Dataset Viewer
Auto-converted to Parquet Duplicate
text
stringlengths
66
43.2k
### Instruction: In an interview right before receiving the 2013 Nobel prize in physics, Peter Higgs stated that he wouldn't be able to get an academic job today, because he wouldn't be regarded as productive enough. > By the time he retired in 1996, he was uncomfortable with the new academic culture. "After I retired it was quite a long time before I went back to my department. I thought I was well out of it. It wasn't my way of doing things any more. Today I wouldn't get an academic job. It's as simple as that. I don't think I would be regarded as productive enough." Another interesting quote from the article is the following: > He doubts a similar breakthrough could be achieved in today's academic culture, because of the expectations on academics to collaborate and keep churning out papers. He said: "It's difficult to imagine how I would ever have enough peace and quiet in the present sort of climate to do what I did in 1964." Source (the whole article is pretty interesting): http://theguardian.com/science/2013/dec/06/peter-higgs-boson-academic-system ### Response: It’s ironic to me that research has shown that productivity isn’t all it’s cracked up to be yet here we are.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: I'm pretty strict on time, to the point where I'll cut off the presentation if it goes over the alloted time (typically, I'll also give them a warning when they're halfway through their time and another when a minute is left). Getting your point accross concisely is a valuable skill and important to master in a business environment. In a similar vein, I put a max word/page count on assignments instead of a minimum. Students often seem surprised at that.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: This sounds like a problem with a specific professor. If my grading rubric has a time incorporated, you lose just as many points for going over as you do for going way under.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: This sounds like a problem with a specific professor. If my grading rubric has a time incorporated, you lose just as many points for going over as you do for going way under.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: This sounds like a problem with a specific professor. If my grading rubric has a time incorporated, you lose just as many points for going over as you do for going way under.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: I did a poster presentation where the time limer was 5 mins, including questions. I presented within the time limits, but no one else in my group did. The « winner » was a student that went 5 minutes over time. It sucked because I could have done a lot better with that 5 extra minutes too...
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: This would be totally unacceptable in my class. Every 5% over (or under) time is 5% off the grade.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: I did a poster presentation where the time limer was 5 mins, including questions. I presented within the time limits, but no one else in my group did. The « winner » was a student that went 5 minutes over time. It sucked because I could have done a lot better with that 5 extra minutes too...
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: I did a poster presentation where the time limer was 5 mins, including questions. I presented within the time limits, but no one else in my group did. The « winner » was a student that went 5 minutes over time. It sucked because I could have done a lot better with that 5 extra minutes too...
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: I did a poster presentation where the time limer was 5 mins, including questions. I presented within the time limits, but no one else in my group did. The « winner » was a student that went 5 minutes over time. It sucked because I could have done a lot better with that 5 extra minutes too...
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: I did a poster presentation where the time limer was 5 mins, including questions. I presented within the time limits, but no one else in my group did. The « winner » was a student that went 5 minutes over time. It sucked because I could have done a lot better with that 5 extra minutes too...
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: I did a poster presentation where the time limer was 5 mins, including questions. I presented within the time limits, but no one else in my group did. The « winner » was a student that went 5 minutes over time. It sucked because I could have done a lot better with that 5 extra minutes too...
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: This would be totally unacceptable in my class. Every 5% over (or under) time is 5% off the grade.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: I don't. If you get 15 minutes, your presentation has to be between 14 and 16 minutes. If you run short, engage the audience with questions. If you're running long, which you shouldn't (you practiced, right?), wind it up. I penalize if you go over 16 minutes, and I'll cut you off at 20 (maybe sooner, depending on how tight we are for time for the day). I would never reward students for going three times the allotted time. They'd never come close to finishing their presentation by the time I stopped them.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: Yes. Part of what we are teaching at the college level is professionalism. You will not be praised in industry, nonprofits, or government if you regularly use up more than your allotted time slot for presentations. Not that this doesn’t happen everywhere quite a bit, especially in academia. But it’s just as irritating in a business setting as it is in a college setting.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: Yes. Part of what we are teaching at the college level is professionalism. You will not be praised in industry, nonprofits, or government if you regularly use up more than your allotted time slot for presentations. Not that this doesn’t happen everywhere quite a bit, especially in academia. But it’s just as irritating in a business setting as it is in a college setting.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: Yes. Part of what we are teaching at the college level is professionalism. You will not be praised in industry, nonprofits, or government if you regularly use up more than your allotted time slot for presentations. Not that this doesn’t happen everywhere quite a bit, especially in academia. But it’s just as irritating in a business setting as it is in a college setting.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: Yes. Part of what we are teaching at the college level is professionalism. You will not be praised in industry, nonprofits, or government if you regularly use up more than your allotted time slot for presentations. Not that this doesn’t happen everywhere quite a bit, especially in academia. But it’s just as irritating in a business setting as it is in a college setting.