Top 10 Reasons Being a University Professor is a Stressful Job# Biology - 生物学
f*e
1 楼
可不可以拿到了EAD不用，以便保持H1B身份呢？
a*g
2 楼
【 以下文字转载自 ChinaNews 讨论区 】
发信人: ldpcrsturbo (hawabang), 信区: ChinaNews
标 题: 太狠了-----北京大学的学生因脸部表情支持刘晓波获罪
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Wed Oct 20 20:45:39 2010, 美东)
记者刚刚收到来自北京大学的紧急求救信，自从中青报痛批刘晓波获得诺贝尔和平奖文
章出笼后，北京大学气氛突变，从今天下午开始，刘晓波获奖当天凡是出外聚餐（庆祝
）的一律宣布取消奖学金评定资格，并在综合素质测评上实行扣分，有可能让他们不及
格。
更有甚者，北京两位刚刚被谈话的学生向记者透露，他们两个班级，所有在诺贝尔和平
奖公布当天“脸上显出开心”的同学都被一一找去问话，这两位同学表示，他们两个班
已经有七位同学被约谈，原因就是他们当天“异乎寻常的开心”。
记者以为电话不清楚，再三询问，都被这两位同学反复证实，北京大学的秋后算账开始
了，而这次秋后所算的那笔帐竟然是中共历史上都少有的——脸部表情罪。这个“脸罪
”最早出现在奥威尔的《1984》里，独裁统治者以民众脸上的“表情”来定他们的罪。
其中一位北京大学的学生带着哭腔对记者说，最让他们感到恐怖不是被问话，而是他们
不知道，自己当天的脸部表情怎么会被学校当局知道了，同学中到底被安插了多少“学
生信息员”？他们靠出卖同学换取了靠学习与正常竞争而得不到的好处，北京大学培养
出这样的优等生？
据记者稍后了解到，北京大学开始“学生信息员”，也就是学生中潜伏的“卧底”开始
于现任周校长，此人大概把吉林大学“学生信息员”制度引进到了北大。据说，他调任
北大校长，就是因为成功把间谍特务机制引进到青年学生中，对中共稳定来说，他的发
明，无异于学术界的诺贝尔奖。
北京大学学生说，情况可能进一步恶化，明天还会有更多学生被找去谈话。他们现在不
但不能乱说乱动，不能随便吃饭聚会，甚至连脸部表情，都得严格控制起来。
发信人: ldpcrsturbo (hawabang), 信区: ChinaNews
标 题: 太狠了-----北京大学的学生因脸部表情支持刘晓波获罪
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Wed Oct 20 20:45:39 2010, 美东)
记者刚刚收到来自北京大学的紧急求救信，自从中青报痛批刘晓波获得诺贝尔和平奖文
章出笼后，北京大学气氛突变，从今天下午开始，刘晓波获奖当天凡是出外聚餐（庆祝
）的一律宣布取消奖学金评定资格，并在综合素质测评上实行扣分，有可能让他们不及
格。
更有甚者，北京两位刚刚被谈话的学生向记者透露，他们两个班级，所有在诺贝尔和平
奖公布当天“脸上显出开心”的同学都被一一找去问话，这两位同学表示，他们两个班
已经有七位同学被约谈，原因就是他们当天“异乎寻常的开心”。
记者以为电话不清楚，再三询问，都被这两位同学反复证实，北京大学的秋后算账开始
了，而这次秋后所算的那笔帐竟然是中共历史上都少有的——脸部表情罪。这个“脸罪
”最早出现在奥威尔的《1984》里，独裁统治者以民众脸上的“表情”来定他们的罪。
其中一位北京大学的学生带着哭腔对记者说，最让他们感到恐怖不是被问话，而是他们
不知道，自己当天的脸部表情怎么会被学校当局知道了，同学中到底被安插了多少“学
生信息员”？他们靠出卖同学换取了靠学习与正常竞争而得不到的好处，北京大学培养
出这样的优等生？
据记者稍后了解到，北京大学开始“学生信息员”，也就是学生中潜伏的“卧底”开始
于现任周校长，此人大概把吉林大学“学生信息员”制度引进到了北大。据说，他调任
北大校长，就是因为成功把间谍特务机制引进到青年学生中，对中共稳定来说，他的发
明，无异于学术界的诺贝尔奖。
北京大学学生说，情况可能进一步恶化，明天还会有更多学生被找去谈话。他们现在不
但不能乱说乱动，不能随便吃饭聚会，甚至连脸部表情，都得严格控制起来。
f*o
3 楼
From:
http://thedailydrill.wordpress.com/2013/01/09/top-10-reasons-be
Top 10 Reasons Being a University Professor is a Stressful Job
By thisiskris18 ¶ Posted in Uncategorized ¶ Leave a comment
http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidkroll/2013/01/05/top-10-reason
Being a university professor is in no way the least stressful job for 2013.
In fact, 2013 is likely to be one of the worst years to be a university
professor.
But many pixels are being spent across the Forbes.com platform at the site
of Forbes staff columnist, Susan Adams. Adams has been a legal affairs
columnist at Forbes since 1995 and writes widely on leadership and careers.
I don’t know Adams but I do know that working full-time for Forbes requires
one to meet a very high bar. For example, many of my readers would know
Matt Herper as one of the top pharmaceutical industry journalists in North
America. Similarly, Bruce Japsen, formerly of the Chicago Tribune, is one of
the best writers on health care in the US.
So I was extremely surprised and, frankly, disappointed that Adams would
write such a misguided article, based apparently on a report from CareerCast
.com and her perception of university faculty through one tenured professor
she knows. Yesterday, Adams issued a mea culpa within the same post — and I
give her credit for keeping the original post up. As of this writing her
post has has 123,000 pages views and 351 comments (115 in the last 24 hr),
primarily objections from faculty members on the front lines at US
universities.
I don’t want to make the same mistake of a small sample size but I feel
that my primarily academic biomedical research and teaching career (since
1992) gives me some latitude to make a few generalizations. I’ve worked at
a state university’s top 25 academic medical center and pharmacy school, an
elite private research university, a teaching-intensive, historically-Black
college/university in a large state university system, and am now a half-
time writing professor (in a department of English) at a state land-grant
university. I also work half-time as a science communications director for a
state natural sciences museum. The emphasis on teaching vs. research at
each institution has varied. I’ve earned tenure twice, once in the
traditional fashion at the 7th year of an assistant professorship and again
at appointment as a professor and department chair.
