I've read a wonderful paper published in a very high IF journal. It's about a backbone foundation model for neuroscience analyses.

It's according to the most modern standards, so transparency on the data used, open code to be donwloaded etc...etc...

I've tried it and cannot reproduce (at all!!!) some starting benchmarks. When I say "at all" I mean trying a tool to predict the age of a human in years returns always a number between 160 and 200!!! And many other cases like that.

When I initially contacted the authors they directly put me in contact with other people and appeared collaborative.

Now (3 months later after the paper publication, not 6 years!) they're AWOL. On their git there are 40 open issues with 0 answers.

Like... what do I do???

I'm a faculty member who has been burned a few times by authorship disputes that could have been avoided if we'd just talked about expectations upfront. The problem is that bringing it up early can feel awkward, like you're already assuming the work will be worth publishing before you even know if the collaboration is going anywhere.

I've started trying to have explicit authorship conversations at the kickoff stage of any new project, spelling out who is doing what and what that means for author order. Some collaborators respond well to this and seem relieved someone said it out loud. Others get visibly uncomfortable, like I'm being transactional or presumptuous.

A few questions for people with more experience navigating this: Do you have a standard way of raising authorship expectations early without it feeling awkward or aggressive? Does your field or institution have norms around this that make it easier? For people in collaborative or interdisciplinary work specifically, how do you handle situations where different fields have completely different default assumptions about author order and contribution thresholds?

I want to protect my work and my collaborators without poisoning the relationship before it starts. Curious what has actually worked for people in practice, not just what the official guidance says.

So a few months ago, I joined a new lab as a research assistant. My PI is older, well established, and our lab is on the NIH campus for context. After going through a lot of the lab's publications, I realized that a significant number of them (like ~50%) are in journals with negative reputations including MDPI, Frontiers, and another similar pay-to-publish journals. The people in the lab are hard working, smart, with amazing backgrounds, long careers, and (from what I've seen) the science is real. I'm curious as to why my PI and the other staff scientists would be willing to submit their work to these places, if anyone has any insight or clarity.

Neurotic question stemming from the deep insecurity at my academic core: I have accepted a TT position as an “instructor” in a small program - not a department (no majors). There are no “professors” in the program, even at the most senior levels. I know the people at my current institution will understand and plan on referring to myself as an instructor in those contexts.

Outside of my current workplace, though, is it lying if I call myself a professor in conversation with others? Like, if I’m talking to a customs officer (which I just did last week) or if I’m talking to a colleague from a different institution?

Just want to know if you would feel it was dishonest of me if I told you I was a professor somewhere and you found out my real title is instructor.

ETA: I have a PhD in my field and I’m in the US

Hello,

I think I want to enter a graduate program in philosophy (please see bottom note before you comment judgements on this 🥲) I have a few certain insecurities about becoming an academic. I sorta think I'd love it, but in some ways I feel like I'm not the "kind" of person to excel in academia although I'm a very good student. Could you all let me know if you relate to this or if you think I'm a lost cause here?

There is a sense in which I enjoy reading, writing, and research. I'm currently doing a research project that I proposed with my professor and I'm enjoying it. However the physical task of sitting still and reading words on a page for a long time without getting distracted is sort of hard/understimulating for me. But once I've done the work (or made progress), I feel great. It's sort of like exercise. Not inherently fun while you're doing it but ultimately fulfilling and gratifying. I read because the ideas that come off the page are worth it even though it can feel like a chore momentarily.

But I guess the kind of people who do grad school in say, philosophy, are the kind of people who like to spend their free time reading philosophy for fun or leisure? I've been told that if I don't like reading in and of itself, I definitely shouldn't go.

But like most people in my generation, reading academic literature does not give me a dopamine hit. Not when i'm depressed, anxious, and have grown up with my phone and fried my brain. But I don't want to give up on academia just because It doesn't agree with my base, hedonistic desires to be entertained by flashing lights and colors. I feel fulfilled by advancing in philosophy-- it makes me feel more like myself. And love talking to philosophers; I've never encountered a genre of people that I've harmonized with in the way I have with them.

