel like such a coward for not being able to speak up about this and having to pretend that everything is great when I am literally fantasizing about leaving the field I am in to be around more accepting researchers. **What do you think Reddit? Has anyone dealt with a similar situation and what did you do?**", "role": "user" }, { "content": "OP, does your organization have an EEO office? You need to put this crap to a stop, but start locally if you can. You say that you’re at an NSF lab, which I’m taking to mean a group funded by NSF. A university or NGO should have some kind of EEO or diversity office or point person. Go to them immediately. Report this. There are steps open to you that start small scale and escalate until this is resolved.", "role": "assistant" } ]