Some time ago I was part of a conference organizing body. In particular, I was in the register, right before the main room, so I saw everyone come in. In the second and the third day, some people came up, saying "I have lost/forgot my landyard, can you give me a replacement?" but some other people just walked in without landyard.

I'm not the police so I wasn't gonna stop anyone from going in regardless of their landyard-wearing status, but I wonder how common is for people to sneak into conferences? Have you ever had someone at a conference audience that you knew hadn't paid? Did you/someone care? Have you ever been that someone? I'm looking forward to reading your stories!

My PI is very busy, and we’ve been trying to get this one first author paper out and submitted, but in my latest draft where I found a lot of room for improvement, he said it was good and if I implement his latest feedback (which does not address the stuff I feel needs work) we should be in good shape.

Is this normal? This isn’t going into a high impact journal or anything (very low impact), but was designed to be a quick paper for me…

I’m not feeling great, because I am still learning statistics (2nd year PhD student) and I feel like he may be brushing it off?

Any thoughts?

Hi! I graduated from college in May from an Ivy League where I studied History and loved it a lot. I was able to do lots of independent research (mostly archival), work with faculty supervisors one on one, and just generally really enjoyed my classes, the department, and looked up to my professors. I’ve heard from some people that a history phd may not be the best decision at this time… but also some have said to ignore that, that there will always be people entering academia and why can’t it be you. It’s kinda hard to make decisions about my future with so many factors and voices in mind lol idk if anyone else feels that way.

Anyways, I’m pretty interested in a history phd and want to kind of fact-find more information about what the application process even entails. If you’re in a history phd program now, or were previously, what was the process like for you? Or the timeline? I’m not thinking about applying for this cycle, but maybe next. A little bit random, but did you ever consider getting a law degree? It feels maybe “safer” than a history degree and like it could lead to jobs I’m interested in.

Well! As you can see I’m kind of lost in the post grad era and would love any of your advice, thoughts, or words of wisdom. Many thanks!

Some of the academic job ads I’ve been seeing state that they will not sponsor any visa. What do I make of the ones that don’t specify anything in the ad for a TT position? Got an invite for a Zoom interview and wondering if I should bring up that I am on H1B and will only require a transfer if I were to be offered the position. What are your thoughts on this?

​

Hello :)

I would like to apply to an event which aims at introducing Master’s students to the mathematical research done at a certain postgraduate research and higher education institute.

There is a selection process and one of the things they ask for is a Scientific CV.

I am a MSc applied math student, I don't have any published research and I haven't attended any conferences or stuff like that.

What should I add to the CV?

I do have some work experience, first in a bank in IT, next as a substitute math teacher and finally as a tutor for lab sessions at a uni for 1 subject, 1 semester.

I assume I shoyld include my BSc thesis topic and describe what I did. Should I include other project I did as part of uni courses as well?

Any iseful tips are welcome.

Thanks a lot :)

Hello! I'd like to start off by saying, im in high school, and i love animals.

Recently i've taken a hit on academic stress. About careers. Who hasnt?

I'd like to ask, to people who are well versed in this topic since i couldnt find proper answers,

If i wanted to work with animals, but didnt wish to become a vet, which would be better for me? Zoology or wildlife biology? Or another field?

What would i need to pick in uni?

How do i study zoology or wildlife biology?

What do i apply for when it times to pick a major(?) in uni??

What qualifications should i aim for?

And lastly, is the job in demand? How hard is it to find a job?

I've taken average income into account, and hope to study in netherlands. But i wouldn't mind any other place so long if it doesnt require me going to and staying in like.. America or whatever.

I have a good IELTS score documented and some other documents that basically say "yeah this person it good to study abroad". But how do i even DO that?!

Thanks to everyone in advance.

Sincerely, a very freaking scared person.

Hi everyone, I'm sorry in advance for the long post. As the title says, I'm considering dropping out and restarting at a different university (no clue where, not even sure if I would be accepted, and I feel very lost).

