EB1 EA, OR or NIW

J

JFLuo

Registered Users (C)
Pls help to evaluate, which category is better?
1. PhD in Engineering
2. 7 Journal papers (6 first author, 1 third author)
3. One Springer-Verlag book (first author)
4. One book chapter in preparation
5. more than 7 conference papers
6. paper reviewer for an international journal for three times
7 Reviewed papers on behalf of advisor for various international journals
8. 7 journal papers totally cited for more than 75 times
9. Programming committee of an international conference
10. Four references from Europe (not known in person)
Six references from USA (2 of them not known in person)

Thanks for your kind help!
 
EA
pos:
You are free like a bird.
All you have to do is to continue working in your field
Don't need an employer or specific project.
Feels good to be approved.
neg:
Most challenging category, highest standards. (A CIS employee explained to me 'well essentially you have to proove to us that you can walk on water'.)

OR
pos:
Surefire deal with your qualifications.
neg:
You need an offer for a 'permanent' position. Some companies don't want to give you a lette stating that fearing that you will use it against them if they want to fire you.
You are tied to the position you were sponsored for (save for AC21 provisions)


NIW
pos:
As long as you continue to work on the project/field that your NIW was for you are fine.
neg:
Relatively unpredictable approvals. (seems to be up to the wims of the officer)

As for the EA/OR subpoints

> 1. PhD in Engineering

Advanced degree.

> 2. 7 Journal papers (6 first author, 1 third author)
> 3. One Springer-Verlag book (first author)
> 4. One book chapter in preparation
> 5. more than 7 conference papers

Has published scholarly articles

> 6. paper reviewer for an international journal for three times

As individual or on a panel has judged the work of others in the field.

> 7 Reviewed papers on behalf of advisor for various international journals

Don't think that that counts too much.

> 8. 7 journal papers totally cited for more than 75 times

'Impact' on the field ?

> 9. Programming committee of an international conference

Sat on a panel judging the work of others

> 10. Four references from Europe (not known in person)
> Six references from USA (2 of them not known in person)

Are these people with 'pull' in the field (tenured academic types, VP's for R&D etc ) ?

Any prizes ?

The problem is that it doesn't help to have many items for one subpoint, it is important to fill 3 categories to their liking.
 
JFLuo said:
Pls help to evaluate, which category is better?
1. PhD in Engineering
2. 7 Journal papers (6 first author, 1 third author)
3. One Springer-Verlag book (first author)
4. One book chapter in preparation
5. more than 7 conference papers
6. paper reviewer for an international journal for three times
7 Reviewed papers on behalf of advisor for various international journals
8. 7 journal papers totally cited for more than 75 times
9. Programming committee of an international conference
10. Four references from Europe (not known in person)
Six references from USA (2 of them not known in person)

Thanks for your kind help!
Click to expand...


OR: If you have a permanent position I would say that you have a pretty good chance to be successful.

NIW: For NIW your academic qualifications are not that important but you have to prove that you are of national interest. Or in very simple terms: You might win the Nobel prize but work in a field where a lot of high qualified americans work and you won't have chance for NIW. But you have "only" a B.Sc. but work in an important field in which hardly any amercian works and you have a very high chance for NIW. Since you didn't specifiy in which field you are working in it impossible to say if you have chance in NIW.

EA: That is hard to say because I think you are a borderline case. And I would think that in the moment the USCIS is in general where tough in all categories so that you might be not successful with EA but it depends very much on your petition and perhaps some additional stuff. Some answers might help to determine your chances: When you were asked to work as a referee for a journal, did the editor specify in his letter/email that he choose you because of your very high qualifications ? Is there a chance that you could referee for 1-2 more journals ? How many of the 75 citations are citations in which parts of your work are discussed in more detail ? Could you get more than 6 reference letters from very well known scientists in your field (CEO, Nobel Prize winner etc.) ? Are you member of any organization which chose you because of your accomplishments ?
 
Honkman and Hadron,

Thanks for your detailed evaluation.

1. I got a recommondation letters from the editor who asked me to review
the papers. He mentioned in his recommondation letter that it is because
the high quality of paper submitted to his journal earlier.
2. The references
are from Past president of national academy of An europe country
Associate Editor of an international journal from Europe
An senior engineer from europe
My book editor from Springer in Germany

Other from VP of R&D of an USA company
4 Professors from US (3 of them knows me well and
from my graduate school)
1 Professor from US who is the general chair of the
conference whose programm committee I am in...
3. I am the member of Sigma Xi
4. Among the 75 citations, at least 4-5 dedicate an paragraph on my paper.
One dedicates the whole paper on my paper....
 
JFLuo said:
Honkman and Hadron,

Thanks for your detailed evaluation.

1. I got a recommondation letters from the editor who asked me to review
the papers. He mentioned in his recommondation letter that it is because
the high quality of paper submitted to his journal earlier.
2. The references
are from Past president of national academy of An europe country
Associate Editor of an international journal from Europe
An senior engineer from europe
My book editor from Springer in Germany

Other from VP of R&D of an USA company
4 Professors from US (3 of them knows me well and
from my graduate school)
1 Professor from US who is the general chair of the
conference whose programm committee I am in...
3. I am the member of Sigma Xi
4. Among the 75 citations, at least 4-5 dedicate an paragraph on my paper.
One dedicates the whole paper on my paper....
Click to expand...


1) That sounds good.
2) (President of national academy) sounds good. (Associate Editor of an international journal) not an useful reference as long he is not a well known professor at the same time. (senior engineer) sound good. (My book editor from Springer) not so useful since you have a connection to him. VP of R&D sounds good. (4 Professors from US (3 of them knows me well and from my graduate school) 1 Professor from US who is the general chair of the conference whose programm committee I am in) all know you therefore not really useful references
3) Sigma Xi doesn't count as a membership criteria as far as I know.
4) Good for OR but not enough for EA in my opinion.

Overall I think you have very good chance for OR if you get 6-7 more reference letters from well known scientists which don't know you personally.
EA will be pretty tough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top