Do PhD supervisors make the grade?

Reader's comments (5)

#1 Submitted by msl_csp on February 20, 2014 - 12:45pm

I rather agree that we focus on the negatives as many PhDs are good. Given that we are in a mass system for PhDs compared to when I was a student, it is to be expected that the dynamic range (as per undergraduates) is larger than in past times. I speak as an experienced supervisor and examiner who has examined at a range of old and new universities.

#2 Submitted by nawjk on February 20, 2014 - 1:11pm

I've hardly spent any time with my PhD supervisors for two reasons; they're not experts in my chosen field (one has knowledge related to it) and secondly, they're never around. It can take months to receive a reply to any query as they are busy with day to day business and other work, and by the time I do receive a reply, I've moved on to something else. It may be due to the cross discipline nature of my project, but useful guidance is a rare thing.

#3 Submitted by paul.... on February 20, 2014 - 2:56pm

I too found this article something of a rant and not particularly revealing about the state of doctoral study. In fact I was left with the impression that the authors of the article must have been the inspiration for this excellent article from the Thesis Whisperer. http://thesiswhisperer.com/2013/02/13/academic-assholes/

#4 Submitted by sarahlouq on February 22, 2014 - 11:26am

Oh dear! I'd been looking forward to reading this but what I hoped was going to be an interesting and balanced look at the state of UK Doctoral education, was, in fact, a rant from a couple of professors who obviously don't want to examine anyone anymore?! I can't see any other reason for such a pompous piece and I doubt that they would be high on anyones list of potential examiners! As one of the 20'000 people who got a PhD in 2010/11 (yes, lovely arbitrary and completely meaningless graph) I worked hard for that and it wouldn't take much effort for you to find evidence that I had some interesting supervisory moments! I deserved my PhD as I am sure the majority do. However, there is a really nasty undertone to this article suggesting that those of us who have gained a PhD in the last 10 years or so are somewhat inferior. I expect better from people in their position - if this was a PhD it would need major revisions. I also expect better from the THE, yes be provocative but don't print sub-standard, poor quality polemics just to massage the ego of Professor so and so!

#5 Submitted by Fanis on February 22, 2014 - 2:01pm

The authors pose an important question and focus on what they perceive as a problem (the negative answer to the title) rather than celebrating success, which for them should be the rule. I note a minor contradiction in that the older way of doing things asked more preparation from the student and more diligence from the supervisor, but wasn't necessarily associated with more rejections. "Whatever the pressures of modern life…" As much as I agree with the authors that they have raised an important problem (and address the "more experienced" audience and those inexperienced supervisors who will take the time to read them, but not so much the Ph.D. students themselves) I do not particularly think that it can be solved simply by enhancing the examination part of the equation. The whole question of how much pressure is put on the academic and whether such pressure is beneficial to science is way more significant, in my view. Yet, overall, I have welcomed this contribution, as much as I sympathise with the student reader. The time limit on their studentships, for example, is bad policy. Others may disagree...