Timeline for How to maximise one's chances of getting a good postdoc position?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
24 events
when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Feb 19, 2014 at 15:50 | history | edited | Espanta | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 73 characters in body
|
Jan 5, 2014 at 6:33 | comment | added | user10269 | @Espanta If you are asserting your opinion in a public forum, I sure hope that you are ready and able to defend it, especially in a question that is phrased in a way that makes verification quite easy. If you compared the percentage of people getting postdoc positions (with or without stackexchange accounts), my money is actually on the fact that people without these accounts will get better postdoc positions. | |
Jan 5, 2014 at 5:58 | comment | added | Espanta | @user14449, I did not publish a paper to put citation for every word appeared here. These are all my personal opinion and they do not need citation. People always refer to what they have personally seen or believe in not to the things that others have not seen. You are welcome to share your personal experience here and I am not gonna ask you any citation. | |
Jan 5, 2014 at 5:28 | comment | added | user10269 | @Espanta what you wrote spells out personal opinion to me. I still see no citations, and I have personally never seen anyone claim reputation points on their CV, nor would I ever even dream of even telling people that I have a stackexchange account. They may link people from their academic websites to their stackexchange site, but that is neither a requirement nor a reliable indicator of success. | |
Jan 5, 2014 at 5:11 | comment | added | Espanta | @BenWebster, Ya, good point. I was thinking of that. Sure I will take your advise. | |
Jan 5, 2014 at 5:11 | comment | added | Espanta | @user14449,stackexchange is a group of online crowd sourcing portals where ppl share wisdom & exp. to earn some credits e.g., visibility and points.Being active on technical portals is likely a good evidence that author 1-is knowledgeable in certain areas, 2-has good communication skills, 3-is interested to extend his knowledge and experience with peers voluntarily, 4-has interest to learn new things, etc. I have seen young researchers/industrialists are increasingly claim stackexchange reputations on their academic pages not only for academic postdoc but for positions needs skills shown here. | |
Jan 4, 2014 at 16:54 | comment | added | Ben Webster | @Espanta I'll just mention that probably the source of all the arguments you're having is that you gave a long list without any sort of prioritization. None of the things you've listed are bad, but some very important ones are mixed in with a lot that are extremely unlikely to make any difference. You might think about whether that's really a helpful way of addressing the question. | |
Jan 4, 2014 at 16:50 | comment | added | user10269 | @Espanta you misread my sentence; I was asking about stackexchange -- do you have any reason to actually believe that stackexchange helps to get a postdoc position? | |
Jan 4, 2014 at 15:43 | history | edited | Espanta | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 67 characters in body
|
Jan 4, 2014 at 15:41 | comment | added | Espanta | @JeffE, "single researcher being fired, denied a faculty position, or denied tenure because they had no patents" is secondary observations from the answer. I will be shocked too in that case. I just suggest to get into patent activity as much as possible and said nothing on failure of people without patent. There are more than 10 points to succeed in postdoc, only one is patent. I think better to let people read and interpret by their own to decide what to do and what not to do. To address your HARD concern on US universities, expectation, & patent I revise the answer. Hope it is settled. | |
Jan 4, 2014 at 15:19 | comment | added | user10269 | LinkedIn is already used very little amongst the academics; I'd like to echo the citation needed sentiments on how Stackexchange helps you get a postdoc position. | |
Jan 4, 2014 at 8:30 | vote | accept | Ondřej Černotík | ||
Jan 3, 2014 at 16:55 | comment | added | JeffE | Let me be clear: I am unaware of any expectation of academic researchers to produce patents. "Expectation" implies "if you dont't do this you are a failure". Researchers are expected to publish. Commercialization is certainly encouraged (more by universities than by individual researchers), but that's not the same thing. I would be shocked to learn of a single researcher being fired, denied a faculty position, or denied tenure because they had no patents, or hired/given tenure when they had patents but no publications. | |
Jan 3, 2014 at 16:51 | comment | added | Espanta | @JeffE, You're right. That is why I used expectation as milder alternative to obligation. Another example is McGill: "The commercialization of research outcomes is an important objective not just of researchers, but of most public and private funding programs as well." So who is researchers if not postdocs and lecturers? I reiterate that patent is more towards industry, but many universities worldwide encourage researchers to register patents and commercialize their idea. I think postdocs are also part of the potential patent applicants in academia. Anyway your point is applied in the revision | |
Jan 3, 2014 at 16:38 | comment | added | Espanta | @YuichiroFujiwara, there is no professionalism discussion in the answer anymore. Its wording is now edited to address the point raised by Jeffe. Thanks anyway. | |
Jan 3, 2014 at 14:13 | comment | added | Jonathan E. Landrum | LinkedIn never helped me do anything except waste time. The one thing that has proven extremely helpful was my website, where I published my work. As a computer scientist, that included programs I'd written. My website was the sole reason I got the job I have now. They didn't even care, really, about my CV that much. I'd proven to them with examples that I could do the work. | |
Jan 3, 2014 at 13:43 | comment | added | Yuichiro Fujiwara | @Espanta I don't see why the thread about professional memberships you linked to is substantial evidence that it increases one's professionalism, especially in the context of landing postdoc positions. Which part of it are you referring to? | |
Jan 3, 2014 at 13:35 | comment | added | JeffE | ASU is only one school, and it is not typical. It is true that patents are increasingly accepted as an alternative or supplement to peer-reviewed publications, I'm unaware of any expectation that a "majority of US institutes", in any field of study, "expect their postdocs to produce a patent". | |
Jan 3, 2014 at 11:07 | history | edited | Espanta | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 96 characters in body
|
Jan 3, 2014 at 11:05 | comment | added | Espanta | for professional membership, readers may refer to this page(academia.stackexchange.com/questions/8923/…) for lots of discussions and maybe references. I rephrase it to satisfy your point. | |
Jan 3, 2014 at 11:01 | comment | added | Espanta | For the patent, here{academia.stackexchange.com/questions/12947/…} is a quiet useful discussions. You can also read a line in Arizona State University about patent here {facultyaffairs.arizona.edu/content/…} | |
Jan 3, 2014 at 1:31 | comment | added | JeffE | majority of US-based institutes are concern about patents and expect their postdocs to produce a patent. [citation needed] | |
Jan 3, 2014 at 1:31 | comment | added | JeffE | Enroll in academic organizations like IEEE and get membership. It increases your professionalism somehow. [citation needed] | |
Dec 25, 2013 at 17:04 | history | answered | Espanta | CC BY-SA 3.0 |