With the caveats of my own experiences and those of colleagues with whom I’
ve worked or otherwise interacted around the world, here are my top 10
reasons that being a university professor is stressful:
1. Performance, advancement, and almost every scholarly metric is dependent
on anonymous peer-review
Write a grant application, get three anonymous reviewer critiques. Submit
research results for publication in a peer-reviewed journal, get anonymous
reviewer critiques. Submit your tenure portfolio or post-tenure portfolio to
a college promotion and tenure committee, get anonymous reviews. While one
may know the general composition of grant review and promotion and tenure
committees, you don’t know precisely who is gunning for you. Anonymity is
sometimes useful but more often allows petty vendettas to occur that are
independent of the work at hand.
2. In the biomedical sciences, universities rarely pay one’s full salary
Research universities, medical schools in particular, are highly-dependent
on federal research funding to pay faculty salaries. So, you have to raise
anywhere from a quarter to 100% of your salary. Some research universities
typically hire more faculty than they can afford with the assumption that
research project grants will generally cover a relatively stable percentage
of faculty salaries. The National Institutes of Health has recently
announced that it’s expected universities to step up over the next 20 years.
3. Faculty must provide salary and university benefits for research staff
If you’re in a tenured or tenure-track position, your salary will likely be
covered for at least nine months (but everyone works 12 months regardless
because you’re competing for research funds against others who will work 12
months even if they only have a nine-month salary).
However, if you have research staff, fellows, editorial assistants, etc.,
you have to pay for these folks off your research grants. That’s usually
100% of not only their salary but benefits as well. Research grant funds
technically come to the university so salary and benefits are in effect paid
by the university. But if you lose your grant, you lose your laboratory
personnel – no backstop, no six-month severance. It’s here today, gone
tomorrow. And all the investment, expertise, and institutional lab memory
goes away. If you lose your personnel, it becomes more difficult for you to
score subsequent funding. That then puts you in a position, even if you have
tenure, of having lab space taken away and having more teaching and
administrative committee work piled on you, making it even more difficult to
score subsequent funding.
4. Faculty must provide universities with the teat of indirect grant costs
The pressure for faculty to obtain research funding is not just self-
motivated. The common complaint among faculty is that if one is lucky to
score a grant in this funding environment, the first thing a supervisor will
ask is when they’re submitting the next one. Why? Because universities
garner an additional 40-80% on top of what your laboratory requests for a
project. Yes, if I get a grant for $200,000 per year, the university gets $
80,000-$160,000 that I don’t see.
These funds are obviously necessary to cover indirect costs such as
utilities, facilities and maintenance, and safety and security functions.
But these funds are often squirreled away for other special projects of high
-ranking administrators. At some universities, the funds are managed well —
to provide recruitment packages for new tenure-track faculty. At other
universities, the distribution of indirect cost recovery is questionable.
More central functions that should be covered by indirect costs are now
being billed directly to laboratories even though their grants provide the
university with substantial indirect costs.
You can never have enough grants at most biomedical research universities.
5. Success rates for biomedical and science & technology grant funding is at
an all-time low
Currently, grant funding rates across the National Institutes of Health and
National Science Foundation are at their lowest percentages in history (see
the dotted line on the figure at this DrugMonkey post). At the NIH, many
institutes are funding at the 11th percentile (and I’ve seen some in single
-digit percentiles). One is permitted a total of total of two submissions
such that overall funding rates can sometimes approach 20%. Writing each
grant generally takes four to six weeks but you don’t learn the grant
scoring for three months, the actual funding possibility until six months (
or longer if Congress is dragging their feet), and see the actual funding at
nine to 12 months. In many cases, it can be over two years (or never)
between conceiving an idea and seeing research support.
The result is that this is the first time in 20 years that I’ve seen more
than three people I know giving up their laboratories and moving on to 100%
teaching positions or other careers entirely. That’s okay from the
standpoint of personal satisfaction but the federal medical research
enterprise has made tremendous investments in individuals. It’s a terrible
waste to see well-trained scientists leaving the academy.
The system also penalizes women for being the gender that gives birth to our
future citizens. The “tenure clock” normally doesn’t get delayed if one
has a child and takes maternity leave. Some granting agencies are now
allowing applicants to note that they may have had a break in productivity
because of family or health issues. But, by and large, women are not treated
kindly by the system.
And just in case you think 80% of science professors are complaining,
consider this: one of the 2012 winners of the Nobel Prize in Chemistry lost
his funding from a private research institute a few years ago. His work
could not move forward because he had to let some research staff go.
Fortunately, his wife is a scientist and has been working with him through
thick and thin. He lives in a high-cost market and had to pick up side work
(he was fortunately a physician) to be able to make his mortgage. Now he has
a Nobel Prize. But most of us don’t.
6. Many US universities operate under a customer service model while
accepting students unprepared for college-level coursework
“The customer is always right,” didn’t always apply to universities. Many
places still require that students assume substantial personal
responsibility for success. But I’ve seen some state universities kowtowing
to student demands that undermine academic integrity. We’re even seeing
helicopter parents contacting professors directly about their kids’ grades
(disclosure is against federal law) and complaining to department chair and
deans. The default reaction from administration is that the professor is at
fault. Professors are also penalized if their course grades have too high of
a percentage of D’s and F’s. At the same time, some of the same
universities are allowing students to enroll in college with SAT scores of
800 or below — for combined math and verbal components. Even among
populations that might not have the luxury of taking standardized test prep
scores, that doesn’t account for the 300 or so more points that may of us
establish as the minimum (I scored an 1120, by the way, so I was no genius).
Too many professors are being expected to make up for the deficiencies of
public high school education.
7. Increasingly reliance on adjunct teaching faculty
For teaching-intensive institutions, a new tactic to cut costs is to hire
temporary faculty to teach courses. Rather than paying a professor $75,000
plus benefits, you can now hire from the ranks of unemployed scientists a no
-benefits PhD at $3,000-$4,500 per 3 credit hour class per semester. I have
seen some tenure-track faculty actually be threatened by their supervisors
with being replaced by such adjunct faculty if they can’t score grant
funding. The abuse of adjunct faculty by US universities is a travesty.
8. The public and some university administrators underestimate teaching
effort
If I teach a 3 credit hour class, it may appear that I’m only working 3
hours/week. However, developing and updating course material takes time,
especially in rapidly-changing fields like mine (pharmacology). At one of my
former universities, we had a defined formula that I quite liked and agreed
with: you get eight hours of time for each one hour of lecture time if it’
s brand-new material and four hours of time for each one hour of lecture
given if it’s an existing course. Those numbers are about right in my
experience.
