Academic research Show more
* Done quickly
* Done correctly
* Interesting result
#neuropath Wed Show more
1) Nature Neuroscience has a special Focus on neurodegenerative disease
2) Tectal glioma as a distinct diagnostic entity: a comprehensive clinical, imaging, histologic and molecular analysis
3) cIMPACT-NOW update 3: recommended dx criteria for “Diffuse astrocytic glioma, IDH-wildtype, with molecular features of glioblastoma, WHO grade IV”
4) Lesion network localization of free will
3/3: negative terms, oppression Show more
I was actually being generous because I could have honestly said 'literally 100% of the people with whom I have conversed about this, graduate and undergraduate'
sociologists who take the stance of 'prove to me it is oppressive and only then will I stop using it' are scum.
Oh hey, it's my one year anniversary of getting on Mastodon. I don't want to get too sappy, but joining this website has genuinely made a significant, positive difference in my life. Meeting wonderful people, being exposed to people from all around the world and from all walks of life. Thank you. Thank you, thank you, thank you. It's been super fun, love you all.
Who thinks it'd be a good/bad idea to broaden how academics' status/success is measured, i.e. currently narrowly focused on peer-reviewed papers published in high impact journals?
- Authoring of books/chapters;
- Curriculum/course/resource development;
- What else?
P.S. A friend, who has tenure and a PGCE (teaching qualification), was recently shouted at by a colleague for wanting to do less research and more teaching.
Academic journal review opinions Show more
Reviews that are good: Good!
Reviews that show that reviewers haven't really made the effort to understand the paper: Also good, because they tell me how to help people read it; frustrating though
Basically the only reviews that are bad are the ones that make you go, "Oh no. That's a good point, I never thought of that, and it will take me years to redo it."
Queer academic at McGill
"Mend and defend"
Scholar Social is meant for: researchers, grad students, librarians, archivists, undergrads, academically inclined high schoolers, educators of all levels, journal editors, research assistants, professors, administrators—anyone involved in academia who is willing to engage with others respectfully.
We strive to be a safe space for queer people and other minorities, recognizing that there can only be academic freedom where the existence and validity of interlocutors' identities is taken as axiomatic.
"A Mastodon profile you can be proud to put on the last slide of a presentation at a conference"
(Participation is, of course, optional)
Scholar Social features a monthly "official" journal club, in which we try to read and comment on a paper of interest.
Any user of Scholar Social can suggest an article by sending the DOI by direct message to @email@example.com and one will be chosen by random lottery on the last day of the month. We ask that you only submit articles that are from *outside* your own field of study to try to ensure that the papers we read are accessible and interesting to non-experts.