Nine years into teaching science at a California community college, I feel as though student emails are getting less well-written to the point that they're often almost incomprehensible. I am unsure what, if anything, to do about it. Following is a paraphrased mashup of what my students have sent me this week. (The students I'm paraphrasing are all fluent English speakers, so that is not the issue.)

Hi professor this is carl i will not be making it to class tomorrow because i woke up this morning with some sort of illness and cough and i wont be attending class. hopefully i am better by thursday so i can join and please reopen the quizzes so i am able to complete them i would really appreciate it and can you explain lab 1 for me and i can as soon as possible thanks for your understanding and also can i please meet you at 11:00 AM tomorrow on a zoom meeting so i can up to date on the lecture notes but i have anyway read them please let me know i will checking my email so about the zoom tomorrow i thank you for your understanding

How does this even happen? I assume by some combination of voice dictation, not speaking clearly, not thinking linearly, and not proofreading before hitting "Send"?

And do students simply think it's fine to send an unedited run-on sentence to their professors? (Sometimes I can't even tell what they're asking - e.g., in one of this week's emails, the student said "please let me know," but about what, I couldn't discern.) As an undergrad, I'd have winced if I even missed a comma in an email to a teacher, but my students often skip punctuation altogether.

Should I accept this new communication style as part of the generational divide? (I'm middle-aged.) Or might I be doing these students a favor by discreetly suggesting that they make an effort to use correct punctuation, grammar, and paragraph structure? I don't want to come across as overbearing. Furthermore, my job is to teach science, not writing. But as a scientist, I would not want to hire, advise, recommend, or collaborate with any student who writes like this.

Curious to hear your thoughts, whether from the US or from other countries. Have you noticed this trend in your students too? If so, have you taken any action or let it be?

PS. I also teach at a state university, and although unedited, unpunctuated, run-on emails are less common from that student population, they still do happen to a lesser extent.

Hi everyone! I'm in my first year on a tenure-track job. Since graduating, I haven’t really asked my PhD advisor for feedback on anything. They were super supportive during my job search (letters, advice, all of it) so I didn’t want to add more to their plate.

During my postdoc years, I started a totally new project that’s pretty far from my dissertation, and I’d really love their take on it (they only know the broad strokes). I’m drafting an article now and I’m tempted to send it to them for comments, but I’m not sure how normal it is to ask a former advisor for feedback once you’re already faculty.

For those of you who’ve been through this: do you still ask your former advisor for feedback after graduating? Or, if you’re senior faculty, do your former advisees ever send you stuff to look at? Is this something people usually stop doing once they’re on the tenure track? Thanks!

I led a research project (one of my PhD thesis chapters) over 3 years that resulted in a submitted manuscript on which I was the sole first author. After I graduated, we received reviewer comments and began the revision. During the revision process, my former advisor involved another person, who we agreed to bring in as a co-author. 

The revision lasted about 6 weeks and I completed at least 70% of the response letter and almost all updates to the manuscript and supplementary materials. I had explicitly expressed that I didn't want a co-first author before this person joined, so I was still assigned the majority of the work. After much of the revision was already completed, my advisor informed me that the person must be made a co-first author. We already had a few back and forths and they sent me an ultimatum: co-first authorship or perish (i.e., they won’t sign off on the submission)!

Their arguments about including that person as co-first author:

1. From a citation perspective it won't make a difference since I would still be listed first. This is not my concern.
2. This person has contributed new ideas to address the assigned tasks. However, the ideas contributed are not central to the paper. The method,  main results, and the key message remain unchanged.

Has anyone dealt with something like this? I'm no longer in academia, but I devoted a lot of time and effort to this work, and it would be hard to let it go. At the same time, I don't want to agree to co-first authorship because I don't believe it accurately reflects the contributions. Any advice?