For context, I'm an international student enrolled with a UK university and I study via distance/hybrid mode as much of my fieldwork is in the global south. As a result, I earn in a significantly weaker currency, but have a good quality of life. I pay the international student rate which is about £28-30k per year as opposed to the home student rate of about £5-7k per year. I am also ineligible for tuition fee support/funding as my permanent address is overseas instead of in the UK. I couldn't secure funding for my Masters either, perhaps I just didn't make the cut at the time as it was super competitive (and of course, still is), so financial stress has been the soundtrack of my life for about 7 years now. I've been self-funded on the PhD for 2 years now, and this, combined with my Masters, has put me in a decade's worth of debt. I took a temporary pause to try and reconfigure my life, and now that term's begun again it's time to resume my studies (I've maxed out on extensions so am not eligible to pause my studies again). But the university I'm with is not great: resources always cut for the Humanities, not affiliated with any AHRC council funding so you don't really have a chance of trying to secure solid funding, slow on communication (though I suppose most Unis are like this now) and just don't seem to care about international students despite us paying the same fees as a PG student on a taught course. To add to it, I've recently had a family bereavement, and I don't know if this is just my grief/loss talking but I feel completely and utterly done with my current uni, even though my supervisor is a star (she's the reason I've stuck it out with the current institution for so long). I've written to them a few times expressing my uncertainty and some issues, but no one really responds. I don't know if this is standard treatment of PhD students, but you can't help but feel a little undervalued and question whether the crippling debt is even worth it. I'm wondering if I should just chance it - drop out now instead of paying for another year and taking on more debt, and just restart at a different university, literally anywhere in the world that will take me on as a funded student. I understand that this sounds delusional because not only am I an international student (I would move to the new Uni's campus though if it meant getting funding), but I'm also in the Arts/Humanities, so there's very little funding anyway :(

I realised I've been continuing on just because I've already spent 2 years' worth of fees, but am now wondering whether that's just daft thinking, because continuing on would mean an additional 3 years' of tuition fee - adjusted for inflation - out into the abyss. The deadline to re-enrol is in a few days, and I'm seriously considering just dropping out at this point. I've scheduled a meeting with my supervisor for Tuesday and am dreading disappointing her because she's been so supportive of me throughout. Thought I'd ask here/ramble a bit in the hopes that someone might have had a similar experience. Sorry again for a long post.

I just started my masters program this fall focusing on interdisciplinary social sciences (mostly political science, but some sociology, international relations, etc. as well). However, my bachelors was mostly stem (stats & compsci) with a little bit of humanities and social sciences here and there. Mostly everything I've learned thus far is new to me, including the type of work required (coming from projects and problem sets to readings and papers). I struggle doing these academic readings efficiently.

For people more experienced in the social sciences and the humanities: how do you read? When doing my readings most things won't be committed to memory. if I do want them to be committed to memory, I have to spend multiple hours on a 50 page chapter. But even with the volume of reading (around 400 pages this week), I find it impossible to digest that amount of information. Currently, I use an ipad, highlight things I find useful or interesting, and will very occasionally write in the margins.

In grad school were you really doing all of your assigned readings? If not, how did you prioritize them? How did you determine that you'd skim or skip a reading altogether? what methods did you use when reading your texts (did you use a laptop and take separate notes, did you read and highlight, was there a particular reading technique you used) that allowed you to get the most from your work? And what were you looking to get out of your readings other than doing it to mark it as complete?

for additional context, I am from the U.S., but studying in the Czech Republic

Sorry for all the potentially ridiculous questions! It's just a completely new field and way of learning for me and I'd love your personal experiences with it! I also understand it's going to vary person to person and field to field, but maybe something you do/did will work for me as well :)

I have been in research (phd/postdoc) for 9+ years. And I am done. I want to quit. But I am in a key role in a project that still runs until August 2027. I already let them know that I am not going to apply for the fellowship to continue in the group (was supposed to apply for a fellowship in January which will support my salary from August 2027). Reality is, I want to quit by January.

I have no complaints against the group or the PI or anything. They have been fair to me. I just cannot go on anymore. I wait until January just for my own sake to step into next career (quitting academia).

But how do I let them know gracefully? Or what can I do to mitigate their struggle. They need someone in this role to complete the project well. They dont have money to get someone (they will have to offer at least a years contract - but project finishes in August)
My official notice period is around 12 weeks.

