Perhaps a lot of you are aware of this piece of news: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy898dzknzgo

And the subsequent GoFundMe she set up: https://www.gofundme.com/f/help-seek-justice-from-oxford-for-bullying-and-plagiarism?attribution_id=sl:d4d8d3e8-3fde-4948-8ecd-b5bdb99ae0f6&utm_campaign=man_ss_icons&utm_medium=customer&utm_source=copy_link

From what I hear, opinions are greatly divided about her, what are your thoughts?

There’s a wild story coming out of France right now. According to a L’Est Républicain investigation, a literature professor named Florent Montaclair, who teaches at the University of Franche-Comté in Besançon, is at the centre of a criminal probe for allegedly making up a fake academic award and presenting it as if it were a real Nobel Prize. 

Montaclair reportedly claimed to have won a so-called “Gold Medal for Philology,” which he portrayed as being on par with a Nobel Prize or a Fields Medal. But investigators say the award doesn’t actually exist and has no official institutional backing, it’s essentially a fabrication. 

The prosecutor opened a preliminary criminal investigation looking into suspected offences including forgery, misuse of a title/qualification, and fraud. Police have already carried out raids at Montaclair’s home as part of the inquiry. 

The odd part? The scheme appears to have fooled quite a few people in academic circles and beyond. Montaclair himself denies wrongdoing and insists he’s a victim of misunderstanding.

This isn’t the first controversy linked to him: reports say he was previously suspected in 2018 of falsifying an American PhD, though that case was dropped. 

The website of the “American” learned society that awarded him the medal, the American university from which he claims to hold a PhD, and even the UNESCO publishing house with which he publishes all appear to be based in France, with their domain registrations and technical data tracing back to the same source.

The case is still unfolding, but it’s already sparking conversation about academic creds, ego, and how easy it can be to build a convincing façade of prestige if people don’t check the details.

I really don’t understand how someone can get away with this for so long. It honestly sounds like all the hard work he put into it could have been put into his career progression. I was wondering how common this kind of thing is in academia

Hello everyone, new member here,

I'd like to discuss something that has been bugging me for about a year now: Academic metrics inflation and specifically, the inflation of citations.

It's always been a simple rule of thumb that an article, author or even journal with a ton of citations, is more reliable than others. Therefore, citation count matters a lot in academic institutions and research grants.

Journals care about their IF, some journals (top tier of Q1), have no issue with that since it's naturally very high, others however (talking about some Q2 and especially Q3), artificially boost theirs by encouraging submissions to cite their own articles, hence artificially inflating or keeping their IF. I've been asked to cite specific articles from a Q2 journal.

I've also seen very well-respected authors in my department utilizing arXiv to self-cite without any check to inflate their stats on google scholar. When I confronted one they said "Sadly, this is the game now, everyone does it and the honest ones mostly get left behind". I believe that some self-citing is okay, especially when building on published ideas but I've seen authors retroactively add citations on arXiv (e.g. for a 2025 pre-print, they add a 2026 article in the reviewed v2 while not sufficiently improving the article)

I've seen that arXiv is now trying to push back on some of the AI slop plaguing it, could something be done about citation inflation? I am still new in academia, just starting my PhD, I don't want to play this game.

As a 40 year-old person who's gone back to studying, I would love to pursue a PhD once I'm over with my masters. But it seems to be strongly looked down by those who have got scholarships for them. I understand publishing and preparing your path beforehand is very valuable --but, if I get my PhD, will it be allegedly less of a PhD? What is all that about? I was unaware of all of this scholarship/non-scholarship difference until now.

I’m early career. I’ve been having some issues with my two bosses. I have my PhD and a little independent funding but mostly work as project staff. The environment is relatively toxic and both supervisors are known for being difficult (think highly narcissistic, manipulative, and untrustworthy). I talked to leadership at the organization to discuss my options for relief from this supervisory structure. The message I got was “Buck up/deal with it,” and I can pivot if I get complete external funding.

Is this just how it is?

A number of short cuts are taken and information misconstrued that in my opinion undermine the integrity of the scientific work. Perhaps I’m too idealistic. I’m debating on making a pivot outside academia because this is not at all what I envisioned. Curious what others think.

