I was recently invited for a one-way online interview for a faculty position. From what I understand I will have to record answers to several questions on a specific online platform. Questions will be shown one by one. I will have a couple minutes to think of an answer and subsequently record it.

This sounds rather awful as it removes the entire human experience, the ability to read body language, the opportunity for follow up questions, or to just have a discussion like normal human beings. I guess it also makes the online interview stage more reproducible, reduces bias, and makes it faster and cheaper.

How do people go and prepare for something like this beyond predicting which questions they are going to be asked and coming up with comprehensive answers to each of these?

Hey everyone, I could use some advice on writing a Letter of Recommendation.

I completed an internship at IIT Bombay, India, this last summer, where I worked on swarm robotics. My situation is a bit awkward because I have been asked to draft my own LOR, and honestly, I have no idea how to do it.

Some context about my internship:

• I worked on a swarm robotics project at IIT Bombay.
• Most of my work involved running experiments for a PhD researcher I was working with, along with the associated robotics setup and troubleshooting.
• The professor told me that the PhD researcher would write my LOR. However, the PhD researcher has now asked me to draft it myself, which she will presumably review and use.

My queries are:

• Firstly, Is it normal for professors or PhD researchers to ask students to draft their own LORs?
• What does a good LOR for a research internship actually look like?
• Should I write it from the professor's perspective or the PhD researcher's perspective?
• How much should I talk about my technical skills versus my work ethic, independence, and willingness to learn?

This is my first time dealing with an LOR, so I'm not sure what I'm supposed to include or how to make it sound genuine.

I'd really appreciate it if anyone could share a sample LOR, a basic structure, or tips on what makes one stand out.

Thanks!

What is the probability of passing MRCS B before starting residency? I have passed both MRCS A and FCPS 1 as a fresh graduate and now i am confused as to get induction first or give MRCS B. Since MRCS B requires surgical skills do i need to polish them in residency before appearing in MRCS B?

Hello, this is my first time ever presenting a research paper at a conference, and my research is in the data science field.

What are your tips for presenting effectively and structuring my talk?

Also, I am quite nervous about the Q&A session. For those in data science or similar fields, what types of questions are reviewers and attendees most likely to ask?

We specifically chose a journal from Elsevier where similar papers with similar methods and similar dataset sizes from similar domains had already been published during recent years and we know that typical peer review gets about 02 ~ 03 reviewers. What should we do? It's my second journal paper. We got only 21 days to integrate it all. One of the reviewers (number 9) gave generic & heavily demanding points which seem copied from a chatbot that didn't even try to read our paper before commenting.
(edit 1: information from comments makes me feel that we got very unlucky by pure chance) (edit 2: considering withdrawing & applying somewhere else to avoid reviewers fighting each-other at the expense of our paper for several months due to disagreements)

I have been sharing a set of Duke blue PhD regalia with my husband, as we both graduated the same year, which we take turns using when we have a graduating students. In a few years, my daughter will be graduating with her MD-PhD at a university where we are both professors. They will allow more than one faculty to conduct her hooding. As we are close to retirement, it would not make a lot of sense to buy a second set at this point. If anyone knows of someone that may let me borrow or buy a used set, I would greatly appreciate it. Thank you. Charleen

Hi everyone!

I’m an undergraduate student currently learning how to conduct academic research, and I’m struggling a bit with writing the introduction and literature review now. I'm here hoping to get some advice from people with more experience. I’d really appreciate any practical tips, resources, or personal experiences you’re willing to share.

Thank u very much🙏🙏🙏🙏😭😭

There were 7710 submissions to the ERC Starting Grant this year. And they expect to fund 373. Those are brutal odds. I can't believe I spent so much time, effort, and energy on something with such a low expected return.

The breakdown for each domain was:

- Physical Sciences and Engineering (Panels PE1 to PE11): 3314

- Life Sciences (Panels LS1 to LS9): 2176

- Social Sciences and Humanities (Panels SH1 to SH8): 2220

Source: https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/portal/screen/opportunities/topic-details/erc-2027-stg

Hi all,

I just presented a conference paper as a practitioner (I'm completely solo: I have my own company). It's pretty normal in my field to have a few practitioner-researchers in the mix each year.