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: I have a similar annoyance (though not as bad) with paper length. If it's a 1500-word paper, I don't mind 1250-1750 range, but then you get into stuff like, say, 2500 words and you start thinking "come on, these lengths are here for a reason." It's especially annoying if they're a really circuitous writer.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: Yikes. I tell my students that if they turn in a 30 minute presentation video (online class) I’m not watching it. 3-5 minutes for the first topic and 5-10 for the second. Anymore than that and I’m probably tuning out.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: I've never encountered a professor who praises people for going over time - quite the opposite in fact, usually they cut the presentation short or deduct points. I usually go the "deduct points" route unless it looks like the class is gong to run out of time for other presenters. Was this the same professor both times? Do you know if they docked points for going over-time?
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: If I give a 10 minute time limit, I cut them off after 12. And then I treat any material they did not present as if they didn't cover it and deduct accordingly. Time limits are very important and learning how to make your point concisely is just as important. We have time limits at conferences, I have a time limit when I am teaching, my students will one day have a time limit when they are pitching an idea to a client. We all have to learn to use the time given in the most efficient way possible.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: I have a similar annoyance (though not as bad) with paper length. If it's a 1500-word paper, I don't mind 1250-1750 range, but then you get into stuff like, say, 2500 words and you start thinking "come on, these lengths are here for a reason." It's especially annoying if they're a really circuitous writer.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: I have a similar annoyance (though not as bad) with paper length. If it's a 1500-word paper, I don't mind 1250-1750 range, but then you get into stuff like, say, 2500 words and you start thinking "come on, these lengths are here for a reason." It's especially annoying if they're a really circuitous writer.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: I have a similar annoyance (though not as bad) with paper length. If it's a 1500-word paper, I don't mind 1250-1750 range, but then you get into stuff like, say, 2500 words and you start thinking "come on, these lengths are here for a reason." It's especially annoying if they're a really circuitous writer.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: I have a similar annoyance (though not as bad) with paper length. If it's a 1500-word paper, I don't mind 1250-1750 range, but then you get into stuff like, say, 2500 words and you start thinking "come on, these lengths are here for a reason." It's especially annoying if they're a really circuitous writer.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: I have a similar annoyance (though not as bad) with paper length. If it's a 1500-word paper, I don't mind 1250-1750 range, but then you get into stuff like, say, 2500 words and you start thinking "come on, these lengths are here for a reason." It's especially annoying if they're a really circuitous writer.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: I have a similar annoyance (though not as bad) with paper length. If it's a 1500-word paper, I don't mind 1250-1750 range, but then you get into stuff like, say, 2500 words and you start thinking "come on, these lengths are here for a reason." It's especially annoying if they're a really circuitous writer.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: I have a similar annoyance (though not as bad) with paper length. If it's a 1500-word paper, I don't mind 1250-1750 range, but then you get into stuff like, say, 2500 words and you start thinking "come on, these lengths are here for a reason." It's especially annoying if they're a really circuitous writer.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: Yikes. I tell my students that if they turn in a 30 minute presentation video (online class) I’m not watching it. 3-5 minutes for the first topic and 5-10 for the second. Anymore than that and I’m probably tuning out.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: Yikes. I tell my students that if they turn in a 30 minute presentation video (online class) I’m not watching it. 3-5 minutes for the first topic and 5-10 for the second. Anymore than that and I’m probably tuning out.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: Yikes. I tell my students that if they turn in a 30 minute presentation video (online class) I’m not watching it. 3-5 minutes for the first topic and 5-10 for the second. Anymore than that and I’m probably tuning out.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: Yikes. I tell my students that if they turn in a 30 minute presentation video (online class) I’m not watching it. 3-5 minutes for the first topic and 5-10 for the second. Anymore than that and I’m probably tuning out.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: Yikes. I tell my students that if they turn in a 30 minute presentation video (online class) I’m not watching it. 3-5 minutes for the first topic and 5-10 for the second. Anymore than that and I’m probably tuning out.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: Yikes. I tell my students that if they turn in a 30 minute presentation video (online class) I’m not watching it. 3-5 minutes for the first topic and 5-10 for the second. Anymore than that and I’m probably tuning out.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: Yikes. I tell my students that if they turn in a 30 minute presentation video (online class) I’m not watching it. 3-5 minutes for the first topic and 5-10 for the second. Anymore than that and I’m probably tuning out.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: I've never encountered a professor who praises people for going over time - quite the opposite in fact, usually they cut the presentation short or deduct points. I usually go the "deduct points" route unless it looks like the class is gong to run out of time for other presenters. Was this the same professor both times? Do you know if they docked points for going over-time?
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: I've never encountered a professor who praises people for going over time - quite the opposite in fact, usually they cut the presentation short or deduct points. I usually go the "deduct points" route unless it looks like the class is gong to run out of time for other presenters. Was this the same professor both times? Do you know if they docked points for going over-time?