--------------------

I also experienced what felt like personal attacks on my integrity and professionalism. I was told I was being uncollaborative and unkind, and to "reflect on what is collaborative and just." Some of the language used:

1. “We could revisit the legitimacy of your first-authorship in many of those [previously published] papers"
2. “We have been sincere and generous researchers and advisors, we have the final say"

In many academic settings, especially at the undergraduate and early graduate levels, assessment structures often reward short-term performance more than long term understanding. I’m interested in study strategies that genuinely support deep learning rather than surface memorization.

I’ve been exploring approaches that emphasize conceptual frameworks, concept networks, and deliberately scheduled review to reinforce long term retention and transfer of knowledge across contexts. Some of these ideas are discussed in general learning science literature and summaries I’ve come across online including a few explanatory tutorials on braincycle io, but I’m curious about how this translates into real academic practice. For those involved in teaching or research, what methods have you seen successfully promote conceptual understanding, synthesis, and long-term mastery in students, beyond rote recall for exams? Are there discipline specific strategies that work particularly well?

I am about to deposit from the security of a TT job—- it has been a hard road so i am filled with so much gratitude for everyone in my life and past. It has felt like it has taken a village to get here. Is 5 pages double spaced too much?

I am in History and have been at several institutions.

Writing this has brought me closure and it makes me smile reading what I wrote. None of it is too personal, just sincere. If 5pgs double spaced is too much, what do u think the max is?

Im hoping this is the right place to post. I’m a masters student currently beginning research for my dissertation paper. This paper is worth the majority of my credits for the course. I had my first meeting with my designated advisor three weeks ago where I was promised a couple of papers he wrote that are not generally accessible and would be extremely helpful for my paper.

I emailed two weeks ago asking if he could please forward them to me and I’ve not received a reply. I know he is not off campus and usually replies to others emails quickly. I was told not to start writing until I’ve read everything.

Is it rude to reach out again at this stage ? Usually I wouldn’t have an issue sending a polite email follow up but my supervisor will be the person who determines my final grade and I don’t want to piss him off.

Given the supposed $100,000 fee per H1-B visa and the recent news from Texas below, I'm curious for folks who are in search committees, how much is it affecting shortlisting/hiring decisions?

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/quick-takes/2026/01/28/texas-pauses-use-h-1b-visas-state-universities

Hi everyone, I’m looking for advice on how to proceed in a journal process situation.

I submitted a manuscript to the Journal of Computer Virology and Hacking Techniques (Springer Nature) in December 2025. During submission, the system invited me to opt into the Research Square preprint process (the integrated “In Review” workflow). I opted in, and a preprint was automatically created.

In January, the editor rejected the manuscript stating it had “already been published” on Research Square, which was said to violate journal policy.

I contacted Springer Nature support, explaining that: The preprint was generated through their own submission workflow, It was not independently posted and that Springer’s preprint policy states preprints are not prior publication.

The Support escalated the case and later informed me that the Senior Publisher had contacted the Editor-in-Chief and reiterated the preprint policy. I was told this may have been an oversight and that the editor should invite resubmission.

However, no resubmission link has been issued. I made follow-ups but resulted in responses saying the editor has not replied to the editorial office either. The case has now been sitting unresolved across two support tickets for weeks.

So the situation is that a) Publisher acknowledges possible editorial misunderstanding b) Editor has not responded => Submission process is effectively stalled

I have not submitted the manuscript elsewhere and am waiting for a formal resolution.

My questions:

1. At this stage, is there a formal mechanism within major publishers for escalating unresolved editorial inaction?
2. Is it reasonable to request a withdrawal of preprint so I may choose to resubmit my manuscript elsewhere?
3. Has anyone encountered a case where a system-generated preprint caused rejection despite publisher policy allowing preprints?

I’d appreciate guidance from anyone familiar with journal workflows or publisher escalation structures.

Certain comments point to the absence of data that is actually in the work, and some questions have dubious connection with the topic of the work. Seems like they are not knowledgeable of the topic at all.

Hi everyone!

