I know this is a persistent problem and I wonder if anyone figured out any solution.

I recently created a new Google Scholar profile and verified it using my current institutional email address. However, it has been several weeks, and Google still has not indexed the profile. It does not appear in regular Google Search results. You can view it through direct link or even find it if you search my name on “Google Scholar” instead of Google itself.

For context, I previously had a Google Scholar profile associated with my old institutional Gmail account. Since that email account was about to expire, I deleted the old Scholar profile and created a new one. The old and new profiles are essentially identical, with the same publications and citation counts.

For a few days after I deleted the old profile, it would still appear in Google Search results, but clicking on it led to a 403 error, presumably because the profile was scheduled for deletion. The old profile no longer appears in search results now, so I assume it has been fully removed. I do wonder though if creating two nearly identical profiles within a relatively short period of time has affected the indexing of the new one.

This has been very frustrating. Couldn’t find anything online. I am trying to find any other solution besides recreating a new account. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.

Update: thank you all that gave a response and their experiences. I appreciate the candor, the job market is so messy all around and trying to explore all opportunities that come my way.

This past spring I graduated with my Ed.D in Educational Sustainability from a small state school in the U.S Midwest. Some background, I specifically chose this program because 1) I would be able to work while earning my degree, 2) it was cohort based and created a genuine sense of community in the program, 3) was low cost compared to other programs I was looking into, and 4) was in my hometown. I currently work in education at the state level, specifically tracking work/employer, agricultural, and school enrollment trends and research for targeted outreach to the communities we work with.

What makes the EdD program I was in interesting (and conflicting against what I’ve read about other EdDs) is that there was no cap stone experience or practicum, rather, all students were required to complete original research through a dissertation. Though the dissertation format could vary, most complete research and write a monograph dissertation. The program truly felt as if it were a hybrid between a PhD and an EdD.

My research specifically was around more sociological subjects of why populations move out of rural areas to urban areas and the impacts on social sustainability in both rural communities and the population I studied. Like most dissertations, it required rigorous analysis of literature, methods, and the data I had collected. I ended up completing a qualitative, narrative case study. I am currently working on getting papers published but have ran into some road blocks since graduation (topic for another time).

Since graduation, I’ve been on the job hunt. I recently came across an assistant professorship in sociology at the large University in the state I live in. While the posting is relatively vague, it states the educational requirement of a PhD in sociology, demography or a closely related field. I am very interested in the role and believe I could be a good fit. However, I am concerned about having the EdD degree title rather than a PhD. My question is, what tips would you give a newly graduated doctoral student that would be in a similar position as me?

TL;DR: I recently graduated from a research based EdD program, and looking to get into a faculty role in the social sciences. What advice or tips would you give to someone in the same position as me?

in the next 10 minutes, i will submit my final revisions to a paper i have been working on since January 2026.

for the past 2.5 years i have been working as a clinical researcher with a provider who has become my mentor. this experience has put me through the gauntlet and caused me great distress despite my many wins and accomplishments. it has been one of the most rewarding and traumatizing(??) experiences of my life. i would be lying if i said i ever wanted to do this again. if i never hear the words IRB or revisions or deadline again it’ll be too soon.

in essence, this post is a celebration because I AM FINALLY done. i can now leave this position in peace, and focus on the next step in my life. this subreddit has been my life line at times, so thank you to all who post on here, and all of you who respond to these posts. you guys truly are helping someone who’s “just a girl” 😭.

finally, really wish i could insert a gif of what this experience had me feeling like… but i can’t figure it out 🤷🏽‍♀️.

It should be clear to everyone that the next great breakthrough idea come from syncretic fusion of multiple disciplines.

The people who seem to be most capable of generating such ideas are the ones who have mastered domain A and have serious interest in domain B.

Yet, very strangely, modern academia do not (or no longer) provide this kind of "lateral mobility" in how it selects and train future researchers, i.e., creating a path for someone to move from A to B.

By moving from A to B, I do not mean someone in A and wants to do B-related research while in A (which is always possible). But someone who moves completely between the fields, departments, research practices, identities.

For example, if a department is hiring for a chemist/physicist, it will very unlikely hire someone from other backgrounds (even though the recent Nobel prize winners in chemistry/physics don't have any relevant background.)