You also have student office hours of four to eight hours per week, time
grading assignments (much more time-consuming now that I’ve become a
writing professor) and exams, and professional development time where one
might attend a seminar or off-campus conference to learn about your field of
study. So, a 3 credit hour class can easily take 15-20 hours/week.
Depending on the school, a full-load might be two or four classes. So, it’s
pretty easy to get to 30-40 hours/week with just two classes. The average
prof works about 60 hours/week so, uh, yeah, that’s a 50% effort.
9. Administrators underestimate online teaching effort
If you’re already teaching the class, it’ll be nothing to throw it up
online, right? Universities are increasingly moving classes to online
offerings, a genuinely useful approach for students working full-time.
Unfortunately, some universities are simply stressing online classes because
it brings in revenue without significantly increasing infrastructure costs.
Professors are usually given less credit for online courses than for those
in-person. Most professors I know who teach online classes say that much
more effort is required for online classes.
10. Administrators overestimate the need for administrators
I know that accreditation guidelines, safety, development, grants and
research compliance, and other administrative issues require dedicated
administrative personnel. Jobs that used to be done by one person now often
seems to require two or three and we’re seeing the number of assistant
associate vice deans for whatever increasing over the last five to seven
years. I used to be part administrator — I’d get additional salary for
that, but not for increased teaching or university service — so I guess
that I used to be part of the problem.
Oh, and why not 11:
11. “Tenure” is no longer tenure
Tenure is a hot-button item particularly for critics of state universities.
Indeed, tenure had its purpose in allowing academic freedom of thought and
opinion without institutional retaliation. Some people think it’s no longer
necessary. But it is, particularly given the substantial dependence of
universities on salary support for faculty. Most universities have also
instituted more stringent post-tenure review processes, generally about
every five years. I’ve rarely seen a tenured professor be fired but a
professor with tenure who is deemed unproductive by whatever anonymous
review can certainly be made to wish they didn’t have a job.
Now, I’m not saying that being a university professor is harder than highly
dangerous jobs like being an oil rig worker, steel worker, logger, soldier,
or deep sea commercial fisher. But I believe that Susan Adams was misguided
and irresponsible in using CareerCast as a source in her initial post. Her
large audience on this high-profile platform reflects some of the
difficultly university faculty face with regard to public perception. I
expect more of any Forbes contributor like me or my science writing
compatriot, Emily Willingham, but certainly much more from a long-time
Forbes staff writer.
I know that I’ve stressed the biomedical side so what do you have to add?
http://thedailydrill.wordpress.com/2013/01/09/top-10-reasons-be
Top 10 Reasons Being a University Professor is a Stressful Job
By thisiskris18 ¶ Posted in Uncategorized ¶ Leave a comment
http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidkroll/2013/01/05/top-10-reason
Being a university professor is in no way the least stressful job for 2013.
In fact, 2013 is likely to be one of the worst years to be a university
professor.
But many pixels are being spent across the Forbes.com platform at the site
of Forbes staff columnist, Susan Adams. Adams has been a legal affairs
columnist at Forbes since 1995 and writes widely on leadership and careers.
I don’t know Adams but I do know that working full-time for Forbes requires
one to meet a very high bar. For example, many of my readers would know
Matt Herper as one of the top pharmaceutical industry journalists in North
America. Similarly, Bruce Japsen, formerly of the Chicago Tribune, is one of
the best writers on health care in the US.
So I was extremely surprised and, frankly, disappointed that Adams would
write such a misguided article, based apparently on a report from CareerCast
.com and her perception of university faculty through one tenured professor
she knows. Yesterday, Adams issued a mea culpa within the same post — and I
give her credit for keeping the original post up. As of this writing her
post has has 123,000 pages views and 351 comments (115 in the last 24 hr),
primarily objections from faculty members on the front lines at US
universities.
I don’t want to make the same mistake of a small sample size but I feel
that my primarily academic biomedical research and teaching career (since
1992) gives me some latitude to make a few generalizations. I’ve worked at
a state university’s top 25 academic medical center and pharmacy school, an
elite private research university, a teaching-intensive, historically-Black
college/university in a large state university system, and am now a half-
time writing professor (in a department of English) at a state land-grant
university. I also work half-time as a science communications director for a
state natural sciences museum. The emphasis on teaching vs. research at
each institution has varied. I’ve earned tenure twice, once in the
traditional fashion at the 7th year of an assistant professorship and again
at appointment as a professor and department chair.
With the caveats of my own experiences and those of colleagues with whom I’
ve worked or otherwise interacted around the world, here are my top 10
reasons that being a university professor is stressful:
1. Performance, advancement, and almost every scholarly metric is dependent
on anonymous peer-review
Write a grant application, get three anonymous reviewer critiques. Submit
research results for publication in a peer-reviewed journal, get anonymous
reviewer critiques. Submit your tenure portfolio or post-tenure portfolio to
a college promotion and tenure committee, get anonymous reviews. While one
may know the general composition of grant review and promotion and tenure
committees, you don’t know precisely who is gunning for you. Anonymity is
sometimes useful but more often allows petty vendettas to occur that are
independent of the work at hand.
2. In the biomedical sciences, universities rarely pay one’s full salary
Research universities, medical schools in particular, are highly-dependent
on federal research funding to pay faculty salaries. So, you have to raise
anywhere from a quarter to 100% of your salary. Some research universities
typically hire more faculty than they can afford with the assumption that
research project grants will generally cover a relatively stable percentage
of faculty salaries. The National Institutes of Health has recently
announced that it’s expected universities to step up over the next 20 years.
3. Faculty must provide salary and university benefits for research staff
If you’re in a tenured or tenure-track position, your salary will likely be
covered for at least nine months (but everyone works 12 months regardless
because you’re competing for research funds against others who will work 12
months even if they only have a nine-month salary).
However, if you have research staff, fellows, editorial assistants, etc.,
you have to pay for these folks off your research grants. That’s usually
100% of not only their salary but benefits as well. Research grant funds
technically come to the university so salary and benefits are in effect paid
by the university. But if you lose your grant, you lose your laboratory
personnel – no backstop, no six-month severance. It’s here today, gone
tomorrow. And all the investment, expertise, and institutional lab memory
goes away. If you lose your personnel, it becomes more difficult for you to
score subsequent funding. That then puts you in a position, even if you have
tenure, of having lab space taken away and having more teaching and
administrative committee work piled on you, making it even more difficult to
score subsequent funding.