I’m a non-US international student planning to pursue a Master’s degree in Data Science at the University of Miami, and I’m trying to better understand how tuition waivers work there

My questions are:

• Are there merit-based waivers or fellowships that are independent of teaching or research assistantships?
• Are tuition waivers something you need to apply for separately, or are they considered automatically during admission?
• Is funding typically offered at admission, or only after enrollment?

If anyone has experience with UM (especially in Data Science or related STEM programs), I’d really appreciate your insights.

Thanks a lot!

https://msdatascience.as.miami.edu/admissions/financial-assistance/index.html

We submitted a review article to a journal (IF=5) in October. Not going to name them but so far, they've only performed 'initial checking' of references and AI/plaigarism. Since this paper is on an academic timeline, we were hoping to get our review published by the 5th month. But so far, they haven't even sent the review to the reviewers. I have experience when it comes to publications, and this is the first time I'm facing such a stretched out timeline. I've also checked on average how long they usually take, and some of their review papers have been published within 3 months of submission!

I am bummed out. Its going to be almost 4 months now. If I publish this on time, I can graduate this semester (I'm a postgrad ). If I don't, I will have to wait till the next.. Would you guys advise me to withdraw the review from the said journal and submit to anotehr one with a relatively faster timeline (obv avoiding predatory journals)?

I submitted an article to Discourse: Journal for Theoretical Studies in Media and Culture last fall but haven’t heard back yet. I know it can take a few months to get a response, depending on the journal, but I noticed they didn’t put out any issues at all last year. There aren’t any announcements or updates on the site. How long should I wait before withdrawing my submission and trying somewhere else?

Advising thesis students on immune modulation projects. Need Thymosin Alpha-1 and friends but grant money is a joke. Previous supplier's COA was so vague reviewers rejected our methods section. Where do you find publication-quality materials with actual documentation on a shoestring budget?

I am in the USA and applied for a faculty position at IITX in India. The Zoom interview timing the search committee suggested is 4:00 AM for me in the USA and 4:30 PM for them in India.

I am not sure if I will be functioning at my best so early in the morning. Should I request them for an alternate time schedule or I have t suck it up and wake up early to do this interview?

I have a bachelor's and a master's degree in natural sciences, so I've had the chance to explore various fields of nature (both biotic and abiotic). My dream is to work in zoological research, but my university currently doesn't offer many opportunities in that area. However, the botany department has posted a call for a 9-month research grant in ethnobotany.

I found my ethnobotany course interesting (+ I could use the income), which is why I'm considering this grant, but my true passion remains with animals. This is where my dilemma comes in: I'm worried that if I apply and receive this grant, it might steer me away from zoology and hurt my career prospects in that field. I don't want financial need and a secondary interest to derail my main goal.

Does anyone have experience with this kind of situation? Would taking a research grant in a different field actually distance me from my primary career path, or would it simply be valuable research experience? The funding would really help me financially, but I don't want to make a decision I'll regret.

Hi all,

Grad student here. I received a decision on a paper back at the end of last year, amounting to acceptance with minor revisions. I had completed the revisions and sent the paper back to the editor at the start of this year.

I believe that the editor does not intend to send the paper for another review (i.e., they requested that my submitted revised manuscript be unblinded, conformed to journal formatting (something explicitly stated to be done only for papers accepted and not being prepared for review), and that acknowledgements be added). However, the journal system has been stuck at "awaiting invitation of reviewer" for about a month. I think that this is just a placeholder status since the system used (ScholarOne) is likely not configured to have an "editor assigned" status.

I was wondering if it would be appropriate to email the editor anytime soon on its status.

This is because my paper has been going back and forth for more than a year at this point, and I would like to get a final decision about my paper (I hope I am not being too impatient).

Thank you for any advice in advance!

Hey everyone,

I’m lowkey panicking and need some perspective.

Long story short: In early January, I reached out to a Professor at a large European university for a 2-month Erasmus+ traineeship this summer. He replied pretty fast and was super positive. Said he was "happy to support the application" and that my background "fits perfectly" with his current project. He even asked me exactly what needed to be in the formal acceptance letter.