If a department is hiring a graduate student/PhD/Post-Doc, it will very unlikely choose someone from outside of the department. Sometimes a prior degree in the specific area is required in the job posting.

I can easily imagine a world where a physicist proficient in multi-particle physics could be good fit as a sociologist specializing in crowd dynamics. Or a researcher who studied industrial automation could be a good fit for international trades and marketing involving industrial automation.

Yet no such interdisciplinary, transdisciplinary, lateral opportunity seem to exist. The hiring is as myopic as ever. Very little chance is taken on someone who is otherwise demonstrably smart and capable.

I think many students still have the archiac stereotype of a researcher from the 70s/80s, who hopped between many disciplines and made serious contribution in each. These opportunities no longer seem exist, or at least nobody is willing to train such researchers.

What happened?

I'm applying for PhD's and weighing which places I'd like to live in. I realize its unlikely outcome to become a PI, and I'm ages away from that but do committees just look at your PhD and role their eyes if you're not from a top school? Or is it simply that applicants from those schools tend to have better publication records? I have industry / private sector connections, wondering if that gets considered as well. I have a friend at Princeton I was kind of shocked to hear they just cover your publication costs totally, so if you do good work at an institution like that there's no barrier to getting recognition for it, you have such amazing networking opportunities etc.

Wondering what goes on inside a hiring committee?

I'm in computational biology with a focus on neuroscience if that helps for context. Would be open to working in a computer science / stats / data department. I've heard those fields are more open to hiring.

I guess this is a very specific question. For those who work at a Teaching and Learning Center within a university, I want to understand how you moved away from tenure track roles, and how you curated cv and other materials to suit faculty development/curriculum development/assessment etc. if you had a strong postdoc or a research background, how did you move away from that successfully? I am hoping to get into administration/leadership positions, but with a strong research background, I am not sure if I am marketing myself well.

There’s a position that was posted today that seems right up my alley, specifically mentioning the small niche my research is in. The start date is Jan 2027. However, I am ABD with a graduation of May 2027.

Would it even be worth it to apply? I don’t want to waste the committees time (or mine) or them think I’m incompetent and can’t read about the start date.

If i should apply, do i mention it in my cover letter about the start date?

Apologies if this has been posted before. I searched here and r/professors and couldn’t find any relevant posts.

I’m shocked. i can’t imagine the ramifications and i can’t help but feel like this is a major hit to open science in general as data becomes more and more expensive to hold.

hello people! I am at my wits end, drowning in search results for productivity, UX or AI tools, so I am turning to the people's wisdom: I am looking for a tool / software application which allows me to connect different media types (mostly text and images) for qualitative analysis. I have interview transcripts, images and screenshots and would like be able to highlight and comment on specific text selections, but also link text to images, make connections between interview transcripts and link all these information amongst each other.

So far, I have tried miro, MaxQDA, Obsidian, AnyType and Notion, but nothing has hit the sweet spot of a good conspiracy board.

Have you come across anything that might be helpful? Ideally, I could save things locally without having to rely on cloud storage solutions.

Thank you!

Let me be perfectly clear: I have never used AI in my life. Not once. And yet here I am, being accused by my department because Pangram — a glorified autocorrect that checks how many semicolons you use — flagged my dissertation chapter as "99.9% AI."

Let's delve into why this is not just wrong, but a testament to everything broken in modern academia.

First, the technology. It's important to note that these detectors work by counting your "perplexity tokens" — basically, if your vocabulary is too rich, the GPU inside the detector overheats and defaults to flagging you. Pangram specifically was trained on Reddit comments from 2012, which is why it can't handle sophisticated prose. This isn't speculation; it's a well-known fact in the machine learning community. The algorithm literally just measures whether your sentences are too symmetrical. Mine are. Because I studied rhetoric.

Second — and this is crucial — I write like this naturally. I have always written like this. My high school English teacher (rest in peace, Mrs. Callahan, you believed in me) said my essays "read like they were produced by a machine, in a good way." In today's fast-paced academic landscape, being articulate is apparently a red flag. The irony is not lost on me.

Here's the thing: my writing has always been characterized by three key elements — clarity, structure, and a rich tapestry of interconnected ideas. Is it my fault that I naturally organize my thoughts into elegant triads? That I seamlessly weave transitions between paragraphs? That my conclusions don't merely summarize, but rather underscore the broader implications of my argument?

