Problems with PhD supervisor

Nitefly said:
You can tell without reading it that BetaNumeric is doing a PhD :D
Click to expand...
Did, not doing. Viva was Feb 2010. Despite the various issues I just outlined I now work in a research company doing stuff like quantum mechanics, AI, systems engineering and a bunch of other research topics as the research team leader. The reason I got that position (signed the promotion contract today!) was because I am able to direct myself and others well, evaluating what is a good or bad direction to move the research in and I don't have an issue pulling the occasional late night or weekend. Much of those qualities I had to learn in a short space of time thanks to the ineptitude of my PhD supervisor. But like I said, it's not something I'd wish on someone but it is possible to severe connection with your supervisor and still get those letters after your name.
 
D.P. said:
There is no way on God's earth you can have any kind of part time side job and do a PhD within the standard 4-6 years, and the 3-4 years stipends in the UK means you are going to have to even more insane hours into things.
Click to expand...

In the previous thread where someone was complaining about having to do work for the dept such as ordering equipment etc.. IIRC you described something like a 40 hour working week of doing work in your department while doing the PhD?
This would indicate that if you didn't have the workload from the dept you'd have at least 40 hours of free time in which you could quite easily fit in a part time job...
 
My PhD is my Job, and vice versa......I certainly couldn't do another p/time job (neither would I want to) and chasing around after your supervisor (or sponsor, as mine likes to be refered) seems to be par for the course.....Personally if I haven't the time to do as she asks then I say so and explain why...has not been an issue as yet.

I should add that I am somewhat older, experienced and more financially independent than the average post-grad so that may bias me to some degree.

I also think, in my limited experience of these things, that each individual's experience and protocols regarding their PhD is going to be different so comparing one to another seems a little meaningless.
 
Last edited:
Maybe I'm in the wrong PhD office. No one I know does these sort of hours. The guy next to me is constantly playing web games or on iplayer! Again maybe it comes down to whether it's computational / lab.

My old biology PhD house mate was working quite long hours. Working at home when home and sometimes even going to the lab at weekends.
 
Castiel said:
My PhD is my Job, and vice versa......I certainly couldn't do another p/time job (neither would I want to) and chasing around after your supervisor (or sponsor, as mine likes to be refered) seems to be par for the course.....Personally if I haven't the time to do as she asks then I say so and explain why...has not been an issue as yet.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't advise people to take on part time jobs, no matter how wonderful and cuddly their supervisor is because while you might have time now you don't know how research will go. Next week you might find your experiment needs to be repeated, 5 times, due to an error you made. Someone might have discovered something which completely undermines your current work. You might find out someone has proved a god damn no-go theorem for certain flux configurations in Type II mavity-gauge models. Then you will have to pull 12 hour days for the next 2 months just to stand still, something which isn't compatible with a second job. However, if you have a very flexible second job, like doing undergrad marking, which you can bang out like a robot any time during the week you want, then you can just shuffle things around and forego a bit of sleep here and there. Personally I found I code best around 3am but I'm a little odd.

The nature of research makes a postgrad's immediate future uncertain and it's that which is the killer for commitments on your time. If you have to work every day of your entire PhD doing 12 hours in the lab/office you're either wacko or doing something wrong. If you have to spend a few weeks or even months doing 12 hours in the lab/office then you're just experiencing the ups and downs of academic research. Until you have enough papers and citations under your belt not to worry about throwing 75% of a paper in the bin that's just something you have to be willing to put up with. Having a jack ass supervisor making unrealistic irrational unreasonable demands you don't have to put up with. Whether you go the quisling route of collaborating with a dictator or decide to douse your bridges in petrol and burn them to the ground is up to you but both options are available, along with a few ones in between. I do not suggest actually dousing anything with petrol though, it's terribly hard to get out of your clothes.....
 
dowie said:
In the previous thread where someone was complaining about having to do work for the dept such as ordering equipment etc.. IIRC you described something like a 40 hour working week of doing work in your department while doing the PhD?
This would indicate that if you didn't have the workload from the dept you'd have at least 40 hours of free time in which you could quite easily fit in a part time job...
Click to expand...

That person in the other thread was actually me :p.

Again, thanks for the time people have put into their replies :). D.P. makes a PhD sound like 3-4 years of slavery!
 
You pay to study your phd, your contracted duties for your warden job. Its none of his business. Next time he brings it up start asking him how fat his wife is getting, should teach him to stay out of your private life
 
A.N.Other said:
If your cell lines need splitting, your cell lines need splitting. This is the way it is.
Click to expand...

Yes definitely. Things take time. One guy in the office, the only lab guy in fact, is always waiting around for technicians to get/sort or whatever it is. He's quite annoyed with them recently as they are being very slow and he has things that need doing.

I couldn't do it. I like the 'freedom and independence' of needing just myself and a pc.
 