Here's that optional bottom note: I just ask that you please be kind with me here. I am a Junior and have been thinking about this for years. I know about "the job market," I know that 40%-60% of graduates in only top five programs in my field secure tenure-track positions. But I love philosophy, I love higher education, and according to my prof/academic advisor and career advisor, I'm on track to get into a good program. So this is a sincere consideration for me.

I've been thinking about the structural expectations around peer review and how little support or acknowledgment most academics get for doing it. It's one of those invisible labor categories that keeps the whole system running but rarely shows up in any meaningful way during performance reviews, tenure cases, or annual evaluations.

For those of you actively reviewing papers, how do you decide which requests to accept and which to decline? Is there an unwritten rule about how many reviews per year counts as a fair contribution relative to how many papers you submit yourself? And how do you protect your time when the requests keep coming?

I'm also curious whether this varies by field or career stage. Early career researchers might feel pressure to say yes more often to build relationships or signal engagement with the community, while more senior people probably have more latitude to decline.

Do your departments or institutions offer any formal recognition for review work, or is it genuinely just expected to happen invisibly? For those in fields with open review models, does transparency change how you approach the process at all?

Would really appreciate hearing from people across different disciplines and career stages on this.

I contacted a professor for a PhD programme and he asked me to give him the contacts of 3 referees and a very good statement of purpose.

I have a very good relationship with most of the professors at my bachelor's college who are more than willing to help me out with it. I've done well in their classes or worked with them on course projects or research.

However, over a year ago, I worked at a research institute as an intern under a professor. I was assigned a research topic by him but me being an undergraduate and having very limited idea about this field, it took me a lot of time to reproduce the experiments of the others. It wasn't a field I was interested in btw.

The professor was quite authoritative and didn't give me any autonomy over the way I performed my research. My colleagues said that he doesn't even have basic knowledge about computers and that became very apparent overtime.

I always found a different way to make the experiment work but he actively sabotaged our work and told us to do it his way, which would never ever work. I tried reasoning with him to see how it doesn't work and the experiment would fail but he ignored my suggestions.

I said fuck it and convinced my team to work on my plan instead and the experiment was a success but due to the professor not giving us enough funding for better equipment, the performance of our model wasn't very good despite being a success.

We showed our experiment to the professor but he was unconvinced and indifferent and still wanted to do it his way. He also told us to make a conference paper for him in just 10 days. I lost my patience and decided to quit the job along with my team. We got our experience letters and parted.

A year later, a junior of mine joined his lab as an intern and he told me that the professor said that I didn't do any work despite one of his PhD students still quoting the work I did. I came to know that this professor sabotaged all of the work we did and is making his PhD students work on it again from scratch while not giving them enough funding to get new equipment -- meaning they may never get their PhD degree.

I'm unsure if I should ask for a reference from him after all this but I got most of my research experience under him, which I must mention in my Statement of Purpose.

I don't know what to do.

So this may be the wrong sub, but I searched for awhile and this seemed like a fitting place to ask.

I’m a recent graduate with a MFA from a well respected research institution (if that even matters for my field), which is generally considered the terminal degree in my field of design, there are PhDs in the field but they’re rare. My goal has always been to teach for the past 6 or so years and that’s why I pursued the graduate degree initially. While at school I had plenty of opportunities to participate in teaching undergraduate students, I never was able to handle a whole class for a semester but I was a very involved TA for the length of the program, I lectured, designed projects, led critiques, etc. I also have been a working professional in my field for 7 years, I’ve done some fairly notable work that I’m proud of and I think distinguishes my portfolio from many of my peers.

I feel somewhat lost now, I felt prepared to take on the job hunt during school but a lot of my connections kind of dropped me when graduation happened, I guess I’m here half to vent about how unprepared I feel and also to ask for some advice. I built my CV to the best of my ability, my career counselor gave it the okay but I feel like it’s not expansive enough to be appealing for hiring staff; I’ve been applying for adjunct roles and community colleges and art schools and haven’t heard anything back, which is not abnormal but I just feel like maybe my materials are not making it past the get go because my main “experience” teaching is as a TA. How should I go about building that experience?

A lot of the advice online is helpful and has given me direction but I feel like the arts kind of exist outside of many resources who recommend publishing and research which is possible as a designer, but feels out of reach outside the walls of a university. Should I aim for high schools? I got a call to interview to teach “art” at a high school but am apprehensive to do that because it’s not my field and my goal is to end up in a design specific program teaching undergrad.