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: I've never encountered a professor who praises people for going over time - quite the opposite in fact, usually they cut the presentation short or deduct points. I usually go the "deduct points" route unless it looks like the class is gong to run out of time for other presenters. Was this the same professor both times? Do you know if they docked points for going over-time?
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: I've never encountered a professor who praises people for going over time - quite the opposite in fact, usually they cut the presentation short or deduct points. I usually go the "deduct points" route unless it looks like the class is gong to run out of time for other presenters. Was this the same professor both times? Do you know if they docked points for going over-time?
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: I've never encountered a professor who praises people for going over time - quite the opposite in fact, usually they cut the presentation short or deduct points. I usually go the "deduct points" route unless it looks like the class is gong to run out of time for other presenters. Was this the same professor both times? Do you know if they docked points for going over-time?
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: I've never encountered a professor who praises people for going over time - quite the opposite in fact, usually they cut the presentation short or deduct points. I usually go the "deduct points" route unless it looks like the class is gong to run out of time for other presenters. Was this the same professor both times? Do you know if they docked points for going over-time?
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: I've never encountered a professor who praises people for going over time - quite the opposite in fact, usually they cut the presentation short or deduct points. I usually go the "deduct points" route unless it looks like the class is gong to run out of time for other presenters. Was this the same professor both times? Do you know if they docked points for going over-time?
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: If I give a 10 minute time limit, I cut them off after 12. And then I treat any material they did not present as if they didn't cover it and deduct accordingly. Time limits are very important and learning how to make your point concisely is just as important. We have time limits at conferences, I have a time limit when I am teaching, my students will one day have a time limit when they are pitching an idea to a client. We all have to learn to use the time given in the most efficient way possible.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: If I give a 10 minute time limit, I cut them off after 12. And then I treat any material they did not present as if they didn't cover it and deduct accordingly. Time limits are very important and learning how to make your point concisely is just as important. We have time limits at conferences, I have a time limit when I am teaching, my students will one day have a time limit when they are pitching an idea to a client. We all have to learn to use the time given in the most efficient way possible.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: If I give a 10 minute time limit, I cut them off after 12. And then I treat any material they did not present as if they didn't cover it and deduct accordingly. Time limits are very important and learning how to make your point concisely is just as important. We have time limits at conferences, I have a time limit when I am teaching, my students will one day have a time limit when they are pitching an idea to a client. We all have to learn to use the time given in the most efficient way possible.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: brevity is beautiful.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: brevity is beautiful.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: brevity is beautiful.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: On a more general and pertinent tangent: If you're given a time limit, stick to it. Presenters have an implicit agreement with their audience where the audience is giving you a certain amount of their time. If you command their attention for longer, you're being rude and selfish in taking more than was agreed upon.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: On a more general and pertinent tangent: If you're given a time limit, stick to it. Presenters have an implicit agreement with their audience where the audience is giving you a certain amount of their time. If you command their attention for longer, you're being rude and selfish in taking more than was agreed upon.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: On a more general and pertinent tangent: If you're given a time limit, stick to it. Presenters have an implicit agreement with their audience where the audience is giving you a certain amount of their time. If you command their attention for longer, you're being rude and selfish in taking more than was agreed upon.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: All my professors have been extremely strict with the time limit. No presentation in a class of 20+ students should take up a 75% of class time.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: All my professors have been extremely strict with the time limit. No presentation in a class of 20+ students should take up a 75% of class time.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: All my professors have been extremely strict with the time limit. No presentation in a class of 20+ students should take up a 75% of class time.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: This is one of the perks of grading all assignments with a rubric, and students having the rubric a head of time. Adhering to the time limit is a column on my presentations rubric.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: This is one of the perks of grading all assignments with a rubric, and students having the rubric a head of time. Adhering to the time limit is a column on my presentations rubric.
### Instruction: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair. ### Response: This is one of the perks of grading all assignments with a rubric, and students having the rubric a head of time. Adhering to the time limit is a column on my presentations rubric.
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: "Scientific Journal of Research and Reviews" is the best name ever.
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: Using WTF as a keyword surelly sets an impact factor over 9000
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: Using WTF as a keyword surelly sets an impact factor over 9000
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: Using WTF as a keyword surelly sets an impact factor over 9000
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: “More research is warranted” has always been the biggest cop out.