Some drama recently happened at a meeting I attended, when some attendees working in eastern European countries expressed shock that scientists working for the Russian Academy of Sciences would be allowed to attend and display their affiliation. It seemed obvious to them that this was unacceptable. Meanwhile, I work in a western European country and I don't think anyone here would expect this to be disallowed; we would not assume such scientists supported their government at all, just as we wouldn't assume that scientists working in the USA supported anything that Trump has done or would like to do.

I'm aware that collaborations of a sensitive nature, e.g. with CERN, have been broken off in the wake of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, and this makes total sense to me, but we work in a small field with no relevance to national defense or even human health.

Is this a conversation being had at other meetings these days?

I got a master's degree to make a career transition into a field that's adjacent to what I was doing before. While in grad school, I figured out that I actually care a lot about the research side of things and could see myself potentially wanting to lead research teams in the future. Unfortunately, the job market for research in this field is rough right now due to both politics and longer-term trends (I'm sure I'm preaching to the choir here). And partly due to my own laziness/shyness and partly due to other obligations, I didn't actually get research experience outside of coursework while I was a master's student.

Is there any way for me to get some low-level research experience to help me build up a research resume? Even though I'm not a student anymore, is it worth emailing professors doing work I'm interested in to see if I can help with anything?

I also want a sanity check: I've been applying to research assistant/associate type jobs, but nothing's panned out so far. I want to know if it's me doing something wrong or if it's just rough out there right now. I know that one's hard to judge without more information, but I'm starting to feel crazy.

This one's a little more far-fetched, but given that I might want to do independent research one day, should I be giving getting a PhD some more serious consideration? I've been resistant to the idea so I brushed it off any time it was brought up, but I got to a point of "maybe one day" near the time I graduated. But maybe that one day should be nearer than I originally anticipated.

Hi everyone,

I am a master's student and i need to choose between two research topics for a dissertation that will be based exclusively on academic literature with no internship or access to confidential company data.

Topic 1: What is the role of management control in the adoption and appropriation of new reporting tools?

Topic 2: Do budgets contribute to deteriorating relationships between management accountants and operational managers?

Which topic would you recommend, and why? In particular, which one would be easier to research and structure at master's level?

Thank you for your advice!

I’m wondering if anyone here has filed a title ix report to get insight on timeline and repercussions? Did you feel justice was served? Asking bc i might need to file a report myself and wanted to know other people’s experiences

Saw a TT position that asks for teaching and research expertise that the department’s freshly hired AVP already has - same area of focus and teaching experience.

The position has been posted for 3 months and the new AVP started just a month ago. Does this mean the department has an internal candidate if they match everything in the ad?

Its may sound weird but I have never written a journal article before and I wish to publish but everytime i write and send in, i get rejection. I feel I am just bad at writing it. How to write one? I think i dont understand all the theoretical contributions and then tying back to evidence. I need a paper which outlines all for me. Thank you if you can help me in anyway.

I'm an early-career researcher seeking advice on collaboration and authorship.

I've had colleagues propose co-authoring papers based on projects I developed independently, after I'd already completed the technical work and deliverables. I'm happy to collaborate on new developments, but I don't think someone should automatically become a co-author simply because they see an opportunity to publish existing work.

Recently, my PI pressured me to include a colleague on a journal article, even though their contribution was extremely limited (probably less than 1%). I had wanted to publish the work independently while acknowledging this colleague's contribution in the acknowledgment. The situation is complicated by what I perceive as favoritism toward this colleague, which is widely known at my institution, and sometimes considered unfair by others.

I'm frustrated by what feels like a recurring pattern in my team: some people wait for others to develop ideas and do the work, then attach themselves to the results. It seems not working like this in other teams of my institution.

My relationship with my PI is friendly, but often hierarchical. Disagreements are difficult, and I generally feel expected to comply with their decisions.

My questions are:

- How do you push back when a PI pressures you to include a colleague as a co-author?

- How do you protect your contributions without damaging professional relationships?

I'm not against collaboration or sharing credit. I just want authorship to reflect actual contributions rather than personal relationships.

I'd appreciate advice, especially from early-career researchers who've faced similar situations.