4. Faculty must provide universities with the teat of indirect grant costs
The pressure for faculty to obtain research funding is not just self-
motivated. The common complaint among faculty is that if one is lucky to
score a grant in this funding environment, the first thing a supervisor will
ask is when they’re submitting the next one. Why? Because universities
garner an additional 40-80% on top of what your laboratory requests for a
project. Yes, if I get a grant for $200,000 per year, the university gets $
80,000-$160,000 that I don’t see.
These funds are obviously necessary to cover indirect costs such as
utilities, facilities and maintenance, and safety and security functions.
But these funds are often squirreled away for other special projects of high
-ranking administrators. At some universities, the funds are managed well —
to provide recruitment packages for new tenure-track faculty. At other
universities, the distribution of indirect cost recovery is questionable.
More central functions that should be covered by indirect costs are now
being billed directly to laboratories even though their grants provide the
university with substantial indirect costs.
You can never have enough grants at most biomedical research universities.
5. Success rates for biomedical and science & technology grant funding is at
an all-time low
Currently, grant funding rates across the National Institutes of Health and
National Science Foundation are at their lowest percentages in history (see
the dotted line on the figure at this DrugMonkey post). At the NIH, many
institutes are funding at the 11th percentile (and I’ve seen some in single
-digit percentiles). One is permitted a total of total of two submissions
such that overall funding rates can sometimes approach 20%. Writing each
grant generally takes four to six weeks but you don’t learn the grant
scoring for three months, the actual funding possibility until six months (
or longer if Congress is dragging their feet), and see the actual funding at
nine to 12 months. In many cases, it can be over two years (or never)
between conceiving an idea and seeing research support.
The result is that this is the first time in 20 years that I’ve seen more
than three people I know giving up their laboratories and moving on to 100%
teaching positions or other careers entirely. That’s okay from the
standpoint of personal satisfaction but the federal medical research
enterprise has made tremendous investments in individuals. It’s a terrible
waste to see well-trained scientists leaving the academy.
The system also penalizes women for being the gender that gives birth to our
future citizens. The “tenure clock” normally doesn’t get delayed if one
has a child and takes maternity leave. Some granting agencies are now
allowing applicants to note that they may have had a break in productivity
because of family or health issues. But, by and large, women are not treated
kindly by the system.
And just in case you think 80% of science professors are complaining,
consider this: one of the 2012 winners of the Nobel Prize in Chemistry lost
his funding from a private research institute a few years ago. His work
could not move forward because he had to let some research staff go.
Fortunately, his wife is a scientist and has been working with him through
thick and thin. He lives in a high-cost market and had to pick up side work
(he was fortunately a physician) to be able to make his mortgage. Now he has
a Nobel Prize. But most of us don’t.
6. Many US universities operate under a customer service model while
accepting students unprepared for college-level coursework
“The customer is always right,” didn’t always apply to universities. Many
places still require that students assume substantial personal
responsibility for success. But I’ve seen some state universities kowtowing
to student demands that undermine academic integrity. We’re even seeing
helicopter parents contacting professors directly about their kids’ grades
(disclosure is against federal law) and complaining to department chair and
deans. The default reaction from administration is that the professor is at
fault. Professors are also penalized if their course grades have too high of
a percentage of D’s and F’s. At the same time, some of the same
universities are allowing students to enroll in college with SAT scores of
800 or below — for combined math and verbal components. Even among
populations that might not have the luxury of taking standardized test prep
scores, that doesn’t account for the 300 or so more points that may of us
establish as the minimum (I scored an 1120, by the way, so I was no genius).
Too many professors are being expected to make up for the deficiencies of
public high school education.
7. Increasingly reliance on adjunct teaching faculty
For teaching-intensive institutions, a new tactic to cut costs is to hire
temporary faculty to teach courses. Rather than paying a professor $75,000
plus benefits, you can now hire from the ranks of unemployed scientists a no
-benefits PhD at $3,000-$4,500 per 3 credit hour class per semester. I have
seen some tenure-track faculty actually be threatened by their supervisors
with being replaced by such adjunct faculty if they can’t score grant
funding. The abuse of adjunct faculty by US universities is a travesty.
8. The public and some university administrators underestimate teaching
effort
If I teach a 3 credit hour class, it may appear that I’m only working 3
hours/week. However, developing and updating course material takes time,
especially in rapidly-changing fields like mine (pharmacology). At one of my
former universities, we had a defined formula that I quite liked and agreed
with: you get eight hours of time for each one hour of lecture time if it’
s brand-new material and four hours of time for each one hour of lecture
given if it’s an existing course. Those numbers are about right in my
experience.
You also have student office hours of four to eight hours per week, time
grading assignments (much more time-consuming now that I’ve become a
writing professor) and exams, and professional development time where one
might attend a seminar or off-campus conference to learn about your field of
study. So, a 3 credit hour class can easily take 15-20 hours/week.
Depending on the school, a full-load might be two or four classes. So, it’s
pretty easy to get to 30-40 hours/week with just two classes. The average
prof works about 60 hours/week so, uh, yeah, that’s a 50% effort.
9. Administrators underestimate online teaching effort
If you’re already teaching the class, it’ll be nothing to throw it up
online, right? Universities are increasingly moving classes to online
offerings, a genuinely useful approach for students working full-time.
Unfortunately, some universities are simply stressing online classes because
it brings in revenue without significantly increasing infrastructure costs.
Professors are usually given less credit for online courses than for those
in-person. Most professors I know who teach online classes say that much
more effort is required for online classes.
10. Administrators overestimate the need for administrators
I know that accreditation guidelines, safety, development, grants and
research compliance, and other administrative issues require dedicated
administrative personnel. Jobs that used to be done by one person now often
seems to require two or three and we’re seeing the number of assistant
associate vice deans for whatever increasing over the last five to seven
years. I used to be part administrator — I’d get additional salary for
that, but not for increased teaching or university service — so I guess
that I used to be part of the problem.
Oh, and why not 11:
11. “Tenure” is no longer tenure
Tenure is a hot-button item particularly for critics of state universities.
Indeed, tenure had its purpose in allowing academic freedom of thought and
opinion without institutional retaliation. Some people think it’s no longer
necessary. But it is, particularly given the substantial dependence of
universities on salary support for faculty. Most universities have also
instituted more stringent post-tenure review processes, generally about
every five years. I’ve rarely seen a tenured professor be fired but a
professor with tenure who is deemed unproductive by whatever anonymous
review can certainly be made to wish they didn’t have a job.
