New answers tagged

4

There are several mechanisms we have that in theroy should deal with this sort of thing: All academics must have their teaching observed by another member of staff at least once a year, but ideally once a module. All academics must observe someone else teaching once a year. When this happens a form must be filled in that says what the observed could improve ...


2

In our UK, Russel group, STEM department the Staff-Student liason structures seem to work well. We have a staff-student committee that is attended by any staff member involved in teaching and representatives from every group of students in the department. The students are there as elected representatives, but obviously they bring their own experiences to ...


4

[Converting a comment to an answer at the invitation of @hueblue...] I feel you are focussing on the wrong part of the issue here. It does not make sense to encourage 'management' to ignore the student representative's views; inevitably this will just create problems and bad feeling in the future, when students get the impression that their input is ignored....


2

Some universities hold "Faculty Development" seminars and even full day workshops. Sometimes these are required, especially of new faculty. It is harder to influence bad actors among the tenured faculty as long as their actions aren't egregious. But even tenured faculty can be influenced by a dean who makes attendance at a workshop part of the required ...


0

There are many quick and good ideas. But without someone doing a rigorous and systematic study to investigate them, which paper do you think will vanish in nirvana and which one will become the most cited referring to that idea. Academia is not much about who had an idea first, but who elaborated on that idea at first and extensively. I doubt quick papers ...


3

Quick papers exist. I have a number of papers that I wrote in a matter of days. Publication obviously took a bit longer, say one or two months, because of the peer review process. However, these are a rather specific type of paper: These are very narrow in focus, very short, and often more pedagogical than presenting new results. If you are in a field where ...


4

I have done "quick papers" before, in the sense that they didn't require as much time or effort to produce as most of my other publications. But there are some important reasons for this. In particular, these papers were almost always the result of my becoming aware of a very specific publishing opportunity which serendipitously overlapped with research ...


2

There is no categorical answer to this, as it depends greatly on many factors. One of them is the field: the paper output rate in mathematics is for example considered to be slower than in other fields (see here). Even inside the same field it might greatly vary. In my field (electrical engineering) it is not unheard of that three-month student projects lead ...


2

To add to GrotesqueSI's answer, while it might be meaningless to associate an exact number to "hard-working" students, as a lot of other factors matter, I am guessing you are asking this question as a way of setting a goal for yourself (or assessing your work-in-progress). A simple solution might be to pick a sample of 10-20 alumni that you consider to be ...


1

Ten...Thirty...Three hundred... I'll be speaking from the "/humanities" side of your question but I am sure this applies elsewhere. There's no answer to your question, I'm afraid. There is no optimal amount of publications and there is no exact number that would indicate "hard work". Ten low-quality publications in non-peer-reviewed journals or books would ...


1

The question can only be answered by an admissions committee at Manchester. But, like any other application, you need to show them that you are a good candidate to succeed in the program and afterwards. There is competition for any available slot and they want to make the best choices. A series of failures isn't a great endorsement. If you want to move, do ...


Top 50 recent answers are included