Dorsa Amir has an excellent post titled Modest Advice For New Students. If you are going to read one thing about doing well in graduate school, click on the link and read that instead—it’s exhaustive and very wise. But if you’re going to read two things, read this current post as well, because I say some things that Dorsa doesn’t.
Your first advice of reading widely really hits strong, especially since it not only connects with writing regularly but also enhances thought processes. I want to study psychology when I go to college but I'm also thinking about learning about philosophy or music. So when I'm reading about these topics I often see connections between multiple different fields of studies, and it's interesting to connect the dots in my mind. I think I'll be open to reading about many other topics throughout the rest of my high school years before gradually gaining deeper knowledge.
I'm about to become director of graduate studies so have been thinking a lot about AI. It would be nice to think that the students who apply to grad school are the ones who held out against the temptations of AI, and so wrote their own papers and did all of the assigned reading. But we have to anticipate that some did not, and will arrive to grad school hoping to bamboozle their graduate professors in the same way the bamboozled their undergraduate ones. The advice I want to give them is: You need to leave now. You might be able to fake your way through one class but you won't be able to fake your way to tenure. (I hope that's true.)
I agree that students (and profs) should write their own papers. Without making a judgment about this, though, I think it’s going to be nearly impossible to have a successful academic career these days without serious use of AI. It’s just too helpful in too many ways—those who insist on eschewing it will fall behind, like professors in 1990 who refuse to use the internet.
You might be right. The question then is, is there a line between using AI to be more productive and using AI to fool people into thinking you’re something you’re not?
That line should exist, but the literature is clear on what happens to human behaviour when we think we aren't being watched. It's going to be interesting to see how different sectors respond to the balance between raw output and quality, especially those where resources are under severe pressure, such as universities in my home (the UK). It's clear to me that AI has probably reduced that time that it takes me to produce a complex report on a subject I know really well to a tenth of what it used to be, but that's because I generally see (or at least that's the story I tell myself!) any errors that are being introduced immediately. It's arguably the subject matter to that is at the edge of our experience that is more risky. This is where grad students, indeed any student, spend most of their time. I guess the academy and the less than honest grad student are now engaged in an AI arms race. I'm sure glad I'm not the one that has to police that!
Perhaps a non-obvious approach to getting a good academic job might also be to speak other languages fluently? The US is (non-obviously?) Not the only choice in this great wide world eh?!
Many non-US countries do let you teach in English. Countries like Canada, obviously, but also places like the Netherlands.
To get to a level where you can speak a language fluently enough to teach a university class in it requires an enormous amount of work, and I’m not sure it’s worth it.
Most Americans don’t want to move to another country, particularly not one where they don’t speak their native language. They might do so if forced, but I think most would rather leave academia.
I see that you're an exponent of AI. Perhaps teaching in a different language won't be that hard for long. Also, if one does have to do the hard work to learn another language, and most affluent parents would agree that to give their kid an edge they'd be willing to pay language teachers, wouldn't that make someone more worthy of hiring so they can go to international congresses and establish sinergies with other universities? The way things are going, perhaps English may not keep its hegemony for long ,I'm speculating obviously, but boy would I love to see THAT happen though🤭 .
No, reading wildly about biases would take you to the understanding of how all biases are formed in the brain before it even gets to the prejudicial ones such as racial biases.
Reading wildly about racial biases would only make your memorising of identity politics stories well covered and ready to replicate and nothing else.
I suppose it depends one's ability to recognise the demarcation between science and pseudo science, a worthy aim for any grad student. In that vein I posit that any student should be an avid reader of philosophy, especially that of Karl Popper, with the footnotes added by WW Bartley and Dr David Deutsch.
Again, reading wildly and not only one version, does the differing naturally on its own. Reading only one version, the one presented by whoever you come across is gonna be political obviously
Pseudo science will tell you that racial biases don’t exist, and the promoters of only one racial biases as the only one they accuse others of but don’t admit to having themselves, will tell you their version is right.
Reading wildly all about those political ignorance and furthermore vastly about how the human brain works, how it forms ideas about subjective views and how politics use those to present them as objective reality, is all it takes to figure it out.