Now, I’m not saying that being a university professor is harder than highly
dangerous jobs like being an oil rig worker, steel worker, logger, soldier,
or deep sea commercial fisher. But I believe that Susan Adams was misguided
and irresponsible in using CareerCast as a source in her initial post. Her
large audience on this high-profile platform reflects some of the
difficultly university faculty face with regard to public perception. I
expect more of any Forbes contributor like me or my science writing
compatriot, Emily Willingham, but certainly much more from a long-time
Forbes staff writer.
I know that I’ve stressed the biomedical side so what do you have to add?
A*n
4 楼
Most applicant do not use EAD if he/she has H1b
【在 f*********e 的大作中提到】
: 可不可以拿到了EAD不用，以便保持H1B身份呢？
【在 f*********e 的大作中提到】
: 可不可以拿到了EAD不用，以便保持H1B身份呢？
o*t
5 楼
想到那个拉屎的笑话
b*k
6 楼
这都是不识数的罪过呀！
.
【在 f*******o 的大作中提到】
: From:
: http://thedailydrill.wordpress.com/2013/01/09/top-10-reasons-be
: Top 10 Reasons Being a University Professor is a Stressful Job
: By thisiskris18 ¶ Posted in Uncategorized ¶ Leave a comment
: http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidkroll/2013/01/05/top-10-reason
: Being a university professor is in no way the least stressful job for 2013.
: In fact, 2013 is likely to be one of the worst years to be a university
: professor.
: But many pixels are being spent across the Forbes.com platform at the site
: of Forbes staff columnist, Susan Adams. Adams has been a legal affairs
.
【在 f*******o 的大作中提到】
: From:
: http://thedailydrill.wordpress.com/2013/01/09/top-10-reasons-be
: Top 10 Reasons Being a University Professor is a Stressful Job
: By thisiskris18 ¶ Posted in Uncategorized ¶ Leave a comment
: http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidkroll/2013/01/05/top-10-reason
: Being a university professor is in no way the least stressful job for 2013.
: In fact, 2013 is likely to be one of the worst years to be a university
: professor.
: But many pixels are being spent across the Forbes.com platform at the site
: of Forbes staff columnist, Susan Adams. Adams has been a legal affairs
f*e
7 楼
所以大多数人都申请EAD，但不用EAD， 对吗？
【在 A********n 的大作中提到】
: Most applicant do not use EAD if he/she has H1b
【在 A********n 的大作中提到】
: Most applicant do not use EAD if he/she has H1b
s*r
8 楼
TG现在是今非昔比，以前告密者都是鬼鬼祟祟， 现在居然光明正大变成学生信息员了
！ 不知道学校怎么问话的？
学生： 不知校长大人唤学生来有何吩咐？
校长： 据学生信息员探报，你今日大笑不止。可有其事？
学生： 的确笑了两声。
校长： 在这太平盛世，河蟹之秋，民怨载道，鬼哭狼嚎之时， 你何乐之有？
学生： 作白日梦娶媳妇，没忍住。。。这学校也管哈？
！ 不知道学校怎么问话的？
学生： 不知校长大人唤学生来有何吩咐？
校长： 据学生信息员探报，你今日大笑不止。可有其事？
学生： 的确笑了两声。
校长： 在这太平盛世，河蟹之秋，民怨载道，鬼哭狼嚎之时， 你何乐之有？
学生： 作白日梦娶媳妇，没忍住。。。这学校也管哈？
J*r
9 楼
楼上连这么假的都信？！
d*f
10 楼
这种事情你觉得没可能？我同学以前因为食堂菜难吃，在bbs上写了个xx食堂菜难吃，
大家要抵制。校团委先是找我老板，又是要记过，差点预备党员都开了
【在 J****r 的大作中提到】
: 楼上连这么假的都信？！
大家要抵制。校团委先是找我老板，又是要记过，差点预备党员都开了
【在 J****r 的大作中提到】
: 楼上连这么假的都信？！
a*b
11 楼
说说几食堂？
d*f
12 楼
不是北大
【在 a****b 的大作中提到】
: 说说几食堂？
【在 a****b 的大作中提到】
: 说说几食堂？
l*g
13 楼