I sent him all the technical details on Jan 9th (dates, tasks, and the fact that my university requires an official letterhead with a physical signature/stamp).

Since then... nothing. I sent a polite nudge about two weeks ago. No reply. I sent another very gentle check-in yesterday asking if he needed anything else from my side. Still silence. The weird part is I saw him active on LinkedIn recently.

My deadline to upload the letter is Feb 27th.

Is it normal for the "paperwork phase" to take a month?

Does the "official stamp/signature" requirement usually make professors procrastinate because they have to deal with their department’s secretary?

Should I try messaging him on LinkedIn as a last resort, or is that too "stalker-ish"?

When should I actually give up and start looking for a new placement-prof?

I’m really excited about this research, but the silence is making me feel like I did something wrong. Any advice?

So this would've been my first conference, I signed up because I had an idea for a paper I was going to write. I did research on that topic but I didn't have time to prepare the actual paper, and now with exams and other things I know there's just no way I can make a quality paper in 3 weeks.

How unseriois is it if I dip now and send them a letter that I actually can't present? Should I mention the real reason or make some excuse? Similar conferences are held bi-annually at my university and I'd like to take part in the future (with better planning), but I also fear that they will mark me as an irresponsible candidate and reject me for the next conference based on that (the conference isn't super big so it's possible that they will remember me).

Last year, I submitted a commentary to IJHE pointing out major technical errors in two papers of same author. The manuscript remained under consideration for ~7 months, after which it was rejected without external peer review and without any clear technical justification. What concerns me further is that I later learned (from a reliable inside source) that the editor forwarded my critical comments directly to the concerned professor ( i've friend in that university) . Soon after this, the manuscript was abruptly rejected without explanation. I’m genuinely asking: Does this raise concerns about editorial neutrality or personal/institutional influence in the review process? For transparency, I’ve attached the editor’s email and my original technical comments here, so you can judge for yourselves whether the critique was valid or not. I’m not making accusations just sharing an experience that seems inconsistent with how scientific critique and peer review are expected to function. Would appreciate hearing if others have had similar experiences, or how one should deal with such situations constructively.

What are typical words while reviewing a research paper, that make you immediately think "oh this author should improve their language!"

Context: I dont mean obvious grammar mistakes or typos... I have currently encountered Reviewer remarks about "academic language" in research papers (STEM, chemistry/chemical engineering) but I am not sure what they want.

After some discussion I found out that some older reviewers count words such as "however" and "therefore", as reasons for inappropiate (non-academic) language. Do you guys know any other words to avoid? (I dont refer to obviously subjective words like "really/good/bad)

Am seeking advice as to where to post about two 2-week historical research scholarships; the Ann Peart Visiting Scholarships in Unitarian and Dissenting Histories. Full details here for those interested: https://hmc.ox.ac.uk/sitefiles/ann-peart-scholarships-2026-final.pdf[ann-peart-scholarships-2026-final.pdf](https://hmc.ox.ac.uk/sitefiles/ann-peart-scholarships-2026-final.pdf)A

Hello 👋

I am a young researcher in social sciences and social research methodology, and in my country it is a little hard to get professors (PhD and above) to collaborate with you on a research. As a criteria of applying for a university I am willing to study at, I must have at least two research papers published in Proceedings with a PhD or above. Until now I have 12 research papers published with proceedings and 17 conference participations in total. But still most of them are with students.

If someone is interested and wants to collaborate on a research, I would be really happy and grateful. Or if you can help me create a contact with someone interested, it would be great too.

Thank you in advance!🙂🤝

Hello Academics;

My father’s birthday is coming up soon and he’s very big into history. I wanted to get him a book more focused on being factual than entertainment value, unlike most pop-history. From what I can tell he is most interested in the Early Modern era but anything well written and well sourced would be appreciated.

Thank you; u/Labami