4 ms·
It is unpaid. A lot of reviewing for conferences is actually being done by Ph.D. students. They have to do it, whether they are on a stipend or not. Equally, a
by woodson 9y ago
It is unpaid. A lot of reviewing for conferences is actually being done by Ph.D. students. They have to do it, whether they are on a stipend or not. Equally, a lot of reviewing is being done by (in some cases, former) academics whose current occupation does not provide resources (time) for doing peer review.
- electricslpnsld 9y ago> A lot of reviewing for conferences is actually being done by Ph.D. students. They have to do it, whether they are on a stipend or not. Most (all?) PhD students in science and engineering are on fellowships, at least in the US. Major research universities will not admit unfunded PhD students.
- phlyingpenguin 9y agoOh boy, would I love that to be the case as an unfunded PhD student, working a separate job as visiting faculty.
- chrisseaton 9y ago> They have to do it, whether they are on a stipend or not. This is like saying that undergraduate students are unpaid for doing their homework. It's part of their education to learn how to take part in the community by doing things like reviewing papers.
- arglebarnacle 9y agoWell sure, but nobody benefits financially or reputationally from an undergraduate student's homework. There's clearly some proportion of having an academic's PhD students do this type of work for them which would stop being educational and start being an abuse. The question is, is too much of this type of work being pawned off on grad students?
- bervlad 9y ago> It's part of their education to learn how to take part in the community by doing things like reviewing papers. And this "part of their education to learn" keeps really cheap labor running science. Even postdocs are considered trainees, because they will always be learning because is part of their "job"