我觉得吧，要追究也要有言论的，私底下说了什么被信息员打小报告了。笑一笑就说支
持刘小波？不是所有人都关心政治的，部分人可能根本不知道这个人是谁。
【在 d********f 的大作中提到】
: 这种事情你觉得没可能？我同学以前因为食堂菜难吃，在bbs上写了个xx食堂菜难吃，
: 大家要抵制。校团委先是找我老板，又是要记过，差点预备党员都开了
持刘小波？不是所有人都关心政治的，部分人可能根本不知道这个人是谁。
【在 d********f 的大作中提到】
: 这种事情你觉得没可能？我同学以前因为食堂菜难吃，在bbs上写了个xx食堂菜难吃，
: 大家要抵制。校团委先是找我老板，又是要记过，差点预备党员都开了
O*X
14 楼
信这个还不如信轮子功
你们学校的事只说明你们后勤比土工牛
【在 d********f 的大作中提到】
: 这种事情你觉得没可能？我同学以前因为食堂菜难吃，在bbs上写了个xx食堂菜难吃，
: 大家要抵制。校团委先是找我老板，又是要记过，差点预备党员都开了
你们学校的事只说明你们后勤比土工牛
【在 d********f 的大作中提到】
: 这种事情你觉得没可能？我同学以前因为食堂菜难吃，在bbs上写了个xx食堂菜难吃，
: 大家要抵制。校团委先是找我老板，又是要记过，差点预备党员都开了
o*1
15 楼
这个错怪我党了。表情不论，这些同学肯定有腹诽之实。
【在 a****g 的大作中提到】
: 【 以下文字转载自 ChinaNews 讨论区 】
: 发信人: ldpcrsturbo (hawabang), 信区: ChinaNews
: 标 题: 太狠了-----北京大学的学生因脸部表情支持刘晓波获罪
: 发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Wed Oct 20 20:45:39 2010, 美东)
: 记者刚刚收到来自北京大学的紧急求救信，自从中青报痛批刘晓波获得诺贝尔和平奖文
: 章出笼后，北京大学气氛突变，从今天下午开始，刘晓波获奖当天凡是出外聚餐（庆祝
: ）的一律宣布取消奖学金评定资格，并在综合素质测评上实行扣分，有可能让他们不及
: 格。
: 更有甚者，北京两位刚刚被谈话的学生向记者透露，他们两个班级，所有在诺贝尔和平
: 奖公布当天“脸上显出开心”的同学都被一一找去问话，这两位同学表示，他们两个班
【在 a****g 的大作中提到】
: 【 以下文字转载自 ChinaNews 讨论区 】
: 发信人: ldpcrsturbo (hawabang), 信区: ChinaNews
: 标 题: 太狠了-----北京大学的学生因脸部表情支持刘晓波获罪
: 发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Wed Oct 20 20:45:39 2010, 美东)
: 记者刚刚收到来自北京大学的紧急求救信，自从中青报痛批刘晓波获得诺贝尔和平奖文
: 章出笼后，北京大学气氛突变，从今天下午开始，刘晓波获奖当天凡是出外聚餐（庆祝
: ）的一律宣布取消奖学金评定资格，并在综合素质测评上实行扣分，有可能让他们不及
: 格。
: 更有甚者，北京两位刚刚被谈话的学生向记者透露，他们两个班级，所有在诺贝尔和平
: 奖公布当天“脸上显出开心”的同学都被一一找去问话，这两位同学表示，他们两个班
l*k
16 楼
你是不是文革期间出国的
【在 d********f 的大作中提到】
: 这种事情你觉得没可能？我同学以前因为食堂菜难吃，在bbs上写了个xx食堂菜难吃，
: 大家要抵制。校团委先是找我老板，又是要记过，差点预备党员都开了
【在 d********f 的大作中提到】
: 这种事情你觉得没可能？我同学以前因为食堂菜难吃，在bbs上写了个xx食堂菜难吃，
: 大家要抵制。校团委先是找我老板，又是要记过，差点预备党员都开了
b*e
17 楼
我脚的他是乾隆年间上的大学
【在 l**k 的大作中提到】
: 你是不是文革期间出国的
【在 l**k 的大作中提到】
: 你是不是文革期间出国的
p*s
18 楼
我擦，那可是国子监级别啊
【在 b*****e 的大作中提到】
: 我脚的他是乾隆年间上的大学
【在 b*****e 的大作中提到】
: 我脚的他是乾隆年间上的大学
d*f
19 楼
我们打个赌把，10w美金。事情发生在2003年
【在 l**k 的大作中提到】
: 你是不是文革期间出国的
【在 l**k 的大作中提到】
: 你是不是文革期间出国的
l*k
20 楼
我想就标题这个事打个赌还有点意义，咋样？
【在 d********f 的大作中提到】
: 我们打个赌把，10w美金。事情发生在2003年
【在 d********f 的大作中提到】
: 我们打个赌把，10w美金。事情发生在2003年
d*f
21 楼
你质疑我的回帖，为什么用别人的标题打赌，这什么赌法？
【在 l**k 的大作中提到】
: 我想就标题这个事打个赌还有点意义，咋样？
【在 l**k 的大作中提到】
: 我想就标题这个事打个赌还有点意义，咋样？
m*t
22 楼
你怂了
我想就标题这个事打个赌还有点意义，咋样？
【在 l**k 的大作中提到】
: 我想就标题这个事打个赌还有点意义，咋样？
我想就标题这个事打个赌还有点意义，咋样？
【在 l**k 的大作中提到】
: 我想就标题这个事打个赌还有点意义，咋样？
l*k
23 楼
你不是在用你的经验证明标题的可靠性么？到底信不信标题啊你？
【在 d********f 的大作中提到】
: 你质疑我的回帖，为什么用别人的标题打赌，这什么赌法？
【在 d********f 的大作中提到】
: 你质疑我的回帖，为什么用别人的标题打赌，这什么赌法？
l*k
24 楼
你不怂，你来跟我赌原帖里说的事吧
【在 m*********t 的大作中提到】
: 你怂了
:
: 我想就标题这个事打个赌还有点意义，咋样？
【在 m*********t 的大作中提到】
: 你怂了
:
: 我想就标题这个事打个赌还有点意义，咋样？
T*e
25 楼
哪儿的记者？
p*e
26 楼
这里的纯洁同学没有在大学被地下党告过密？
国安几处负责高校，一直在中关村有办公室，各校有联系人。
国安几处负责高校，一直在中关村有办公室，各校有联系人。
m*t
27 楼
你说别人举的例子不对，别人跟你打赌你就顾左右而言他，又跟我扯什么原帖，show下
限也不用这么卖力
你不怂，你来跟我赌原帖里说的事吧
【在 l**k 的大作中提到】
: 你不怂，你来跟我赌原帖里说的事吧
限也不用这么卖力
你不怂，你来跟我赌原帖里说的事吧
【在 l**k 的大作中提到】
: 你不怂，你来跟我赌原帖里说的事吧
l*k
28 楼
他举的例子是预备党员－－既然签了卖身契自然就不能以常理度之了，所以我打趣他
党员们要交党费要汇报思想要保持一致要blahblahblah，跟我们普通学生有毛关系？