But it takes genuine interest in how the mind and brain works, instead of having a political agenda and just saying that you do.
Your first advice of reading widely really hits strong, especially since it not only connects with writing regularly but also enhances thought processes. I want to study psychology when I go to college but I'm also thinking about learning about philosophy or music. So when I'm reading about these topics I often see connections between multiple different fields of studies, and it's interesting to connect the dots in my mind. I think I'll be open to reading about many other topics throughout the rest of my high school years before gradually gaining deeper knowledge.
I'm about to become director of graduate studies so have been thinking a lot about AI. It would be nice to think that the students who apply to grad school are the ones who held out against the temptations of AI, and so wrote their own papers and did all of the assigned reading. But we have to anticipate that some did not, and will arrive to grad school hoping to bamboozle their graduate professors in the same way the bamboozled their undergraduate ones. The advice I want to give them is: You need to leave now. You might be able to fake your way through one class but you won't be able to fake your way to tenure. (I hope that's true.)
I agree that students (and profs) should write their own papers. Without making a judgment about this, though, I think it’s going to be nearly impossible to have a successful academic career these days without serious use of AI. It’s just too helpful in too many ways—those who insist on eschewing it will fall behind, like professors in 1990 who refuse to use the internet.
You might be right. The question then is, is there a line between using AI to be more productive and using AI to fool people into thinking you’re something you’re not?
That line should exist, but the literature is clear on what happens to human behaviour when we think we aren't being watched. It's going to be interesting to see how different sectors respond to the balance between raw output and quality, especially those where resources are under severe pressure, such as universities in my home (the UK). It's clear to me that AI has probably reduced that time that it takes me to produce a complex report on a subject I know really well to a tenth of what it used to be, but that's because I generally see (or at least that's the story I tell myself!) any errors that are being introduced immediately. It's arguably the subject matter to that is at the edge of our experience that is more risky. This is where grad students, indeed any student, spend most of their time. I guess the academy and the less than honest grad student are now engaged in an AI arms race. I'm sure glad I'm not the one that has to police that!
Perhaps a non-obvious approach to getting a good academic job might also be to speak other languages fluently? The US is (non-obviously?) Not the only choice in this great wide world eh?!
I like that! Clever and very non-obvious.
I don’t quite agree, though.
Many non-US countries do let you teach in English. Countries like Canada, obviously, but also places like the Netherlands.
To get to a level where you can speak a language fluently enough to teach a university class in it requires an enormous amount of work, and I’m not sure it’s worth it.
Most Americans don’t want to move to another country, particularly not one where they don’t speak their native language. They might do so if forced, but I think most would rather leave academia.
I see that you're an exponent of AI. Perhaps teaching in a different language won't be that hard for long. Also, if one does have to do the hard work to learn another language, and most affluent parents would agree that to give their kid an edge they'd be willing to pay language teachers, wouldn't that make someone more worthy of hiring so they can go to international congresses and establish sinergies with other universities? The way things are going, perhaps English may not keep its hegemony for long ,I'm speculating obviously, but boy would I love to see THAT happen though🤭 .
Read wildly about racial biases..
No, reading wildly about biases would take you to the understanding of how all biases are formed in the brain before it even gets to the prejudicial ones such as racial biases.
Reading wildly about racial biases would only make your memorising of identity politics stories well covered and ready to replicate and nothing else.
I suppose it depends one's ability to recognise the demarcation between science and pseudo science, a worthy aim for any grad student. In that vein I posit that any student should be an avid reader of philosophy, especially that of Karl Popper, with the footnotes added by WW Bartley and Dr David Deutsch.
Again, reading wildly and not only one version, does the differing naturally on its own. Reading only one version, the one presented by whoever you come across is gonna be political obviously
Pseudo science will tell you that racial biases don’t exist, and the promoters of only one racial biases as the only one they accuse others of but don’t admit to having themselves, will tell you their version is right.
Reading wildly all about those political ignorance and furthermore vastly about how the human brain works, how it forms ideas about subjective views and how politics use those to present them as objective reality, is all it takes to figure it out.
But it takes genuine interest in how the mind and brain works, instead of having a political agenda and just saying that you do.