I had some good conversations with other presenters and a few of them followed up afterward by sending Arxiv preprints of their work and asking if they can see mine. I'm happy to share and I thought maybe it'd be best to register as well instead of lobbing them PDFs.

As a first-time submitter, though, I'm a bit confused about how I should register. Specifically email address and affiliation. I have three viable emails: personal gmail, company email (matched the affiliation listed on the paper), college email (I -just- started adjusting at a college a couple of months ago).

Arxiv seems to encourage use of institutional email but I was not teaching when I submitted this paper and the affiliation on the manuscript is my company name. I'm also not sure if I will still be working for myself in, say, 10 years.

Question is, what email should I use? (Does it even matter, since I don't have any prior pubs on arxiv?)

I'm in my final semester of a Master's in Germany. My thesis is a panel regression on how supply chain shocks affected listed EU firms.

What I need: yearly figures for about 50-150 listed EU firms (net income, total assets, sales, operating profit, cost of goods sold, inventory) that I can export to Excel or R.

The problem: my university does not license Orbis or LSEG Workspace/Datastream. Its other databases cover articles, news and company profiles, not multi-year financial statements.

My questions:

1. Do you know of universities or libraries that give outside students access to Orbis, LSEG, or WRDS/Compustat Global, for example walk-in use or a guest account?

2. Are there free or cheap sources of standardised financials for EU listed firms that include 2018-2019?

3. Has anyone done a thesis with hand-collected annual report data? How did you keep it reliable and check it?

Thanks for any pointers.

Hi everyone! I'm studying HR Management and working on a research project that has both theoretical value and practical implications.

One area I'm considering is psychological safety and employee silence, why employees sometimes choose not to speak up at work, whether out of fear, because they feel nothing will change, or for other reasons. I'm interested in understanding what influences these decisions and whether there are aspects of this topic that haven't been explored enough.

Are there any workplace issues or research questions you think deserve more attention? I'd really appreciate any ideas, perspectives, or recommendations for papers that might help me explore a promising research direction.
Thanks!

I recently finished my PhD, and honestly, I’ve been feeling increasingly confused about what my next move should be. I think I just need to get these thoughts out and see if anyone else has been through something similar.

When I started my PhD, I had a pretty clear vision of what I wanted my career to look like. I wanted to pursue postdocs for 2–3 years, gain more research experience, and then move into academia. My ultimate goal has always been to become a teacher-scholar, someone who genuinely enjoys teaching but also gets to conduct research, mentor undergraduate students, share knowledge, and learn something new alongside them. I don’t want to give up research, but I also know that teaching is something I truly love.
So, naturally, I started applying for postdocs after finishing my PhD. I’ve made it to the final stages of some interviews, and I’ve received positive feedback about how well my research skills align with the positions. Yet, despite all that, things haven’t worked out so far.

I’m not really looking for advice on what I might be doing wrong with my applications. I’ve put a lot of effort into understanding each position, tailoring my applications, and preparing for interviews. I know I still have things to learn, but I also know how much work I’ve put into getting here.

What frustrates me is the job market itself.
Some positions are advertised as suitable for recent PhD graduates, but I feel like I’m competing against people who already have several years of postdoctoral experience, sometimes even multiple postdocs. I’m just trying to get my foot in the door, and it sometimes feels like I’m competing with people who have already had several opportunities to establish themselves.

Then there are PIs who expect five or more first-author papers. I have three first-author papers from my PhD, and I know exactly how much work went into earning each one. I’m proud of what I’ve accomplished, but I can’t help wondering how a recent graduate is supposed to compete in a market where the expectations seem to keep increasing.

Another difficult part is that I haven’t had much support from my advisor when it comes to finding postdoctoral opportunities. I’ve asked about introductions to research groups and potential connections, but I haven’t really felt that kind of proactive support. So, for the most part, I’ve been navigating this entire process on my own.

