Of monsters and mentors: PhD disasters, and how to avoid them

PhDs: ‘toxic’ supervisors and ‘students from hell’

How should universities handle breakdowns in PhD student-supervisor relationships?

7 April

Reader's comments (11)

#1 Submitted by Zmith on June 1, 2017 - 11:51am

I would prefer to remain anonymous. I was thirty when I was awarded my PhD (this was before time constraints were imposed) after seven years of hard and dedicated work. My supervisor told me I was too old to apply for university posts. He was wrong; but I believed him, and so I didn't. Now sixty, I look back on a ruined and wasted life.

#2 Submitted by r.... on June 3, 2017 - 9:33am

I am sorry to hear that you think that your life was wasted by some inappropriate advice from your PhD supervisor. You need to realize, however, that doing a PhD should train you to think independently and evaluate evidence without outside influences. Have you even tried to apply for positions? Did the seven year's hard work result in publishable/applicable output required to apply for a university post?

#3 Submitted by meme on June 1, 2017 - 2:43pm

I've certainly heard horror stories about PhDs which echo this article and my own PhD viva (outside the UK) was one of those. One of my examiners tried to block my PhD, mainly because he had a feud with my main supervisors, which was an incredibly stressful situation. I made it in the end but it damaged my confidence. As a PhD supervisor myself, I recognise that it is a learning process for every academic. I'm supervising a new cohort of students who started after several of my students completed their PhDs. I can see now that having insights into the PhD trajectory (and not just your own) is very important to plan ahead, including career and publication plans. Training could help with this as well. Supervising a lot of PhD students at the same time also means that I have to plan feedback and meetings quite carefully, which (perhaps counter-intuitively) makes me more efficient. I'm sure that's not the same for everyone though. We also all have to sign a learning agreement with the PhD student, which sets out ground rules about meetings and response time. If there are any issues, a student can always refer to this and say that the supervisor(s) didn't uphold their side of the bargain. The other important thing to recognise is that PhD supervision is often not recognised in terms of workload and career progression. This doesn't excuse the horror stories in this article but it should put things in perspective.

#4 Submitted by BenCrocket on June 1, 2017 - 5:52pm

Reading the first PhD student's story, I believe it's a biased, subjective, and exaggerated account, with almost no real substance there. The student failed to give the reader any explanation about her supervisor's supposed failings. Did she made any progress in her research? What was the problem of withdrawal? Why didn't she just continue with her PhD? What does it mean 'male dominated' department? Is this an accusation by itself? Why?

#5 Submitted by Douglas Taylor on June 3, 2017 - 6:44am

I have never supervised a PhD but have supervised many master's dissertations / research reports. My experience is that different students have different needs and we need to identify those needs early. I have had students who wanted assistance in finalising the topic, agreeing the research methodology and help in getting through the panel and then just a read-through of their final work. Others want their hands held every step of the way and almost seem to require counseling. The former group are a little frustrating because one feels almost intrusive and excluded from the process; the latter group are often too time consuming and demanding and suck the life out of one. So there is a middle ground. At our university we enter into a contract with each student at the beginning of the process, setting out our expectations and responsibilities as supervisors and students, and that forms the basis for our relationship. Now, in my sixties, I am embarking on my long dreamed for PhD. My bad experiences have been fining one potential supervisor so focused on his research that he tried to change my topic to fit in with his interests; one appointed supervisor who suddenly did not have his contract renewed and left me to find someone else - I did that at another university; and my current supervisor, who suits me perfectly (I like "supervisor light"). So my advice to would-be students would be to find the supervisor first and make sure you agree on topics, methodologies (in principle) and working / supervision methods before committing to the university. Meet your commitments and expect your supervisor to meet his or hers. And never be afraid to change supervisors - it's your life, your career and, ultimately, your responsibility. Remember that it's better to "waste" two years than a life-time.

#6 Submitted by r.... on June 3, 2017 - 9:27am

The most important advice to a prospective PhD student: do your homework before you commit! Find out as much as possible about your potential supervisors (publications, funding, facilities available, number of people in their groups). Most importantly,talk to other current or previous PhD students to get their opinions! I was once "saved" from joining a well-known lab by talking to lab members there. Past glory does not always translate into the current situation.