I'm a grad student planning to apply to PhD programs in a quantitative field. I have 2 years of prior research experience and 2 national conference presentations. For the past 6 months, I've been working in an academic lab, mainly hoping to get a publication. I've taken on most of the project, including the literature review, research questions, data exploration, and methodology.

The problem is that 6 months in, we still haven't established a clear hypothesis or methodology, and I feel like I'm going in circles.

Our PI meets with the lab for only an hour each week. She encourages us to send questions and ideas throughout the week, but when I send reports or analyses, she either doesn't respond or reacts with a thumbs-up. During the weekly meetings, she'll admit she hasn't reviewed my work and ask me to present it instead, which makes achieving progress extremely slow.

When I present, she criticizes my work without offering constructive feedback. When I ask what specifically needs improvement, she'll say things like "just think critically" or "when you bring me something actually useful, I'll give you feedback." When I have confronted her about her feedback style she just says "I'm not trying to discourage you, that's just how I am". I've worked in other labs and understand that criticism is part of research, but I've never experienced feedback this unhelpful.

Our PI frequently rejects my proposed hypotheses and methodologies, even when supported by the literature. She acknowledges that she's unfamiliar with the specific field, the data we are using, and that I know more about the topic, yet insists on her preferred approaches.

For example, a colleague she invited to review our work praised my analysis but questioned why I hadn't used a particular method. I had originally used that exact method, but my PI told me to change it. The colleague confirmed that my original approach was more appropriate, yet my PI still insists on doing it her way.

She's told other lab members their work is "garbage," that they're wasting her time, or that they lack sufficient education. Every other student she's brought on has left within 3 months. I'm the only one who's stayed this long.

I understand that research requires independence and I'm not expecting hand-holding. However, I feel like I'm expected to figure everything out by myself while having my decisions overruled without meaningful feedback. 

I'm now questioning whether it's worth continuing to invest 20 unpaid hours every week in this lab. I have a potential research opportunity next summer, but I'm unsure whether I should stay another 6 months hoping for a publication or cut my losses and focus on school. The only things keeping me here: I want to publish, I need letters of recommendation for a PhD, this work is interesting to me, and I don’t want to have a blank on my resume for the next 6 months.

My questions
- Is this normal academic mentorship, or are these red flags?
- Is 6 months without an established hypothesis or methodology concerning?
- Would you stay for the possibility of a publication in this situation or does it seem hopeless?

I'd appreciate perspectives from graduate students, researchers, and PIs who've been in similar situations.

Hi all! I have a conference coming up where I’ll be giving a short ten minute presentation. My area is a bit abstract and niche to my specific field, but the principles are well established in an adjacent field. Because of this, I have to explain some pretty fundamental principles in a concise and understandable way, and in my experience, the best way to do that is with a picture. Initially, I tried to just look up open source figures online, but, they won’t be understood by my audience since they are all highly specific to the more established field. In other words, it would require me to give tangential context that would muddy the message and lengthen my already long introduction.

So, I’m trying to create the graphic on my own in PowerPoint, but, I’m at the point where I have to admit I’m not very talented at it. I have an image in my head but I just can’t execute. I think I could use AI to create something close to what I envision (I would cite its use of course), but, would that look bad or tacky?

I've come across a TT job that is still accepting applications until the end of the month, but which has its first review date at the start of it. I'll throw my hat in the ring regardless, but I was wondering from anyone who's been on the other side how likely it is that late submissions get seriously looked at. It is a humanities job at an ivy, somewhat narrow field.

Obviously we have all heard the horror stories. While I have looked into the body of research into what improvements need to be made to support campus community members going through the title IX or related processes, what I have yet to see is a case study of an institution that is actually succeeding. Nor have I even heard anecdotal stories about an institution that handles these things well.

I know, of course, that we are much less likely to hear about it going well than going poorly. But it felt worth asking: Does anyone know college or university that seems to be doing a good job on this front?

Hi everyone, I’m due to qualify with my PHD (graduating in December) and changed my legal name last year. Grad school required me to cross the stage with my legal name, which is now my married name. I bumped my maiden to a middle name.

I am autistic for context and had massive anxiety around the name change situation, not even just related to academia and publication.