And I’m tired. Not just physically, but mentally.
I can easily spend four or five hours preparing a single application, researching the institution, tailoring my research statement, writing my cover letter, and making sure everything is aligned with the position. And after all that, there’s no guarantee that anyone will even read it carefully. I’ve applied to positions across academia and industry, and as an international candidate, I’ve found the industry search particularly difficult.

Lately, I’ve started questioning the strategy I was once so sure about.
Is it worth spending the next 2–3 years doing postdocs, only to return to this same job market afterward and compete for permanent academic positions?

What if I spend those years moving between temporary positions, trying to build my CV, publishing more papers, and gaining experience, only to find myself in the same uncertain position again?
I’ve also been thinking about teaching-focused institutions and undergraduate-focused colleges.
I know I would genuinely enjoy an environment where teaching is a significant part of the job, where I can mentor students closely, and where research is still possible, even if it accounts for only 20–30% of my responsibilities. I don’t necessarily need to be at an R1 institution to feel fulfilled. I want to teach, continue doing meaningful research, and work with students who are excited to learn.

I’ve seen people with extensive postdoctoral experience eventually move into teaching-focused institutions, which makes me wonder whether I really need to follow the traditional postdoc-to-research-intensive-faculty route, especially when I already know what kind of academic environment appeals to me.

At the same time, I don’t want to make a decision out of exhaustion or give up on something I’ve worked so hard toward. I genuinely love research, and I don’t want to close that door prematurely. But I also don’t want my entire life to become an endless cycle of temporary contracts, applications, interviews, relocations, and uncertainty.

With the current economic and political climate, and the additional challenges international candidates face, it’s becoming increasingly difficult to know what a sensible long-term strategy looks like.

I’m not even sure whether I’m looking for advice or just need to hear from people who understand this feeling. I know I’m not the only person going through it, and perhaps that’s why I wanted to write this post.

For those of you who recently completed your PhDs, especially in STEM: how are you thinking about your next steps?

Did you pursue postdocs because you genuinely wanted that research experience, or because you felt it was the only way to eventually get a permanent academic position? And for those who chose teaching-focused institutions or a different path, do you ever wonder what would have happened if you had continued pursuing the traditional research-intensive route?

I’m trying to figure out whether I should keep pushing toward the original plan I had for myself or allow myself to reconsider what that plan looks like.
Right now, I think I’m just trying to find a way forward that doesn’t leave me completely burned out before my career has even really begun.

(EDIT) I would like to add one thing to my post:
I know from the comments most of them are saying to keep applying for postdocs. My question is, if I get a TT assistant professor position at a PUI with a 20% research duty versus keeping on applying for an extensive postdoc, which is the better option? And yes, I’m an international candidate in the US, so visa regulations are getting stricter day by day!

I really need to get out of my head with this dilemma. Getting a postdoc never guarantees a permanent position. I have seen acquaintances who have been doing several postdocs over the past 6 years. Like 3 already, of 2 years each, and they still couldn’t get a permanent position.

I’m just scared, and honestly, exhausted. Seriously so confused, or maybe I'm just overthinking!

Sorry for my super long post😞😞😞😞

Has anyone else been in this situation? Am I going to have to just grin and bear it for the next two years?

I’m in my first semester of grad school and I keep hearing complaints from classmates about how they feel like they’re struggling and wish there were more resources (e.g., writing, career, community) geared towards grad students.

I have an assistantship in student affairs and my supervisor is very supportive of me pursuing a project geared towards grad students but every time I try to reach out to other faculty and staff on graduate student outreach, I just get told that graduate students are already welcome to use the resources offered to undergraduates. It’s frustrating because I can see how I can help but am not being allowed to do so. I’m not even asking for anyone to put in additional work or money, I just want to have a few graduate versions of events that are geared towards undergrads. I know fellow GAs who want to help as well, we just need the powers that be to okay it.