#7 Submitted by Anonymouse on June 4, 2017 - 1:46pm

In my opinion, my writing wasn't read in any detail, I tended to receive a compliment about my writing at the top of the chapters and not a lot else (and not all the chapters were returned to me) . In my opinion, I got supervisor 'support' with the statistics but I wasn't confident in this help (I kept asking my supervisor by email if the statistics were OK and made sure to keep the emails until the thesis was passed) and had it documented prior to the viva of my concerns. In my opinion, the examiners also had concerns about the statistics. In my opinion, the main supervisor spent less than 50 minutes reading my draft thesis (in my opinion, the other supervisor didn't provide any feedback on the draft thesis) and only changes were made to the abstract at this stage. I was surprised and delighted to pass (I was preparing myself for a fail) and because of the comprehensive feedback from the examiners my thesis was greatly improved. In my opinion, the viva (I let a supervisor sit in) must have unnerved the supervisor because this person, in my opinion, tried to do the corrections and get me to pass them on to the internal. I eventually ended up cutting this supervisor out of the process. In my opinion, I have tried to tell some in the university about what happened during the corrections phase (I didn't give my name or the supervisors of course) but they didn't know how to handle it or didn't want to know. Had I failed the viva I'm not sure I would have approached the university (colleagues are often friends) but I would have sent the emails I'd kept and the feedback I'd received regarding the thesis on to their professional body. I can't be sure, but I think one of the supervisors was fairly new to post (but had been an academic for many years) and may have failed to get another student through to PhD completion around about the same time. I'm still uptight about it years on...

#8 Submitted by Doctoratus on June 4, 2017 - 11:51pm

Whilst supervision is a two-way street, it is often easier to blame the student rather than the supervisor. Institutions that place candidates in harms way with inattentive, or even worse, destructive supervisors are failing in their duty of care. Sadly this appears to be a problem that transcends international borders. In a world, which can quantify almost anything, it is remarkable that evaluating supervisor quality has proved such a hard, albeit sensitive problem to solve. However, there is evidence to suggest that a more holistic view of candidature, which evaluates both the supervisor and the candidate, has much to offer and can provide hard data to remove or reassign the small percentage of supervisors who do the most harm. ( https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/assessing-phd-supervisors-leads-higher-completion-rates)

#9 Submitted by Anonymouse on June 5, 2017 - 12:54pm

Supervision should be a two-way street but the reality is there is huge power imbalance. I tried different things to try and get more engagement from my supervisors. For example, I sent agendas, I praised them, sent emails and reminders, was very direct, perhaps even rude (through sheer frustration) and I even suggested a timetable for feedback at one point but it was fruitless. I actually liked them as people but I honestly wouldn't rate them as supervisors. In my opinion, I learned much, much more from the examiners and actually received more feedback from them. That's not the way it should be. What happened during the corrections phase placed me in an extremely difficult position and I had no choice but to eventually address the situation with the main supervisor. I'm pleased that I did but, in my opinion, I've suffered for it. The balance of power was not in my favour...

#10 Submitted by Thewark on August 11, 2020 - 11:22am

If PhD studentships are awarded to a supervisor in the normal way of open grant competition, successful submissions to the grant-awarding body should be made public. They can be a window into supervisors' minds if one has the wit or cynicism to reflect on their implications for the prospective student. As a panelist or advisor for several funding bodies I see submissions that span a wide range from pure egoism ("My research programme is brilliant, I am brilliant, my intellect shines like a lighthouse and I need a PhD slave to do my bidding") to supportive and collaborative mentoring ("I have an idea to share with a PhD student, who will have a good start with my existing data and material, who will have opportunity and encouragement to make the research their own, to fashion their own intellectual standing, and to emerge trained and confident").

#11 Submitted by ppatibe... on November 23, 2021 - 6:50pm

I don't know if you or someone you know might help. I completed a 4 year PhD abroad but did not submit my thesis for several reasons, covid being one of them. However, I do now want to complete my PhD at a local University back home here in the UK but need help to draft a letter explaining why my thesis was not submitted. I'd be happy to provide additional information at the right time. Do you know someone from your publication or other who might be able to help? Please, advice?

Of monsters and mentors: PhD disasters, and how to avoid them

Despite all that’s been done to improve doctoral study, horror stories keep coming. Here three students relate PhD nightmares while two academics advise on how to ensure a successful supervision

Register to continue

Subscribe

Related articles

PhDs: ‘toxic’ supervisors and ‘students from hell’

Reader's comments (11)

Sponsored

Featured jobs