I’m aware that ORCID exists but am trying to figure out whether to correct this on my thesis and graduate in my maiden name, and publish in my maiden name too. Or to continue with my married name, the bonus of that being that I have absolutely no digital foot print with my married name (not that my footprint is problematic anyway).

What have others done? Any advice would be appreciated.

I’ve seen other posts about this mention the issue of separation later down the line. Obviously that’s not part of the plan but who knows what the future might throw at me. It has fueled the fire of worry regarding graduation and publication name non the less.

I have my first on campus interview for an assistant professor job coming up. Due to the location of the main campus and the satellite lab I would be based at, at some point during the multi day interview, someone, presumably on the search committee, is going to drive me 4 hours to the other campus.

As excited as I am about the job, as an introvert, I am dreading this long drive with someone who is essentially a stranger. Any tips for keeping casual conversation going for this long?

Hey everyone,
Looking for some serious advice on how to handle an awkward Letter of Recommendation (LOR) situation.
Long story short, I recently asked my Master's thesis supervisor for an LOR. I made the massive mistake of sending a generic AI-sounding email. He called me out directly, saying it showed how "careless" I am. I immediately apologized, explained a chaotic situation (my uni email access was expiring), and thankfully, he still agreed to write it.
Twice in the past, I had to call him back into the lab because I forgot something he had just taught me.
I got a distinction on my Master’s thesis under him. He has been incredibly supportive in the past and even checked up on me after my viva.
Is it acceptable to ask them what they plan to highlight, or is that considered taboo/rude?
If it is okay to ask, how should I approach the conversation without sounding distrustful or pushy? I want to make sure my application is cohesive and that their letter aligns with the specific skills I’m trying to highlight in my personal statement.
Has anyone done this successfully? What wording did you use?
Thanks in advance!

Edit/update: thanks all for the kind words and encouragement. I think I manifested a little with this post - I heard from my collaborator (and scientific bestie) that the letter is circulating for signatures and should arrive on Friday.

Original post: I’m a mid career social scientist working in healthcare research in a school of medicine (USA, highly ranked R1). I started at my current institution as a postdoc hired by a mentor, and stayed here for a faculty job. So I never really had to do the full job market…

I’ve hit a ceiling in my current position and there are some institutional dynamics that are making it more difficult to do my research. So I went on the job market this spring.

I have a verbal offer at a different R1 - not as highly ranked, but well respected within my field. The institutional priorities and culture are better aligned with my priorities and values. Plus one of my regular collaborators is already there.

I visited and interviewed in August, then had several zoom follow ups with the chair, dean for research, and the head of their clinical and translational science center. I also met with the department admin director and went over expectations for salary, start up, etc. I’ve since seen the chair in person at a conference and even attended the department reception. I’ve made it pretty clear that I’m impressed with the department and institutional culture and excited about the opportunity.

I last spoke with the chair in person two weeks ago, and he said they would have an offer ready within a week. I still don’t have an offer. I’m not sure how much I should be following up? I don’t want to come off as nagging, but also need to make some other personal and professional decisions that are impacted by this offer.

Hello all,

I was in a workshop in Germany and the presenter made a comment of how dr. rer. nat. is higher than dr. sc. hum. . I am a bioligist/neuroscientist doing my doctorate, and I had to enroll through medical faculty because there were complications between my lab and how long i was there and the biosciences faculty, so my supervisor told me to switch to medical faculty. When I heard his comment, it made me feel weird and kind of concerned. Is this really a common conception (in Germany vs. Europe vs. world in general) and how will it really affect me? I am a little anxious now.

Edit: thank you all for quelling my anxiety :D lovely to hear that it really doesn't matter down the line, and there is little distinction of it outside of Germany (which i plan to move after completing my doctorate). when i was first starting out, i wanted to enroll as a dr. rer. nat. as it felt closer to home (as i started out with integrative and cell biology, also i think it sounds cooler). i am at a lab that is part of pharmacology institute in a university so there is a bit of a closer bond to the medical faculty. i was not aware of this perceived "hierarchy" since there are a mix of people who have and pursuing these two types of phd in our lab, so i really thought it was just a name to show the faculty you are graduating from. i'll set a goal to graduate summa cum laude just in case 😼 (don't tell me that not matter either haha)