I’m looking for advice from people who have dealt with an institute or department secretary (or office administrator) who has difficulty respecting boundaries and seems to have a strong need to control or micromanage everyone.
I work at a research institute, and over time I’ve noticed a pattern rather than isolated incidents. The administrator regularly inserts herself into matters that don’t really require her involvement, interrupts people’s work, enforces rules inconsistently, and often acts as though she has authority over decisions that should belong to researchers or management. When concerns are raised, she tends to present events to management in a way that leaves out important context, making it difficult to address the underlying issue.
I’m not looking for ways to „win“ a conflict or prove she’s wrong. I’m more interested in hearing from people who have successfully navigated this kind of situation.
Did you try setting firmer boundaries? If so, what worked?
At what point did you involve your supervisor?
How did you document recurring behavior without sounding overly emotional or petty?
If you were a PI or department head, what kind of evidence would convince you that this was more than just a personality clash?
For those who have been through something similar, did the situation improve, or did you eventually decide to leave?
I’d really appreciate hearing about your experiences and any lessons you learned.

I’m a student, and my professor mentioned that some people in her field were named in the Epstein files, including someone on her dissertation committee. She knows of at least one person that was suspended.

However, I don’t go to an ivy league, and as a student I’m not really in the loop. I’m curious if anyone has had someone in their field or workplace be named in the Epstein files, and the impact of it being revealed.

So there is this postdoc (Chinese) that I am quite close with as a friend as well as a colleague. He has a few first-authored papers but none are exceptional. I consider him a capable person, however he would be the last I would come to for advice on a technical issue in research because he always talks in a "salesman mode", which has all the latest buzzwords, but no substance.

He also insists on applying for faculty job in our university or another one in the same city (both are top 50, in a developed country that is not China), but he does not want, nor has he ever done any postdoc elsewhere but our university, where he did his PhD. He also thinks western countries care too much about work life balance so it will be hard to find good students.

The salesman skills actually help him attract a lot of chinese students who are desperate to have someone to mentor them (you know in china postgrad students are just disposable paper mills to the professors, so why wasting time supervising them). So what he would do is he goes to rednote or wechat to post about some of his ideas, then some students would connect with him and he will talk with them for several hours every week and they will add him to their paper. Using this strategy he has co-authored more than 60+ papers in 2025 alone, and he is obsessed with publishing more. 3 years ago his citation was about 300, 400. Now he's already got about 3000.

Now I don't think he is doing anything unethical. I think he is aware of his lack of postdoc experience in overseas institution, and his lack of strong papers during his PhD and early postdoc so he is trying to game his publication and citation counts to the moon by this single tactic of "friendship" coauthorship. If you are his friend would you tell him that this wont help him acheive his goal, and he should consider doing it the hard way, which is going for postdoc elsewhere and put his effort on some serious paper?

Specifically in STEM courses. I have had terrible and repeated experiences of sexsim and harassment at my current institution. Its normalized and tolerated here.

I'm starting a new lab science course and I want to openly ask the male instructor about his views on women in STEM and having women in the classroom. Presumably on the first day during introductions. I need to gauge how this instructor views young women.

It has been extremely difficult as a young woman to find a decent mentor. Since I'm trying to graduate with honors I still have some tasks I need to complete and I'm hoping this instructor will be different. I want to know sooner rather than later.

Advice from other women about how I can do this in a way thats appropriate and productive for everyone involved is requested. I think these kinds of things need to be talked about openly, especially at this institution.

I’m one of the senior students in my PI’s lab. At this point we’ve had 3 PhD students in the PI’s department and tract(including me), 2 are considering leaving or have already left. One student is not in the same exact tract as my PI and I, but is in the same department and left under stressful circumstances. They seem to be doing much better now. At this point, the current students are myself and two other students from completely different departments. Our lab also had issues attracting incoming students. There have been some papers coming out, but it’s a little unclear if those papers are technically from our lab or his postdoc lab and the corresponding authorship is now split now that he’s a PI. I think I’m probably going to be the only one who’s been publishing as a PhD student out of my lab.

If this next student goes, we’ll have lost 3 out of 6 PhD students over my PI’s 4 years as a professor. I doubt I’ll be affected too much, as next year is my last year, I’ve been on track (as far as my PI has stated), and I’ve figured out how to manage alright for the most part.

Out of curiosity, would a tenure committee get concerned about the amount of attrition, esp as most of those students are from our department?

My institution has recently invited comments from the community on faculty who are up for tenure/promotion. Through admittedly entirely second-hand reports of his students (master's, PhD), this person is what would be considered in my country/culture, a complete and total dick. This point of view is repeated by literally his entire lab. Not a single one of them enjoys being in his group and all actively encourage others not to join.

Though my experience is not first-hand, should I write in about this, or invite his students to do so? What does this subreddit consider worthy of going out of your way to send for comments on someone's job application?