原帖里说的事情，你们到底敢不敢赌么？
【在 m*********t 的大作中提到】
: 你说别人举的例子不对，别人跟你打赌你就顾左右而言他，又跟我扯什么原帖，show下
: 限也不用这么卖力
:
: 你不怂，你来跟我赌原帖里说的事吧
党员们要交党费要汇报思想要保持一致要blahblahblah，跟我们普通学生有毛关系？
原帖里说的事情，你们到底敢不敢赌么？
【在 m*********t 的大作中提到】
: 你说别人举的例子不对，别人跟你打赌你就顾左右而言他，又跟我扯什么原帖，show下
: 限也不用这么卖力
:
: 你不怂，你来跟我赌原帖里说的事吧
a*e
29 楼
有，64前我是入党积极分子，本来马上就预备的，没预备上。4年之内又是反思又是思
想汇报，伟大的组织都不予考虑。后来就死心了。在后来6年后，组织找我谈话，我告
诉他们我已经不想了。
【在 p*****e 的大作中提到】
: 这里的纯洁同学没有在大学被地下党告过密？
: 国安几处负责高校，一直在中关村有办公室，各校有联系人。
想汇报，伟大的组织都不予考虑。后来就死心了。在后来6年后，组织找我谈话，我告
诉他们我已经不想了。
【在 p*****e 的大作中提到】
: 这里的纯洁同学没有在大学被地下党告过密？
: 国安几处负责高校，一直在中关村有办公室，各校有联系人。
l*k
30 楼
98年和99年的63晚上我们在三角地和湖边做过试验，木有被谈话
～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～
【在 p*****e 的大作中提到】
: 这里的纯洁同学没有在大学被地下党告过密？
: 国安几处负责高校，一直在中关村有办公室，各校有联系人。
～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～
【在 p*****e 的大作中提到】
: 这里的纯洁同学没有在大学被地下党告过密？
: 国安几处负责高校，一直在中关村有办公室，各校有联系人。
p*e
31 楼
你想怎么赌？
这种事情按概率是99.99%可能发生的。
要是87.53%的概率大家根本不会对此感兴趣。
【在 l**k 的大作中提到】
: 他举的例子是预备党员－－既然签了卖身契自然就不能以常理度之了，所以我打趣他
: 党员们要交党费要汇报思想要保持一致要blahblahblah，跟我们普通学生有毛关系？
: 原帖里说的事情，你们到底敢不敢赌么？
这种事情按概率是99.99%可能发生的。
要是87.53%的概率大家根本不会对此感兴趣。
【在 l**k 的大作中提到】
: 他举的例子是预备党员－－既然签了卖身契自然就不能以常理度之了，所以我打趣他
: 党员们要交党费要汇报思想要保持一致要blahblahblah，跟我们普通学生有毛关系？
: 原帖里说的事情，你们到底敢不敢赌么？
l*k
32 楼
什么概率？有就是有，没有就是没有。楼主透露一下哪级哪系，验证起来不难
这又不是赌球赛，根据胜率来决定让几分
【在 p*****e 的大作中提到】
: 你想怎么赌？
: 这种事情按概率是99.99%可能发生的。
: 要是87.53%的概率大家根本不会对此感兴趣。
这又不是赌球赛，根据胜率来决定让几分
【在 p*****e 的大作中提到】
: 你想怎么赌？
: 这种事情按概率是99.99%可能发生的。
: 要是87.53%的概率大家根本不会对此感兴趣。
m*t
33 楼
赌个脑袋，原帖关我鸟事，老子看到有人打赌就来看热闹，怂了就认，你丫这磨叽，跟
老娘们一样。
他举的例子是预备党员－－既然签了卖身契自然就不能以常理度之了，所以我打趣他
党员们要交党费要汇报思想要保持一致要blahblahblah，跟我们普通学生有毛关系？
原帖里说的事情，你们到底敢不敢赌么？
【在 l**k 的大作中提到】
: 他举的例子是预备党员－－既然签了卖身契自然就不能以常理度之了，所以我打趣他
: 党员们要交党费要汇报思想要保持一致要blahblahblah，跟我们普通学生有毛关系？
: 原帖里说的事情，你们到底敢不敢赌么？
老娘们一样。
他举的例子是预备党员－－既然签了卖身契自然就不能以常理度之了，所以我打趣他
党员们要交党费要汇报思想要保持一致要blahblahblah，跟我们普通学生有毛关系？
原帖里说的事情，你们到底敢不敢赌么？
【在 l**k 的大作中提到】
: 他举的例子是预备党员－－既然签了卖身契自然就不能以常理度之了，所以我打趣他
: 党员们要交党费要汇报思想要保持一致要blahblahblah，跟我们普通学生有毛关系？
: 原帖里说的事情，你们到底敢不敢赌么？
l*k
34 楼
看来在笑话版不能开玩笑，开了玩笑就要应赌，你丫真粘核
show下
【在 m*********t 的大作中提到】
: 赌个脑袋，原帖关我鸟事，老子看到有人打赌就来看热闹，怂了就认，你丫这磨叽，跟
: 老娘们一样。
:
: 他举的例子是预备党员－－既然签了卖身契自然就不能以常理度之了，所以我打趣他
: 党员们要交党费要汇报思想要保持一致要blahblahblah，跟我们普通学生有毛关系？
: 原帖里说的事情，你们到底敢不敢赌么？
show下
【在 m*********t 的大作中提到】
: 赌个脑袋，原帖关我鸟事，老子看到有人打赌就来看热闹，怂了就认，你丫这磨叽，跟
: 老娘们一样。
:
: 他举的例子是预备党员－－既然签了卖身契自然就不能以常理度之了，所以我打趣他
: 党员们要交党费要汇报思想要保持一致要blahblahblah，跟我们普通学生有毛关系？
: 原帖里说的事情，你们到底敢不敢赌么？
p*e
35 楼
你没被谈话和别人被告密，这冲突么？
【在 l**k 的大作中提到】
: 98年和99年的63晚上我们在三角地和湖边做过试验，木有被谈话
:
: ～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～
【在 l**k 的大作中提到】
: 98年和99年的63晚上我们在三角地和湖边做过试验，木有被谈话
:
: ～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～
p*e
36 楼
你这逻辑跟让屁民提供李鹏家邓家在海外银行账号的意思差不多。
南京大屠杀和饿死三千万有名单吗？
【在 l**k 的大作中提到】
: 什么概率？有就是有，没有就是没有。楼主透露一下哪级哪系，验证起来不难
: 这又不是赌球赛，根据胜率来决定让几分
南京大屠杀和饿死三千万有名单吗？
【在 l**k 的大作中提到】
: 什么概率？有就是有，没有就是没有。楼主透露一下哪级哪系，验证起来不难
: 这又不是赌球赛，根据胜率来决定让几分
l*k
37 楼
饿死的完整名单没有，就算有也肯定有错误，但是我自己家就有这样的例子，当然可信
。一共就七个学生，记者都收到信息了，却不知道是哪个系哪一级的，搞笑呢？
～～～～～～