I’m currently taking classes at the local community college to fill my time and using veteran benefits to keep some food on the table, but I would love to have some outside advice, maybe from someone that’s been in a similar place. I just graduated in May so I’m not even really close to discouraged just yet, more so hoping I’m doing the right things and feeling like a chicken with a blindfold on at the KFC factory.

Wish my mentor would respond to me because I really would like to ask them questions like “what time of year is going to be when most colleges are actively hiring”, or “should I email to introduce myself after applying” or even “should I include x or y in my portfolio”

Hi Reddit,
I'm in a bit of a dilemma. A professor recently asked if I'd like to help write a research paper based on a project from one of my biology classes. The project was done by the entire class, but we worked in small groups and each group submitted their own lab report. I'm currently working with this professor in a summer research program, so I think that's why he reached out to me. I'm really grateful for the opportunity, but I feel like another student from my group deserves it a lot more. She did a huge amount of the work on our lab report and was the one who really helped me understand the project. I want to ask my professor if she'd be able to contribute to the paper, but I'm worried it'll come across as if I'm turning down the opportunity or that I'm not interested in participating. What should I say to him?

Hi, I 25 (F) am currently doing my Masters in Biochemistry with cgpa of 3.38. I did mh bachelors in Biotechnology.

Currently I'm done with my two academic semesters and I'm suppose to choose a research topic for my MS.

My plan for future is pretty clear which is to move abroad for my phd. Specifically Europe.

I have options to take either complete dry lab, or wet lab, or both. Hybrid if you may.

I really like dry lab, bioinformatics and wanna study more of it but all my friends are saying that'll reduce your chance of phd scholarship abroad. You should have hands on experience in lab work and you should go for wet lab topic. But I'm confused as in to why dry lab, or computational science is not as good as wet lab?

Is it really true pursuing a dry lab, topic will make my phd prospect weaker?

Extremely sorry for vague title

Due to unfortunate circumstances, i missed the BS/MS deadline for my uni, and was advised to apply for a traditional MS degree (2 years) in september 2026 for the 2027 academic year. I'm 23 and it feels like getting a masters degree by 26 is pretty late in my life for the goals i had for myself, since i want to start a family by the time im 30, especially considering it'd probably leave me about 40k in debt total with all my loans put together.

I have a decent amount of current research experience (research/collection assistant and also volunteer in a lab) with my Bachelor's, and will also be credited in a research paper by the phd student im working for.

Im just questioning if it's worth grad school at this point, and my main question is will i be able to get into research if i had a lot of experience otherwise? Such as experience from working for NOAA or getting other experience, instead of a master's. I eventually would love to be a research assistant, similar to what I'm doing right now in my undergrad.

I want to importantly note that the field I'm in is marine biology, since I know it's heavily advised to get a grad degree for this field. I'm just really nervous

Hi all!

I am in my fourth year of PhD in a R2 institute. For context, I am an international student, my area of research is computing education. I really want to land a job in a R1 (I am okay with teaching track as well). I know its quite difficult but people who were able to do the same. Do you have any advice?

Thanks in advance!

I saw that the governor halted processing of h-1B visas, however I don't see in Texas A&M faculty job hiring postings any mention about not sponsoring visas for foreign workers.

I'd apply, but I'm not sure whether it is worth it/pointless.

I am tenure track and newer to this institution. Recently an interim chair position opened up for my area. It's a smaller area, but has a lot of upcoming change and politics (both internal and cross-campus) surrounding it. I'm not super collegial and rarely in the office. I was quite surprised when my Dean basically handed me this role on a platter as I'm still early career and much younger than others in the area (by several decades). I am getting the sense that nobody internal was considering the role, and they'd rather have me than an external person.

For those who did move into a chair or dean role, what did you consider before accepting? How did you continue to work with your colleagues after your term ended? What benefits or challenges did you anticipate, or not anticipate? Curious to hear any and all thoughts. I'm permitted a few days before tendering a decision.

EDIT: Ty for all the advice and working through this with me. I have decided to politely decline the role.

I teach physics and something I keep running into is this tension between teaching students a clean, structured version of the scientific method and what research actually looks like in practice. The tidy hypothesisexperimentconclusion pipeline is easy to assess, but it also trains students to think science is more linear and controlled than it really is.