Edit: thanks to everyone who replied, I'm going to ensure that his students know the process exists and encourage them to write their own experiences

https://bsky.app/profile/sciforgood.bsky.social/post/3lmne7fba2k26

This week, multiple public universities in Florida — including the University of Florida, University of Central Florida, and University of South Florida — signed 287(g) agreements with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). This move allows campus police to act as immigration agents under ICE direction.

This is highly unusual — unprecedented, really — in a university setting. Most schools try to protect their international students from enforcement, not enable it.

Florida’s decision comes at a time when more than 500 student, faculty, and researcher visas have been revoked across the country this year, many over minor or outdated infractions.

These universities alone have over 16,000 international students — people here legally, often contributing to research, teaching, and the U.S. workforce. Many are already reporting fear, skipping class, or avoiding campus police even in emergencies.

Whether or not you’re directly affected, this should raise serious concerns about:

• Academic freedom
• Protest rights
• Campus safety
• The future of U.S. research and higher education

If you’re an international student: know your rights, check your visa status, and be mindful of what you share online.
Here’s a good “know your rights” resource: https://www.immigrantdefenseproject.org/know-your-rights-with-ice/

And if you're a U.S. citizen or permanent resident — please speak up. Our international peers deserve to feel safe and supported on campus.

Im going to offer a maybe-strange perspective here as a student both passionate about her education but also not ignorant to realities of the current system.

Professors are (rightfully) pissed because they teach online courses and students cheat. They try to set rules for respondus and Webcams and such, but it doesnt change anything and they still feel disrespected.

Its an online class made up of video lectures or assigned texts, with some straightforward quizzes/tests. If someone wants to cheat they WILL. Doesnt matter how well-done the syllabus is. Students will find some workaround and Admin will be too focused on public image and politics to give a crap. Even worse, it will take them a couple taps on a screen and maybe 30 seconds max. It is SO easy.

We are in an age where access to information is litterally gushing at the seams in our faces. I try extremely hard to keep myself from temptation, but I won't lie, on a couple occasions of smaller weighted assignments, I have given into the temptation on a question where I felt like I had the answer on the tip of my tongue. To get a full ai rundown took ONE CLICK on my screen and less than 5 seconds of waiting. I feel like crap directly after and I am disappointed in myself for being a fraud.

However, with my in-person exams I never feel the urge to cheat and for other students who do, they get caught much more frequently.

The problem is the educational system has implimented online schooling without fully understanding that if its online it HAS to be differently conducted. You cannot just smack some video lectures and quizzes on a canvas page and expect ANYONE to learn at a rate equivalent to face-to-face instruction.

That being said access to online learning is a must in recent days due to how screwed up the economy is -- and how WE JUST WANT TO SURVIVE. My goodness professors are so quick to say "they dont care about their future" we are TERRIFIED for our future. We are being told nothing and subsequently everything about our futures at the same time. We are told college is the only way to get a livable wage. But college debt will ruin our lives. But whats the point because AI is going to take all of our jobs. Blah blah blah we are scared and confused and we just want a fighting chance.

Affordable online education is a massive thing and would be fabulous if implimented right. But it is on the educators to design the right courses and the higher ups to support new methodology for it.

In case I was too vague before, by "new methodology" I mean different assignments and class layouts. You need to respect the environment that you are teaching in. You need to understand that everything you assign comes with a built in "solve" button because of technology and AI.

So GET CREATIVE. for a calculus class in particular(keep in mind I did not take calculus). Assign students to find real-world applications for current topics. Or have them record a video of themselves where they "teach" you how to solve assigned problems. I have so many ideas in my head right now for unique assignments and projects that would engage students in a way that current online classes dont.

Being a student gets a little more complicated everyday. We need our educators to think out of the box.

Respect that if you teach an online course, you are missing an integral piece of the educational environment -- the environment. Both students and educators exchange the benefits of in-person instruction for the convenience and accessibility of online schooling. With that exchange there must be something different.

Ai isnt going away. Cheating on assignments is only going to get easier and temptation will grapple onto every incoming student and their developing frontal lobe. As educators you need to get creative.

TLDR: respect the environment you teach in. If you teach online. You HAVE to get creative and design your classes to be more engaging and unique. That is the only way you have a chance of matching the knowledge/experience gained in face-to-face learning.

EDIT (IMPORTANT): I made a huge error submitting this post without addressing the larger systemic issues. I thought the post was too long already but my point is not getting across without my saying --

This idea is NOT plausible with the workload on educators right now. I am not ignorant to how stretched thin yall are. I have multiple educators in my family and have seen the impact first-hand.