I recently applied to join a research lab as a graduate student and went through a few rounds of interviews. As part of the process, I also completed a research-related task and presented my work to the professor and the team.
Unfortunately, I was informed that they decided to move forward with another candidate. I thanked them for the opportunity and for the time they spent with me throughout the process.
However, I’m still genuinely interested in the lab’s research, and I’m wondering whether it would be appropriate to ask if they might consider me for an internship instead, if they have any openings.
I don’t want to come across as desperate or make the situation awkward, especially after they’ve already made their decision. At the same time, I’d be willing to gain more research experience and contribute to the lab if there were a suitable opportunity.
Would asking about an internship be reasonable, or would it be better to accept the decision and move on? I’d appreciate honest opinions, especially from people who have experience with academic research labs.

The topic of this has showed up in a class of mine (not relevant just background) and to me the number of graduate degrees and just graduates makes sense since there's a disparity of men/women in academia; though the performance difference seems like a hard question to answer as to why it is, i do know that women study more on avg than men, but why?

this question is applicable to every single field (some more than others), it is just curiosity on my part not related to anything of my time in university or it. The question is also related to academics and their differences based on the category of sex.

im just gonna keep this short but are jobs limited in biotechnology? what is the job security for this cause i see so many ppl not getting a good job after education. tbh I do enjoy the subjects but I dont mind shifting to another path if it means better pay and less time consuming.

what are some other options I could look into?

Hi folks! I hope all is well!
You may remember me as the one who posted about thank-you notes; well, thanks for the advice, because it worked, and I have been invited to an on-campus interview (R1, Midwest), in a humanities field!

My main question is: what do I wear (he/him)? I am sorry to ask what may seem like a rather obvious question, but fashion and expectations change over time, and I would rather be safe than sorry! I don’t have the full schedule yet, but the interview is approaching. I arrive on day X, and the visit takes place on days X+1 and X+2.

Is a full suit and tie mandatory for the job talk and meetings with the dean (and chair?)? Would a nice pair of chinos or flannel pants, a non-matching blazer, a shirt, and a tie be acceptable for those occasions? Would a shirt, chinos, and a sweater be acceptable for dinner or on the day without the job talk and meetings with higher-ups?

Also, do you have any more general advice about dos and don’ts that candidates frequently overlook? English is not my native language, so I would particularly appreciate any advice on whether that is something I should keep in mind during the interview, beyond the obvious need to communicate clearly.

Thanks in advance!

Grading students on accuracy on a topic they are NOT supposed to understand yet is extremely silly. It impacts their future prospects whether it be college admissions, job interviews, grad school ect ect and with how hyper competitive these spaces have become, it’s borderline punishing to have such weight on these assignments. This only prompts students to maximize their grade which is done through cheating 99% of the time, which in turn diminishes real understanding and reinforcement which is what homework is supposed to be. This is all things I started thinking about after I say the trending declarations by the UC Berkeley professor stating he will no longer place weight on the HW scores for his course.

So as the title says, I have been toying with the idea of applying for a History PHD. I'm only at the "thinking about it" stage, and so far have only browsed my local uni's requirements page. I have always had an interest in history, and I love the hands-on aspect of research. It was this hands-on interest in research that led me to completing a Masters is Library and Information Studies (MLIS). This degree is unique because it can be either course based or thesis based. I started with the course based option, changed my mind and tried to pivot towards the thesis based but due to general world chaos (this was during peak pandemic), I wasn't able to write a thesis. So, I have a course-based MLIS and only assignments to prove my academic prowess.

Also, I have never been a social student. During my undergrad, I didn't intend to go to grad school so didn't get to know any of my professors. It was luck that I was able to get my reference letters for my grad school application.

And THEN, as mentioned, my MLIS happened during the pandemic and I spent my time in grad school going back and forth between online and in-person classes. Because of this, plus not being a very social person, I don't think a single one of my professors would remember me. It has also been four years since I graduated.

So basically, my questions are below:

1. Can I apply with my course-based MLIS? I have coursework that I received very good grades on and could hopefully apply with.
2. What do I do about reference letters? I would need three academic reference letters, but I don't have any academic connections anymore. Like none at all. I would feel so awkward and a little desperate contacting my professors now.
3. Should I just start from scratch and complete an MA in History and hope I can continue into a PHD from there? I am honestly just itching to get back into historical research, I miss it so much. I just wanna be a full time nerd again!