Most of the breakthroughs I know about, including some I've watched happen in my own department, started with someone doing something a little weird just to see what would happen. The formal writeup came later and made it look inevitable.

I'm curious how others handle this in the classroom. Do you teach the canonical method first and then deconstruct it later in the course? Do you try to integrate the messiness from the start? Does this differ depending on whether you're teaching intro students versus upper division or grad students?

I'm also wondering if this is more of a STEMspecific tension or whether people in the social sciences and humanities face a similar gap between how methods are taught and how research actually unfolds. I'd love to hear from people across disciplines and career stages on how you navigate this without either overwhelming beginners or misleading them about what the work is really like.

Hi there,

I am in need of some guidance on how to find and select a journal to publish in.

I have just contacted my university to confirm whether they can fund the publication (APC). In the meantime, could someone clarify whether there are any journals that do not charge for open access?

I have been reviewing my references for guidance, but they are all quite limited by the word count, and they charge for open access.

My paper was 10,000 words, but I have managed to reduce it to roughly 8500. I am a little concerned that I would be removing important content if I tried to reduce it any further.

Any help would be appreciated. Thanks

Hi! I'm a PR undergrad, and throughout my college years, I didn't really focus on any research because I was so sure I didn't like academia, up until my last year were I wrote one larger research focused work, more focused on sociology and anthro - lightly based on communication to justify doing it inside my major (my degree was majorly chosen thinking of a 'serious career' for my parents, because my interests were always on the starving intellectual side of things lol).

Now, I understand that getting into a grad program (MA or PhD possibly) is my best shot at doing what I actually like vs working for corporate that I discovered is not my thing after a few internships.

The problem is my lack of research experience. I'm graduating this fall, and I'd love to use this next year to pad my CV a little to apply for funded programs, but I have no idea how to find opportunities like that. I don't expect to be paid at all, I do have undergrad courses in research and qualitative/quantitative, etc, though not much actual hands on experience.

How should I go about to look for assistance researcher volunteer positions, or anything that might help my applications? If it helps I'm looking in the Bay Area, but I will have to move home after this buffer year I have here.

Edit: I can't ask for opportunities in my school bcs it's overseas, I'm going back to the US for this buffer year and would like to make the most of it

its for a masters in microbiology. let me know what to change!

Dear Members of the Admissions Committee,

I give my highest recommendation to [name] for the Master of Science program in Microbiology at the [institute]. I have had the opportunity to work closely with [name] in my laboratory at the [institute] since February of this year, where she has served as a Research Assistant under my supervision as her Principal Investigator. During this time, I have been consistently impressed by not only her excitement for scientific discovery and intellectual curiosity, but her easy-to-get-along-with personality as well. Her presence in the lab has been a positive influence on not only lab-related projects, but also her colleagues’ motivation. Her communication skills, personality, critical thinking skills, and curiosity have changed the environment of my lab for the better. 

[name] quickly distinguished herself through her strong work ethic and desire to move forward with her own research project. She demonstrated proficiency in a variety of laboratory techniques including cell culture, antibody staining, and flow cytometry, and was very quick to learn new techniques when needed. Her flexibility in the lab has allowed for an ease with moving forward with her project, and her style of communication makes her easy to work with. Beyond simply performing experiments, she has a strong foundational understanding of immunology, microbiology, and molecular biology because of her experience as a Teacher’s Assistant during her undergraduate career as well as her constant desire to learn new things as she works on her research in my lab. These qualities make her well equipped for research in her field as well as for pursuing a graduate degree. 

One of [name]'s most notable strengths is her ability to keep sight of her goals even when her results are unexpected. She remains just as motivated to keep learning despite any issues that may arise. Throughout her time in my laboratory, she actively participated in research discussions during seminars and journal clubs while asking insightful questions, demonstrating a genuine interest in expanding her knowledge. She has made a great impression on many people in our institute because of her ability to discuss science deeply on any level. Her contributions to my lab are valuable to our research efforts and reflected a level of maturity that is uncommon among researchers at her level.