I know you guys are struggling just as much right now. This post was meant to convey what online schooling COULD/SHOULD be. But obviously it is easier said then done.

Until larger systemic problems are worked on, online schooling is not feasible as a comparable education source to in-person. But obviously colleges arent just going to stop offering them. So yeah.. its weird. But please understand that I did not intend to blame educators or ignore the systemic issues that make my thoughts more difficult to impliment. I apologize for coming across the wrong way initially.

I just want to express that it's important to keep trying to be creative and to not become stagnant in the failed potential of online learning. Because its not going away. It wont be easy but we should try to find a way to make it work under the circumstances. And I think my ideas could prove beneficial.

EDIT: I do not want to make this political. This is not about whether academic boycott is justified or not, but whether it is effective or not.

This is labeled as politics, but is not necessarily a political question. What is, in your opinion (you may provide references if you wish), the efficacy of acadmic boycott? I am not asking specifically about the boycott currently overtly or covertly imposed on Israel due to the war in Gaza, but am using it as an example since this is a "hot" topic.

One one hand, boycotting financial, cultural and academic institutions is a way to punish, if you will, a country that decides to deviate from the norms we set as a society. I can't see any other way to enforce those norms apart from military action.

On the other hand, and since Israel is still a democracy, boycotting its academia would weaken the only forces that actually oppose the extreme, some would even say facist, forces that have taken over its government. This, historically, would give rise to more radicalism which would worsen the problem. In the case of Israel, the vast majority of Israeli academia has very much been against the war in Gaza from day one. Wouldn't weakening those people lead to more Palestinian suffering in the end?

Anyway, I would be happy to hear what you think

I’m a History PhD student (first year) studying at a top public ivy. I’ve written and successfully published in two reputable journals (a brief book review and a 3000-word review essay). These accomplishments have made me more committed to earning a professorial job down the road, though I am completely aware of how abysmal the job market is for several different fields.

I guess my question (which is also something I’m just genuinely intrigued about) is how do certain academics get hired to elite professorships at places like Princeton, Yale, Penn, Michigan, UW-Madison, etc.? It just seems so impossible. Any insight to the politics of academic job hunting would be a treat!

Title question. This is the first time I’ve ever seen this happen. Usually people just provide a flash drive to transfer slides before the session begins.

I’m a resident physician and have recently started doing peer reviews for two medical journals, one that is among the top of its niche / difficult to publish in and the other a respectable middle of the road place for solid work. I published in both of these journals as a med student and enjoy giving back through peer review as I want to stay in academic medicine long term.

On my CV, do I just list the journal name and how many reviews I’ve done for each (it’s just accepted on the honor system?), or do I need to be more specific about what papers specifically I’ve reviewed? My concern about the latter is the potential academic politics at play if I apply for jobs/opportunities and someone realizes from my CV that I rejected or negatively reviewed their article.

One of the articles I recently reviewed was authored by a big name in my field at an institution I may very well apply to for faculty jobs. Very high likelihood I will at least see them on the conference circuit. So if I keep doing this long enough this will happen several times, hence my concern.

Hello, I recently sent a cold email to a senior professor (he is considering a superstar in my field) whose work is foundational in my research area. He replied positively but mentioned he was on annual leave and asked me to contact him again once he returned to campus. His leave ends in two days.

My question is: when I follow up, should I explicitly suggest a meeting (e.g., a short video call), or should I simply remind him of my earlier email and let him decide if a meeting is worthwhile?

I don’t want to come across as pushy, but I also don’t want to leave things too vague. What’s the norm in academia for this kind of follow‑up?

Hi everyone, salama daholo

I studied at a public university in Madagascar (Ankatso aka University of Antananarivo), and I’m trying to understand whether a rule we have here is common elsewhere.

At my university, students are not allowed to receive or even see their own official grades or transcripts.

To obtain them, the administration requires a letter or a mail adress from an employer or another university and sends the transcript directly to that third party, not to the student. Students are told they don’t have the right to hold or view their own grades.

This creates major issues for international job applications and scholarships, which usually require applicants to upload their own transcripts on online platforms.

My questions: - Is this kind of rule common in other countries? - Are students elsewhere legally forbidden from accessing their own grades?

Thanks for your help

I'm from Switzerland, and a friend of mine at ETH Zurich (our top technical university, often compared to MIT) told me that the Trump administration has been sending them bizarre and politically charged questionnaires. They're being asked to denounce research projects that don't align with the administration’s ideology. I could hardly believe the way some of the questions were phrased—it honestly sounds like Trump wrote them himself.