For extra background info, I would be studying in Canada and I completed my BA in Art History and MLIS in Canada.

Thank you!

Edit: Somehow I completely forgot that applying for an MA would also require reference letters. I have professional references I would ask, but only from one employer. So three reference letters from the same place... I fear I have hit a wall.

As a grad student, I sign up for both thesis and research hours each semester to keep my course load full time for my fellowship. I wonder if the university receives all of that money, or does my PI get paid through those hours as well?

I'm in the US for context. Truly just curious. I would almost hope she does get a portion of it directly for all she does for us.

i’m a current undergraduate jr and a history and political science double major. i know i want to pursue a phd but i am having a hard time deciding whether to apply to history or poli sci programs. i really enjoy both of my majors but i get the sense that i would enjoy historical research more than political research. i am not a very big quant person, and if i did do political research i would 100% want it to be qualitative but a lot of poli sci programs are becoming increasingly quant. even then a lot of qualitative political research does not feel like it’s really up my avenue. i dont really want to concoct theories or anything, i sort of just like constructing events which is possible in poli sci but i feel like it’s more of a political history thing. also, if i went for a history phd i would not have to take the gre.

however there are a lot of reasons why i’m gravitating towards poli sci too. i would miss poli sci. i feel like you get more history in poli sci than you do poli sci in history. i also feel like it’s more flexible - there’s think tanks, ngos and non profits, and government (though i know these jobs are also competitive) whereas if i got the history degree it would be academia or nothing and i know the market is awful. i am not interested in pivoting to archives, museums, or k12 teaching.

what do you all think?

All my life (20+ years in my 29years old life) becoming an astrophysicist, and later on cosmologist has been my goal. Kept working towards it steadily. Did physics hons from DU, and went on to pursue masters in astrophysics from University of London. The year (2021) I came back home after finishing my masters, everything took a very unexpected turn. PhD was supposed to be the next thing on my journey. You don't realise what kinda hold your parents or closest family members have over your mental status untill it hits you right in the face. Every single thing in my household and in my own mind became so chaotic that I got off the track. My life paused. Now I'm not gonna delve deeper into it and bore the heck out of anyone who's bothered to read this (again no expectation, but still hopeful).

So after about 5 years I want to resume, get back on the track to the only thing that actually makes me feel my existence isn't a waste. I wanna study the heck out of cosmos. During my break I took classes, workshops and courses whenever I could so that I wouldn't disconnect from the field. Alas, I haven't had any major research experience that most PhD programs look for. Which is completely valid from their pov.

I know I have to restart with small experiences, whatever I can get. What I didn't know was that even those small experience opportunities are so very difficult to come by. I have cold mailed quite a few professors in my field asking for a chance to work under them, whatever small role it may be. Because I know that chance to gain experience will be a tremendous boon for me. But it's been near to impossible to get a single role as an assistant or anything in a research group.

I keep trying to be involved in my field as much I can on my own. Like I'm trying to write a paper with a survey data I was fortunate enough to come across. Joined a student based astro research group. Whatever I can do.

So why am I writing my background here, because I'm desperate. I'm hoping if there's even one person here who's an astrophysicist and is looking for someone to help out with their research, whatever minor role it is, give me a chance. I don't know if I can be a valuable addition to your group but what I can guarantee is that I will do my best, learn from you with my full capacity and hopefully my consistency, willingness and desperation to continue research will help you out in return. It literally might be the turning point for my life.

As for my background, my thesis during masters was about late cosmic acceleration with a potential DE candidate as its one of many theorized solutions. Since I am a postgraduate, I'm good with scientific coding, latex, etc. Also as I mentioned, I have been taking online courses for ML in physics, Quantum Grav, etc. And currently I'm working on a small project with radio data from HI4PI survey.

Basically, I'm hanging in here. Still hopeful despite my closest people/family telling me that my life and career is over, in their words "shob shesh. Er aar kichhui hobe na."

Thanks for sparing your valuable time on this post.

