I am currently a graduate student and a member of an organization in my field. In my organization, there is this Early-career group composed of young scientists who already earned their Ph.D.’s, taking post-docs, and running their own research groups. In the case of graduate students, does early-career or the term applicable? and what is the difference between the terms early-career scientist, a budding scientist, young-scientist?

I am currently a graduate student and a member of organizations in my field. In my organization, there is this Early-career group composed of young scientists who already earned their Ph.D.’s and some are taking post-docs and running their own groups. So, can we consider graduate students as early-career or the term early-career is only applicable to my previous definition?

I am a graduated student and i have published research papers. My supervisor was a corresponding author on published papers because i am not a faculty member, but i have put my faculty as my affiliation there. Can i publish papers as a corresponding author if i am not employed there? Can i put any other faculty as affiliation? My goal is to independently publish the papers, but i am not sure about the rules.

My department is focused on teaching. We teach 6 classes/year with heavy undergraduate mentoring. It actually feels like teaching 8 classes per year. I know that there are grants “designed” for teaching institutions (RUI at NSF, for example), but to be eligible my institution has to be officially a PUI (primarily undergraduate institution). By all measures my department would qualify (no masters/phd degree), but other departments in the university are research active, so we are an R2 institution.

Furthermore, the university has been heavily pushing to be considered an R1 institution. They are giving a lot of resources (time/money) to these research-active departments. People at the teaching-intensive departments are at a significantly disadvantage since our research is less intensive, so we never get the internal grants.

When I talk to the administration the conversation goes like this (not literally):

They: …, we support your efforts to get grants.

Me: It is difficult to get grants due to the heavy teaching load.

They: People at (teaching department at another university) get grants.

Me: They qualify as a PUI.

They: That may help them, but if your proposal is good, it will get funded.

Me: To do good research I need the time to do it.

They: You can apply for internal grants to get seed funding/time.

Me: Most of my department applies, but we are not funded. It is difficult to
get internal funding when competing with people in other areas that have more time for research.

They: Then you can apply for external funding, we support your efforts to get grants…

In summary, I work at an undergraduate department, but due to funding agencies rules, I am considered to be at a research intensive institution. Also, I have applied for grants, and colleagues at panels told me (in confidence) that other weaker proposals were funded because they got the PUI classification. My research was not considered strong enough (for a research intensive institution).

Has anyone had this experience?

How can I maximize my chances to get INTERNAL funding when competing with people that have much more time for research?

How can I maximize my chances to get EXTERNAL funding when competing with people that have much more time for research?

Should they instead protect their tweets and Facebook posts and keep them private / Friends-only in their account settings?

Some profs’ tweets / Facebook posts are great and inform the public of their new research, especially stuff in machine learning / data science, while other profs I have seen use much of their tweets and Facebook posts to rant about politics, e.g. rants about Donald Trump. It seems dangerous for a professor to have all of his political feelings posted publicly on Twitter / Facebook.

The University of Southern California (U.S.C.) medical school is currently rocked by a sex and drugs scandal involving the dean of the school — and possibly other faculty and administrative leaders that worked to cover up the scandal.

Would attending a graduate program rocked by scandals hurt one’s chances of landing academic jobs afterwards?

Sources:

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/25/us/usc-scandal-carmen-puliafito.html

[2] http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-usc-dean-pasadena-overdose-20170725-htmlstory.html

The University of Southern California (U.S.C.) medical school is currently rocked by a sex and drugs scandal involving the dean of the school — and possibly other faculty and administrative leaders that worked to cover up the scandal.

Is drug abuse prevalent among professors, and is there any data available?

Should one refrain from applying and attending such graduate programs that are involved in such scandals? Would attending such programs hurt one’s chances of landing academic jobs afterwards?

Sources:

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/25/us/usc-scandal-carmen-puliafito.html

[2] http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-usc-dean-pasadena-overdose-20170725-htmlstory.html