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: “More research is warranted” has always been the biggest cop out.
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: “More research is warranted” has always been the biggest cop out.
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: “More research is warranted” has always been the biggest cop out.
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: Those acknowledgements though😂😂😂
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: Perhaps a little less complex, but there's also the classic paper "Get Me Off Your Fucking Mailing List."
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: Perhaps a little less complex, but there's also the classic paper "Get Me Off Your Fucking Mailing List."
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: Perhaps a little less complex, but there's also the classic paper "Get Me Off Your Fucking Mailing List."
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: Perhaps a little less complex, but there's also the classic paper "Get Me Off Your Fucking Mailing List."
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: Perhaps a little less complex, but there's also the classic paper "Get Me Off Your Fucking Mailing List."
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: Perhaps a little less complex, but there's also the classic paper "Get Me Off Your Fucking Mailing List."
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: Perhaps a little less complex, but there's also the classic paper "Get Me Off Your Fucking Mailing List."
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: That fucking graph/figure. Hahahaha
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: That fucking graph/figure. Hahahaha
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: That fucking graph/figure. Hahahaha
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: That fucking graph/figure. Hahahaha
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: That fucking graph/figure. Hahahaha
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: added this to my mendeley
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: Probably more views than the typical publication
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: Probably more views than the typical publication
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: Probably more views than the typical publication
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: Probably more views than the typical publication
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: added this to my mendeley
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: added this to my mendeley
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: added this to my mendeley
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: added this to my mendeley
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: My new goal is to find a way to reference this paper somehow in one of my own.
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: My new goal is to find a way to reference this paper somehow in one of my own.
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: My new goal is to find a way to reference this paper somehow in one of my own.
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: My new goal is to find a way to reference this paper somehow in one of my own.
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: Don’t these journals ask for a hefty fee? Did the professor actually pay money to get this published?
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: Don’t these journals ask for a hefty fee? Did the professor actually pay money to get this published?
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: Raminds me of my former PI who has a fun hobby: Getting predatory journals to include people like Hoss or Borat as an Editor. Why Fake Data When You Can Fake a Scientist? His point being: Virtual editors can significantly improve the visibility of junk journals
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: Raminds me of my former PI who has a fun hobby: Getting predatory journals to include people like Hoss or Borat as an Editor. Why Fake Data When You Can Fake a Scientist? His point being: Virtual editors can significantly improve the visibility of junk journals
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: Raminds me of my former PI who has a fun hobby: Getting predatory journals to include people like Hoss or Borat as an Editor. Why Fake Data When You Can Fake a Scientist? His point being: Virtual editors can significantly improve the visibility of junk journals
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: At my university (edit: I do not live in the US), if you publish even in lower tier legitimate journals, that counts against you. So this guy's resume must be bulletproof for him to take a hit like that
### Instruction: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936 ### Response: >eigenvalue | weird birds -Take a shot every time eigen/quantum/möbius/bent paper with a pencil etc. has been mentioned in the wrong context.
### Instruction: How about we stop working for free? Just this month I was invited to review five new submissions from three different journals. I understand that we have an important role in improving the quality of science being published (specially during COVID times), but isn’t it unfair that we do all the work and these companies get all the money? Honestly, I feel like it’s passed time we start refusing to review articles without minimum compensation from these for-profit journals. ​ Field of research: Neuroscience/Biophysics Title: Ph.D. Country: USA ### Response: I'm getting pretty sick of writing papers for free. For my PhD and postdoc I've worked on other people's big projects. Every time they strategically keep me in the lab for the entire duration of the fellowship with no time to write, knowing full well that I have to write papers to get a job, and that I'll do it for free when the fellowship is over just to try to keep up.
End of preview. Expand in Data Studio

SFT Format Dataset

Overview

This dataset is converted to SFT (Supervised Fine-Tuning) format. It was created by transforming OpenMathInstruct and Stanford Human Preferences (SHP) datasets.

Dataset Structure

Each entry follows this format:

Instruction: [Problem, question, or conversation history]

Response: [Solution, answer, or response]

Usage Guide

Loading the Dataset

from datasets import load_dataset

# Load datasets from Hugging Face
openmath_train = load_dataset("Seono/sft-openmath-train")
openmath_eval = load_dataset("Seono/sft-openmath-eval")
shp_train = load_dataset("Seono/sft-shp-train")
shp_eval = load_dataset("Seono/sft-shp-eval")


Using for Fine-tuning

# Setting for SFT Trainer
trainer = SFTTrainer(
    model=model,
    tokenizer=tokenizer,
    args=training_args,
    train_dataset=openmath_train["train"],
    dataset_text_field="text"
)

then other codes..
Downloads last month
6