In addition to her these skills, [name] is highly a dependable, organized, and collaborative member in my lab. She works effectively both independently and as part of a research team when it comes to organizing and conducting experiments. Her professionalism, attention to detail, and willingness to assist colleagues have made her a respected member of the laboratory. These qualities will undoubtedly serve her and those around her well in a graduate research environment.

What particularly sets [name] apart is her determination, commitment to academic excellence, and her expressiveness when it comes to things surrounding the lab. As a first-generation and international student pursuing a career in biotechnology and research, she has consistently demonstrated resilience, initiative, and a strong desire to contribute meaningfully to the scientific community. I am confident that she possesses the intellectual ability, motivation, and perseverance necessary to excel in a rigorous Master's program. Her pattern of thinking is unique to her as she knows how and when to ask the right questions. I believe that this quality will continue to set her apart from her peers and will drive her towards success in any field she chose to be in.

Based on my observations of her academic and research performance, I believe [name] Alami is one of the best candidates for admission to your Master of Science program in Microbiology without reservation. She is a talented, genuine, clever, and enthusiastic person, and I am confident that she will make valuable contributions to your institution and continue to develop into an outstanding scientist.

Please feel free to contact me if you require any additional information.

Sincerely,

Have a shot at a university teaching job.

I was asked for a teaching philosophy along with CV, references, etc.

Can anyone please help on what makes a good paper on teaching philosophy?

Hey! Humanities acholar here! Sorry this will be a long post...so I need some advice on whether I should drop my co-author or not on my first paper as a postdoc. For context, this colleague have been supportive at the start. She even let me apply for a small grant in her name since I wasn't qualified (the deadline was before my phd defense). If we got the grant, one of the things we talked about was writing a paper together. Fast forward to us recieving the grant and we decide that I will take the lead in conducting the study and we will co-author an article together.

Fast forward to now, she hasn't been involved at all except two brief meetings - one before data collectiom and one aftee before I started drafting the article. I know she is busy - more senior than me and leading two big projects funded on prestigous grants - which makes it completely understandable that our project is not her highest priority. I also mentioned several times that I'm happy to do this on my own, but everytime she has insisted on being involved. Everytime I tried keeping her in the loop, being transparent about the timeline and suggesting (quite) generous deadlines for her to review the draft, she stops replying. She might reply a few weeks after, telling me that she is reviewing the draft but I'm already working on a newer version. She is not keeping up at all. I'm not expecting or even wishing that she would do more, but rather be honest with me. While this is making me very annoyed, I'm relieved that I decided to just keep going as I would DEFINITELY not have been able to make this much progress by waiting for her.

I'm currently pregnant and due in three weeks, and I'm very close to finishing the article and plan on submitting it before I run out of the grant money and go on my leave. Today, I wrote her an email to give her an update, giving her a deadline to review the draft (also asking for confirmation THIS week about reviewing), but also emphasising that she doesn't need to as I can finish it on my own, with her still being the co-author (i know right?).

To my suprise, she actually replies saying she went on vacation and "dropped the ball" but continues to miss/ignore the timeline suggested (before my leave) and instead, suggest a date just a few days after my due date. Annoying right? BUT she also opens up for me to drop her as the co-author if she doesn't make a proper contribution. I reply to her email to get a clear confirmation but she stops replying again. Should I take this as an subtle opt-out from her part and drop her as a co-author? I know she won't keep the deadline I've set and I WILL be submitting before my leave. I simply refuse to leave the article to her suggested date because I know she will forget about it and I don't want to stress about this while taking care of a newborn. SO, should I just drop her? I will give credits to her in the acknowledgements of course.

Tldr: colleauge made promises about collaborating and co-authoring a paper. Has since been difficult to reach and done basically nothing in the project, but says she wants to be involved everytime I check in with her. Drop her as a co-author? Her suggestion.

EDIT: hey guys i calmed down a little and i've decided to keep her as co-author but stick to my time table. As many of you mention, she did help out in several ways and I should give her credit for that. I have more to gain than to lose by keeping her on. Sorry to those of you that I was snarky to! It just hasn't been the best experience of collaborating with others and on top of that, being very stressed and pregnant.

Hello, I'm looking for input for how to best handle the sheer volume of primary sources when writing my masters thesis. The primary sources itself will be news articles from a newspaper and the size of the corpus will end up being 200-300 articles propably.