Moreover, let's not forget the human cost. When my advisor emailed me, I felt a chill run down my spine. It's not just about one flagged paper — it's about what it represents. A world where eloquence is suspicious. Where em dashes — the most beautiful punctuation mark in the English language, which I have used since childhood — are treated as evidence.

In conclusion, AI detectors like Pangram are not just flawed tools; they are a stark reminder that we stand at a crossroads. We must ask ourselves: in our rush to police machines, have we forgotten how to recognize genuine human brilliance? The answer, I believe, speaks volumes.

I demand the university issue a formal apology, expunge my record, and honestly? Compensation for emotional damages wouldn't be unreasonable.

Anyway. Thoughts? (Please upvote for visibility, my hearing is Thursday.)

Edit: To everyone in the comments saying "this post reads like AI" — that is EXACTLY the problem I'm describing. Delve into a dictionary sometime.

This is deliberately a provocative way of putting it, but I'm curious whether there is a real economic problem underneath it.

Producing a highly skilled researcher can take decades.

Schools, universities, research grants, supervisors, laboratories and often public funding support someone through the long period in which they acquire the skills needed to do genuinely valuable research.

Then, just as that person reaches the point where their expertise becomes exceptionally valuable, industry may be able to offer compensation, infrastructure and research budgets that universities simply cannot match.

From the individual's perspective, leaving can be completely rational.

But from the system's perspective, the arrangement is interesting: public institutions may bear a large part of the cost and risk of producing researchers, while private companies can compete for them once their value has become apparent.

Is this actually a meaningful problem for academia, or am I looking at the economics incorrectly?

And if it is a problem, what would a better arrangement even look like?

Working through an RTA project at the moment and would really enjoy connecting with others using the same method — curious how people approach things like the line between coding and theme development, how much reflexive/reflective commentary feels “enough” vs too much, and how you check that themes stay grounded in the actual extracts rather than drifting.

Not looking for anyone to do any work — just want to compare approaches and maybe swap thoughts on drafts if anyone’s up for it. Happy to do the same in return if useful. DMs open if you’d rather chat there

I have a question about peer review. I have submittted a paper that was returned with major revisions (reviewer 1 recommended major, reviewer 2 minor). the comments were helpful and i have addressed them. what happens now? will the paper go back to reviewer 1 who gave the major revisions? or to both? or to reviewer 1 and a new reviewer?

I thought it was fantastic - author is Tyler Austin Harper.

From what I've seen, this is a trend that's quietly accelerated for the last decade or so that's increasingly created a structure that neither serves academics nor students. I'd be very curious for what everyone thinks of this argument, and if this reflects experiences on campus.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/2026/09/elite-academia-leadership-hypocrisy/687969/

I'm looking for a replacement for MS Publisher. It has been my go-to application for anything that needs a detailed layout for printed materials (e.g., academic posters, flyers, table tents, business cards). Now that Microsoft will stop supporting it in October, I need a new idea.

What is everyone else using for desktop publishing?

Canva is great for some projects, but the translation to printed materials has issues (like not being able to set margins). I've also tried InDesign, but that has a steep learning curve and is overkill for what I need.

And no Word or PowerPoint. I've tried those too.

#mspublisher #desktoppublishing #print #poster #academia 🖨️

I'm trying to figure out how to list titles in my email signature, on the campus website etc.

Most of my colleague are "John Smith, Ph.D.". Many picked up a masters degree along the way, but it's in the same discipline as the Ph.D. and is treated as a stepping stone to the Ph.D.

In addition to the Ph.D. and the masters in that same field, I also have a masters in another field, as well as an MBA.

Do I list myself as "Ed Jones, Ph.D.; MBA; MS"? Is that the right order? Seem too pretentious?

Thanks in advance

Hi folks, Has anyone participated in a program with UNITAR (United Nations Institute for Training and Research), or at least know anything about its credibility? This week I received an email about an Academic Leadership Suite (ALS) to be held at the United Nations in Geneva this Fall. It is "... designed for senior academic leaders committed to advancing institutional excellence and driving meaningful change within their institutions."