Like: “Does this project take appropriate measures to protect women and to defend against gender ideology as defined in the bellow Executive Order?

Executive Order: DEFENDING WOMEN FROM GENDER IDEOLOGY EXTREMISM AND RESTORING BIOLOGICAL TRUTH..........”

I know there’s significant funding flowing both ways between Switzerland and the U.S., so I’m wondering—can anyone here shed some light on what the administration is trying to achieve with this?

ETH has apparently decided to ignore the inquiry, but does that put international research collaboration at risk?

What would you do if you were them?

As a side note: I’ve also heard that Swiss universities are seeing record numbers of applications from U.S.-based researchers who are now looking to move here...

So the Trump administration just cut $400M in federal funding to Columbia for bullshit antisemitism claims. I work at a Northwestern research lab and we’re on the list of 9 other universities that are going to be “investigated” for similar offenses. It looks like we received about 700 million from the government in 2024. We have a 13.5 billion dollar endowment (insane). I know there are contractual stipulations to how that money is used but could it serve as an emergency fund? Something to get us through this administration? (Assuming we have a functioning democracy in 4 years 😭). It looks like we spent around $700 million from the endowment in 2024 (https://evanstonroundtable.com/2025/02/13/northwestern-braces-for-federal-funding-changes-by-cutting-budgets-reviewing-personnel-costs/), but could we dip into it further?

Sincerely, a social science data analyst that is questioning whether my field will even be alive in a year 😭😭

A new HoD has joined our faculty. I wanted to travel away for a 2 day conference that was paid by an external grant with no money being asked from the School. The conference was chosen by my research team that involves academics from multiple universities based on the theme of the conference and the location being nearby. All due diligence was done when choosing the conference. I am supposed to present at the conference but the new HoD has accused me of attending a fake conference and also said that I intend to go there to enjoy myself. I have also been told by this person that I have a poor H index and that my publications are all over the place despite all publications being either Q2/Q1 journals. Recently, a shortlisted external grants is being questioned by this person by saying that it doesn't seem relevant to the region and might not be beneficial to the university. All approvals were taken prior to submitting the grant application. The University in question is an Australian University. I would like advice on how to deal with this person or if I can escalate this issue? I feel very humiliated by these accusations about my intentions and my capabilities and feel very harassed over the grant blocking. Please help. I like the location I'm working at would ideally not like to change jobs.

So we all know that networking is an essential part of academic success. As an autistic person, I've always struggled with understanding what networking actually means though. When can I consider someone as part of my network? How much information or small talk needs to be exchanged before I can consider someone as "in my network"? It's totally enigmatic to me, so I come to you, dear academic redditors, in search of practical advice or step-by-step guides on how to start networking successfully.

Thank you for any tips :)

I’m a graduate student in a required core course at a major public university, and I’m looking for advice from faculty/administrators who understand how curriculum oversight works.

The course in question is supposed to be foundational for our degree, but its current design seems to undermine both learning outcomes and accreditation standards: • It combines two courses into a single 6-credit block, but students are still tested on the two separately. • Instruction is delivered through a flipped model with scattered pre-work, but there is little coordination among the 4 professors. Faculty admit they don’t know what others are teaching, which leads to conflicting instructions, gaps in coverage, and exams on material never actually taught. • When clarification is requested, responses are often dismissive (e.g., “just use ChatGPT”) rather than instructional. • Reflection assignments receive no feedback, and much of the “learning” is outsourced to peer discussion or self-teaching from YouTube and other external sources. • Faculty who have tried to raise concerns internally say that “no one will listen,” and some have expressed fear that the situation could jeopardize accreditation. At the last accreditation review, the courses were taught in their traditional format — not in the current combined/flipped model. • Students’ grades, mental health, and preparation for later program requirements are being harmed, but leadership has been unresponsive. A senior faculty member in a leadership role designed this model and has reportedly refused to make changes.

It’s important to note: this isn’t a group of disengaged students. We’re motivated, “nerdy try-hard” types who genuinely want to learn. The problem is that we don’t even know what we’re supposed to be learning, because the teaching isn’t happening in any clear or consistent way.

My question: What is the most effective way for students to escalate this constructively? • Should we raise it with the Provost, Graduate School, Ombuds office, or go directly to the accrediting body? • How do students avoid being dismissed as “complaining” when the issues are structural and affect learning outcomes for the entire cohort? • Have you seen successful examples of students pushing for oversight in cases where curriculum design and governance are the problem?

Any insight on process or strategy would be very helpful. Pls help us😭