Hello! I'm a PhD student whose undergraduate degree is in a different field from my PhD department. I have spent far more time learning about my PhD subject than my undergraduate one, which I have comparatively less interest in anyway. I've come to think that interdisciplinary research is increasingly more common, and that what actually matters is your knowledge and techniques rather than the name of the field you sit in. That said, I've found that having a clear "label" helps when talking to non-experts or putting together a CV.

So I'm curious, is your academic "title" determined mainly by your most recent degree? I realise publications are also an important factor too, but mine are spread across a fairly wide range of journals, so I'm not sure that narrows things down much.

I'd like to hear what the general rule of thumb is. I never know quite what to say at conferences or on job applications. Thanks :)

So, in my college, after a few semesters, you have to go through an interview to qualify for the next set of courses in the department. I had my interview recently, and honestly, it was one of the most embarrassing experiences of my life. I had exams right before it, couldn’t sleep properly, and then stayed up preparing for the interview. Since there was no specific range of questions, I had to review almost everything we had studied. I have good academic results and I’m genuinely passionate about my field, but I’m not someone who knows every concept in extreme depth. I studied a lot, but during the interview, I couldn’t answer even the basic questions properly. I was stuttering, which I don’t usually do, and I couldn’t express what I knew. I felt like I had so much more to give than what I actually showed them.
The professors already knew me because of my academic results, so I feel like they had certain expectations of me. They kept asking follow-up questions, and I couldn’t answer them properly, which made everything feel even more awkward. I knew some topics only from the outside, not from the inside, and I couldn’t explain them properly. Somehow, I still qualified for the next set of courses, which is supposed to be highly competitive. Maybe my academic results helped me, or maybe they took everyone this semester because there were fewer candidates. I’ve done many things academically, managed events, and been involved in other activities, so I know what it feels like to perform well and what genuinely embarrassing experiences feel like. That’s why I keep thinking about this so much. I know I had more to offer, but I couldn’t show it. At the end, the professors even made a few jokes about my previous coursework. I was sleep-deprived, my brain wasn’t functioning properly, and I still can’t stop thinking about how I must have looked to them. I genuinely feel like they may never consider me worthy of a project or research opportunity if they need students, because my performance was so bad.
Now that I’ve qualified for the next set of courses, I’m worried those professors will remember me for that interview. They’ll be teaching me in the upcoming semesters, and I can’t stop imagining what they’ll think when I walk into their classes. I keep remembering their expressions and how badly I struggled, and I feel embarrassed all over again. I don’t even want to look at my course materials because they remind me of the interview. I’m genuinely passionate about my field, but this experience has made me feel so low that I don’t even want to study the subjects anymore. Maybe I’m overthinking or exaggerating the situation, but no matter how much I try, I can’t get it out of my head. Academics is a very big part of my life. I’m an introvert, and I’ve missed out on many things in life just for academics, so now I feel like I’ve ruined things here as well. Please tell me how I can get over this. Please be genuine. I’m all ears.

¡Hola!

I'm planning to move to Spain next year to live with my partner. She's currently in Madrid, although we're open to settling in other cities too.

My Spanish isn't strong enough to undertake a PhD in Spanish, so I'm wondering what funding opportunities might exist for English-language PhDs.

Briefly, my academic background includes a First Class BSc (Hons) in Applied Psychology from Scotland, and I'm about to graduate with an MA in Clinical Psychology from Bulgaria. As part of my master's, I'm developing a thesis that I believe has strong potential to become a PhD project. Several professors at my university have encouraged this, including one who is originally from Madrid.

Alongside my studies, I have over two years' experience supporting people with disabilities in various aspects of their lives. My current role is Psychologist and Career Consultant, although I understand professional regulations differ in Spain and I wouldn't be able to use the title "psychologist" there without meeting local requirements.

I'm also part of a university research team in Bulgaria and will be gaining some teaching experience from February.

There are a few other things on my CV, but these are probably the most relevant.

Does my background sound competitive for funded PhD positions in Spain, particularly those conducted in English? Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

\Not sure if the flair is correct for this type of post; let me know and I will fix it.*