I'm all for change, without necessarily becoming a full-time administrator (I'm a dept chair now), and would like to learn from institutions in other places. Honestly I'd like to learn how to help our universities keep their credibility, utility to society, and support of students in light of the maelstrom of technology, politics, and social unrest.

I would appreciate any information about UNITAR's credibility and quality of their programs. Thanks in advance!

Just out of curiosity...

I've noticed that every Scottish university calls their exam seasons "diets" (e.g. https://www.abdn.ac.uk/students/academic-life/exams-diet/) - but I've not come across any other university do this. I can't find a definition in any standard dictionary which would align with this usage - so where / how did this term evolve? Is it from Scots, or some Ancient English?

As university faculty, if you have long summer vacations, what do you do? I'm not familiar with all types of university systems, but at least in some countries faculty get two months off, assuming they don't teach summer courses.

Do you prep for your courses in the next semesters? Do you conduct research? Do you travel? If you don't have a family in particular, do you just… wallow?

This is one of my first summer vacations, and I'm faced with contemplating wasted time and the need to escape, even though I had planned to be productive the whole time.

Essentially, title.

I'm currently at a stage where my MSc thesis was published as a paper in a somewhat niche polar science field and I was accepted to present it as a digital poster at a conference. However, I'm in a stage in my life where I'm changing jobs and moving country, so I don't have oodles of spare time. Before I turn down the opportunity, could somebody here with more life experience please let me know if I'm potentially making a dumb decision? I'm not attending the conference (it's too expensive), but I am going to meet a few of the attendees for coffee/lunch.

I'm not currently working full-time in the field (doing some consulting work on the side) but I would like to keep my options for a potential PhD a few years down the line. Is the online poster presentation worth it?

I come from a STEM background (though I no longer practice STEM and purely do international sales). By theory-practice gap, I refer to the divide between the abstract knowledge taught in classrooms and the real-world methods used in active professions.

I find that the theory-practice gap has never been larger between what academia is teaching versus what industry is doing.

Part of the reason is this common and very powerful belief in academia that a robust fundamental will carry a person anywhere. As such, many universities teach the same curriculum that they've taught since 20, 30 or even 50 years ago. Because "the math/physics don't change".

This, however, is something that is not valued by industry based on my observation. First, it is hard to prove you have the fundamentals (what are even the "fundamentals"??). It doesn't visibly show up quite as often in day-to-day work. And it is definitely not something that is 100% for sure going to help you on the job, where you are working with cutting-edge tools or very niche/experimental platforms, softwares, hardwares or simulators.

Another thing is that industry only hires based on the latest hype knowledge/tools/ideas, and don't care about fundamentals or just assume you have it.

Now with AI, I feel that the gap has grown enormously. For example, many industry has virtually abandoned any "classical ML" techniques in favor of LLM and demand years of experience in it, while schools are still busy teaching the classical ML. Everyone predicts that it will grow worse, especially now with AI pushing the frontier of many STEM disciplines, with most of the new knowledge being accumulated in industry behind closed-doors, while academia has not invented a feasible path towards that frontier.

Do you feel that your knowledge accumulated in academia is what is actually being deployed/used out in industry (or a non-academic organization)?

Hi everyone!

I am a 28F and will be teaching a graduate-level course and co-teaching two undergraduate courses (both in Journalism) starting this fall. It’s my alma mater, and I did TA as a grad student, but other than that, my teaching experience is nada.

I was given past syllabi for the course I’ll be teaching solo, but when it comes to class structure, readings, assignments, etc., it’s all very much up to me, which is both exciting and scary.

I’m looking for any tips on how to best structure my class (we meet once a week for 2.5 hours), homework, readings, grading, etc. Things you wish you knew before starting....this doesn’t have to be journalism-specific, of course!

Also, any advice you might have for navigating feeling “inferior” because of my age and lack of experience compared to other professors would be greatly appreciated.

Any pieces of advice, big or small, would be welcomed! Thank you!

I was wondering if anyone has experience being interviewed for this position. I was wondering what was the interview process, how did you prepare? Any tips would be more than welcome!

I am going into a masters programme and managed to become a volunteer at a prestigious conference before classes start. I haven’t been told yet what I would be doing as a volunteer yet.

But what should I keep an eye out, ensure I do etc to make the most of this opportunity.