As the title states, I don’t have Computer Science background (B.A. in Business Administration and Master of Social Work) but would like to do PhD in Computational Social Science (Data analysis or Information sci).

There are master programs, mostly professional programs, admit students from whole range of areas, such as Computational Analytics and Public Policy from U of Chicago or QMSS from Columbia.

But PhD programs don’t. Although PhD programs state on their website that they accept students regardless of their backgrounds, it means that they accept students from mathematics, statistics, or linguistics, but not from Social Work.

My interest is solving social issues by using computational approach. I have taken MOOC courses, such as Linear Algebra and Statistics with R, and I learned R and Python(both intermediate). I also have been working as RA in ICT in Bangladesh project.

To me, it becomes clearer that what PhD programs want is those who have solid CS knowledge and the idea of doing PhD seems to be so unrealistic.

Is it really impossible to do PhD in Data Sci or Info Sci without direct/indirect CS knowledge? If it is possible what should I do?

So after all these crazy days of trying to finish my application and encouraging professors to finish the LORs for me, there is the next thing – my professor sent the letter of recommendation (which he had to send just to the institution) also to me. I think he did it unknowingly, but now I am stressed again, because I should not know the content of the letter of course. I didn’t open it, but this situation is quite crazy. If I can see that he sent it to two recipients, it stands to reason that the another recipient can see it too.

Uhh. Does someone know what should I do now?

EDIT: It was a letter related to the grant application

I have submitted a small piece in two Journals, one for the Journal’s blog and one for an on-line version of it but haven’t heard from them for quite a while. I submitted to the first one on 12 May, didn’t get any response and I e-mailed them on 27 May just to make sure they received it and I finally got a response on May 31 asking for extended cuts. I expanded the article to meet the second journal’s standards and I submitted it on 25 June. Meanwhile I submitted the cut version to the first journal on 3 August. On August 18 I tried to send an e-mail to confirm that the second journal had received my piece and the e-mail that I send to the original submission address failed to deliver (I received a relative notification). Anyway, I e-mailed the general submissions address of the second journal to let them know of the problem and ask if I need to re-submit and have received no response until today.

I know that it may seem that it is not a long time but the short version of the paper is 4 pages and the long one 7, so it shouldn’t take much time for the editors to finish reviewing it (another journal responded within a week). Also I need to increase the number of my publications to apply for some positions asap. Should I try to re-contact any journal or should I just keep waiting?

I reviewed an article for a journal, suggesting some revisions. The authors made revisions and now the journal has asked me to do a second round of reviewing. As well as the revised manuscript, the journal also sent me the report written about the original submission by the other referee of the paper.

I’m not a very experienced reviewer. This is the first time I’ve got to see someone else’s report on a paper I’ve reviewed. When writing my report about the revised paper, am I allowed to discuss or respond to the other reviewer’s comments? (When I’ve received referee reports on my own revised manuscripts, I’ve never seen referees discussing each other’s opinions.)

In this case, reviewer 2 and myself wrote very similar reports, with reviewer 2 being a bit harsher. There is however one point in reviewer 2’s report that I’d like to reply to directly. He/she criticises the authors’ results X because they don’t also show Y. Showing Y at the same time as X has been a long-standing goal in our field. But nobody has ever succeeded, and recent studies suggest that probably X doesn’t imply Y after all. The authors do a poor job of defending themselves. There was no mention of Y in the original submission and I didn’t mention it in my report either.

In general, is it okay to write in a referee report “The other referee says… but actually…”. Or should it be in a separate comment to the editor? Or should I try to rephrase so that I’m responding to the authors instead of the other referee (not easy in this case).

Maybe I’m overthinking this, but it seems to me (i) I’m supposed to be reviewing the paper, not reviewing the other referee, and (ii) if this should go to yet another round of revision, it shouldn’t develop into an argument between the referees!

I know many faculty are concerned about diversity in their labs and it seems to be an ongoing issue. Will it ease PhD recruitment pains to have a searchable database of propsective applicants? Especially for minority applIcants. Not so much to manage the application process but just to find good fit and increase diversity in the group/lab.
My advisor prides herself in building a diverse lab and went through a significant amount of effort to find right persons in the direct applicant pool that fit her criteria.
Anyone have any experience with efforts to diversify their labs that proved successful? Will a secure searchable repository of minority applicants make it easier?

I have a PhD in computer science and recently I would like to get a postdoc with a respectful professor in my field to update my research works or after that working in more applied domains in companies.
I don’t know the steps of applying for postdoc positions specially in USA and Canada.

Thanks for any advice:)

I have the idea to commission a local artist to make an artistic version of a couple of figures I often use for presentations, and that I would probably use for my thesis cover. The figures does not present any numbers, but rather conveys the general idea behind the work (subject area is theoretical chemistry). The artist does not have an online portfolio, but a lot of his work is probably best described as “kind of abstract, bad for people who suffers from trypophobia”.

I already know that most of the conservative seniors at my department would think it is a bad idea. Normally we go with quite bland figures and monochrome covers (there is nothing in regulations stating that we can’t spice it up though). But I am interested in hearing what you would think, if you saw such a thing, a bit out of the ordinary.

I would, by the way, probably pay him out of my own pocket, as I don’t think my grant includes art money. And I am perfectly fine with that.