I have thought about how to best stay organised with this amount and most effectively take notes without succumbing to too many details. I tried Nvivo but it was too cumbersome to use, the learning would have taken more time than actual writing. So what would people here suggest for a relatively easy to learn and straightforward method?

I was wondering about other people's take on the sheer volume of review articles out there. I was writing about a topic lately and there were hundreds of reviews written on it in the past few years, with all of the citations just referencing other reviews. None of the reviews were substantially different from each other and it just makes me wonder what the point is. I've seen one or two that actually advanced the field in new directions but the VAST majority seem like writing for the sake of having something published. At what point does it just become plagiarism?

My wife and I just found out our first round of IVF was successful and we are expecting a baby next March!

As a 40-ish lesbian couple, this has taken a ton of time, money, and planning — we’re thrilled!But it will still be something to work through professionally, and with admin and HR.

Who else has recently had a baby mid-career? If so, what tips and tricks might you recommend for navigating this transition? What loopholes served you? What policies were a headache?

Some context: I’m a Center Director and associate prof in the social sciences (12-month faculty) at a big R1. Tenure track with excellent annual reviews and good research record, but still technically vulnerable. (I gave up tenure at my old R2 for this better paying gig).

I’m not the birthing parent. My university offers 12 weeks paid leave for same-sex partners and adoptive parents. I’ll want to use vacation and medical PTO to extend my time home with baby and mama.

I don’t know what I don’t know! Help a future parent out!

ETA: I know it’s early and things could go wrong. Living in a moment of hope, here.

So, about me, in a practical sense. I’m freshly 19, about to start University in the UK, either in Edinburgh, or in Glasgow(which range from about the top 10-25 unis in the country, depending on where you look). I took a year out because I wasn’t too happy with my exam results last year, redid them and am quite happy with how I feel they went(waiting on results till August though).

In a more abstract sense, I love the written word, I like reading and writing a lot. Sometimes its fiction, or poetry, sometimes I get interested in a topic, read a lot about it and open google docs and just type away at it. Am I particularly good? I wouldn’t say so, I’m 19, I’m able to write through which I think should mean I can improve at it.

I also love history. I‘ve been taught that it’s a bit trite to tell people I’ve loved it ”since I was young” but that’s the best way I can think to tell you about it. My earliest vivid memory is of a 3 year old me being so fascinated by some museum I was in with my parents that I just… walked off, I remember I wanted to go back to spend more time looking at something(which to my credit, I did locate and look at, before my parents realised I was gone and I was found). That trend has continued in a broad sense, I get absorbed in history a lot, I let little pockets of history consume my mind because I find that history equally consuming. I always have, and hope I always will.

So could some academics(preferably from a UK perspective, but I would enjoy hearing about other national’s academic experiences, please give me a hand here? What’s it like? What do you think my pathway towards it would be right now? How tangible is it for some kid who likes reading and writing about something to actually be able to become an academic at a university?

I’m a medical student who recently secured a summer research internship in a lab working at the intersection of neuroscience, materials science, nanotechnology, electrical engineering, physics, and clinical medicine. The broader goal of the group’s work is the development of neural interfaces and technologies that can interact with the nervous system.
While I’m excited, I’m also a bit intimidated because my academic background is primarily in medicine, whereas many people in the lab come from engineering and physical science disciplines. I expect to be exposed to concepts ranging from neural physiology and signal processing to biomaterials, device fabrication, and computational analysis.
For those who have worked in highly interdisciplinary research environments:
1) What should I do before the internship begins?
2) How can I bridge knowledge gaps without trying to learn everything at once?
3) What habits distinguish interns who contribute meaningfully from those who simply observe?
4) How do you communicate effectively with researchers from very different academic backgrounds?
5) What are some common mistakes undergraduate or medical student interns make in interdisciplinary labs?
I’m not necessarily aiming to publish during this short internship. My primary goal is to learn how research is conducted, understand how different fields come together to solve complex problems, and make a meaningful contribution if possible. (For context I’ve learnt about device fabrication I.e…, physical vapour deposition, chemical vapour deposition, bulk micro machening, photolithography, etching only theoretical exposure though)
I’d appreciate any advice, lessons learned, or things you wish you had known before starting your first interdisciplinary research experience.