【在 p*****e 的大作中提到】
: 你这逻辑跟让屁民提供李鹏家邓家在海外银行账号的意思差不多。
: 南京大屠杀和饿死三千万有名单吗？
。一共就七个学生，记者都收到信息了，却不知道是哪个系哪一级的，搞笑呢？
～～～～～～
【在 p*****e 的大作中提到】
: 你这逻辑跟让屁民提供李鹏家邓家在海外银行账号的意思差不多。
: 南京大屠杀和饿死三千万有名单吗？
l*k
38 楼
你哪只眼睛看到我说冲突了？
莫非你的意思是，被告密的出来说一说，没被告密的就别说话，lol
【在 p*****e 的大作中提到】
: 你没被谈话和别人被告密，这冲突么？
莫非你的意思是，被告密的出来说一说，没被告密的就别说话，lol
【在 p*****e 的大作中提到】
: 你没被谈话和别人被告密，这冲突么？
g*g
39 楼
老将智力无下限
p*e
40 楼
你家饿死人我不知道，怎么可信？
你不知道七个学生，记者知道，怎么搞笑？
若说这事有很小可能没有、有很大可能有，这才是符合逻辑常识的。
国内新闻管制，连明确的罪犯都叉某，这学生被搞有压力，你反而要求完美透明度，还
拿自己没被谈话做为佐证，逻辑劈叉没觉着疼么？
【在 l**k 的大作中提到】
: 饿死的完整名单没有，就算有也肯定有错误，但是我自己家就有这样的例子，当然可信
: 。一共就七个学生，记者都收到信息了，却不知道是哪个系哪一级的，搞笑呢？
:
: ～～～～～～
你不知道七个学生，记者知道，怎么搞笑？
若说这事有很小可能没有、有很大可能有，这才是符合逻辑常识的。
国内新闻管制，连明确的罪犯都叉某，这学生被搞有压力，你反而要求完美透明度，还
拿自己没被谈话做为佐证，逻辑劈叉没觉着疼么？
【在 l**k 的大作中提到】
: 饿死的完整名单没有，就算有也肯定有错误，但是我自己家就有这样的例子，当然可信
: 。一共就七个学生，记者都收到信息了，却不知道是哪个系哪一级的，搞笑呢？
:
: ～～～～～～
l*k
41 楼
lol，我又没要求楼主发到新闻上去，只用偷偷告诉我就行，你不用鸡动
～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～
【在 p*****e 的大作中提到】
: 你家饿死人我不知道，怎么可信？
: 你不知道七个学生，记者知道，怎么搞笑？
: 若说这事有很小可能没有、有很大可能有，这才是符合逻辑常识的。
: 国内新闻管制，连明确的罪犯都叉某，这学生被搞有压力，你反而要求完美透明度，还
: 拿自己没被谈话做为佐证，逻辑劈叉没觉着疼么？
～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～
【在 p*****e 的大作中提到】
: 你家饿死人我不知道，怎么可信？
: 你不知道七个学生，记者知道，怎么搞笑？
: 若说这事有很小可能没有、有很大可能有，这才是符合逻辑常识的。
: 国内新闻管制，连明确的罪犯都叉某，这学生被搞有压力，你反而要求完美透明度，还
: 拿自己没被谈话做为佐证，逻辑劈叉没觉着疼么？
p*e
42 楼
楼主也是转帖，你应该去问那个记者。
你也不要太敏感，有国内地下党和辅导员敏感就够了，海外补助发不过来的。
【在 l**k 的大作中提到】
: lol，我又没要求楼主发到新闻上去，只用偷偷告诉我就行，你不用鸡动
:
: ～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～
你也不要太敏感，有国内地下党和辅导员敏感就够了，海外补助发不过来的。
【在 l**k 的大作中提到】
: lol，我又没要求楼主发到新闻上去，只用偷偷告诉我就行，你不用鸡动
:
: ～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～
l*k
43 楼
这文章不是公开媒体上找的，楼主既然能私下收到稿子，应该跟记者也有私下联系么
你也不用太鸡动，这里是学术版，不是傻聋版
【在 p*****e 的大作中提到】
: 楼主也是转帖，你应该去问那个记者。
: 你也不要太敏感，有国内地下党和辅导员敏感就够了，海外补助发不过来的。
你也不用太鸡动，这里是学术版，不是傻聋版
【在 p*****e 的大作中提到】
: 楼主也是转帖，你应该去问那个记者。
: 你也不要太敏感，有国内地下党和辅导员敏感就够了，海外补助发不过来的。
a*e
44 楼
笑话版开什么玩笑，无聊，笑话！
【在 l**k 的大作中提到】
: 看来在笑话版不能开玩笑，开了玩笑就要应赌，你丫真粘核
:
: show下
【在 l**k 的大作中提到】
: 看来在笑话版不能开玩笑，开了玩笑就要应赌，你丫真粘核
:
: show下
p*e
45 楼
既然你这么啃腚是假的，也请你相信围观屁民的智商，你不必这么敏感。
ccav天天正面宣传，屁民还能被别有用心的一小撮给骗了去？你这是侮辱ccav呢。
【在 l**k 的大作中提到】
: 这文章不是公开媒体上找的，楼主既然能私下收到稿子，应该跟记者也有私下联系么
: 你也不用太鸡动，这里是学术版，不是傻聋版
ccav天天正面宣传，屁民还能被别有用心的一小撮给骗了去？你这是侮辱ccav呢。
【在 l**k 的大作中提到】
: 这文章不是公开媒体上找的，楼主既然能私下收到稿子，应该跟记者也有私下联系么
: 你也不用太鸡动，这里是学术版，不是傻聋版
l*k
46 楼
我一直相信着呢，要不这个坑怎么会只有三五个ID回帖lol
～～～～～～～～～～～～～
【在 p*****e 的大作中提到】
: 既然你这么啃腚是假的，也请你相信围观屁民的智商，你不必这么敏感。
: ccav天天正面宣传，屁民还能被别有用心的一小撮给骗了去？你这是侮辱ccav呢。
～～～～～～～～～～～～～
【在 p*****e 的大作中提到】
: 既然你这么啃腚是假的，也请你相信围观屁民的智商，你不必这么敏感。
: ccav天天正面宣传，屁民还能被别有用心的一小撮给骗了去？你这是侮辱ccav呢。
相关阅读
想知道一下，犹他大学跳海的在读博士唐晓琳在美国读书期间曾经回过国吗？哪位能推荐一篇来自science和nature的旷世佳作范文在美的华人生物教授有哪些有希望拿诺奖加微信txm149,进入全球华人高端私密交友平台。为什么和怎么做文献综述中国的牡蛎为什么会冠以外国的身份习皇拟取消两院生命科学部和医学部严肃地请教一下癌症的诊断标准： (转载)贺建奎证明了科学和科学家的虚伪性NAS awards 2019cellular signaling审稿机会转基因生物用故事给你的演讲添加生命力某大“3 3”聘用制教师97%淘汰率。。PNAS word template helpsb院士制度选出了SB去当权 应该吗？黄军就和贺建奎哪个更牛逼一些？ (转载)请问怎样从计算机转行成生物科学家“贺建奎”让基因编辑“背了个大锅”中国人口增长率再过几年就会低于零，放开生二胎后变化不大。