BetaNumeric said:
I wouldn't advise people to take on part time jobs, no matter how wonderful and cuddly their supervisor is because while you might have time now you don't know how research will go. Next week you might find your experiment needs to be repeated, 5 times, due to an error you made. Someone might have discovered something which completely undermines your current work. You might find out someone has proved a god damn no-go theorem for certain flux configurations in Type II mavity-gauge models. Then you will have to pull 12 hour days for the next 2 months just to stand still, something which isn't compatible with a second job. However, if you have a very flexible second job, like doing undergrad marking, which you can bang out like a robot any time during the week you want, then you can just shuffle things around and forego a bit of sleep here and there. Personally I found I code best around 3am but I'm a little odd.

The nature of research makes a postgrad's immediate future uncertain and it's that which is the killer for commitments on your time. If you have to work every day of your entire PhD doing 12 hours in the lab/office you're either wacko or doing something wrong. If you have to spend a few weeks or even months doing 12 hours in the lab/office then you're just experiencing the ups and downs of academic research. Until you have enough papers and citations under your belt not to worry about throwing 75% of a paper in the bin that's just something you have to be willing to put up with. Having a jack ass supervisor making unrealistic irrational unreasonable demands you don't have to put up with. Whether you go the quisling route of collaborating with a dictator or decide to douse your bridges in petrol and burn them to the ground is up to you but both options are available, along with a few ones in between. I do not suggest actually dousing anything with petrol though, it's terribly hard to get out of your clothes.....
Click to expand...


I don't disagree....For me however this is my job, it will remain my job if and when I submit my thesis and so on. I spend an average of 25 hours or so working on the project itself, another 10 hours working specifically on my thesis. In between there is significant travelling and mooching about time.....the whole thing relies on total flexibility, so another job would be impractical.

All in all I probably work a 40-45 hour week, but not office hours and sometimes more, sometimes less.

For me and both my previous occupations, a 45 hour week doing something I would do (and have done) in my spare time anyway is like part time heaven....:)
 
Scotty123 said:
One guy in the office, the only lab guy in fact, is always waiting around for technicians to get/sort or whatever it is. He's quite annoyed with them recently as they are being very slow and he has things that need doing.
Click to expand...

You have technicians who do stuff for you? Pffft, fancy-pants! :p

DIY all the way. Might take a lot of time but there's no waiting around...!
 
I think I have said this in another thread but my experience of studying for and passing a PhD (and going on to get a good postdoc position) is much closer to what BetaNumeric says than D.P. (who seems to have been brutally bent over during his PhD and seems to validate his experience by saying that is the only way).
 
Castiel said:
All in all I probably work a 40-45 hour week, but not office hours and sometimes more, sometimes less.

For me and both my previous occupations, a 45 hour week doing something I would do (and have done) in my spare time anyway is like part time heaven....:)
Click to expand...
I almost think that's part of the test of getting a PhD. Someone says "Okay, here's 3 years of money. I'll give you something to think about and a pointer every now and again but you can work when you want, on pretty much what you want. I'll check up on it, somewhat, every 6 or 12 months. If you have bugger all after 3 years it'll become a black hole on your CV. If you have gotten off your arse and done something constructive then you'll get a reward".

PhDs are supposed to have basic guidance but it's about learning self direction and motivation. If you get a postdoc there's even less guidance. Then it really can be "Here's some money for 3 or 4 or 5 years. Don't do anything and you'll not get another chance. Do something good and I'll give you another 5 years of money afterwards". Being paid to think up new things, to consider problems others cannot solve, is awesome. But part of that is developing a feel for what problems to look at, when to change direction, what to put the effort into. A PhD supervisor makes sure you don't fall asleep at your desk (sometimes literally) but part of their responsibility is to give you responsibility to chart your own course. It shouldn't be just dumped on you but if needs be it can be. The original poster sounds like his supervisor doesn't quite see it like that but I doubt the whole department is the same.
 
I wouldn't have a black hole as I have the Sub Warden position, but the intention is to get a PhD not leave!

I am 9 months into my PhD and about to submit my first year report (it is supposed to be submitted 9 months in) and know my gap in knowledge but need a fair bit of guidance to find a solution! I am somewhat enjoying the PhD and will certainly up my hour-age in the near future. Over the summer I have nothing to do for the Sub Warden job, just free lodgings :D.
 
BetaNumeric said:
You're not being unreasonable. As you said, plenty of people do PhDs while raising small children. I have no idea how some of them afford it or can move about Europe every few years with a wife and toddlers but they manage it.

The issue is whether or not you can manage the dual workload. Unfortunately your supervisor is the one who signs off on any paperwork which says you are or aren't meeting necessary targets. However, if you are clearly coping with the workload of both responsibilities then you really shouldn't have a problem.

I'm surprised you're held to a 9-5 thing. When I did mine people turned up when they wanted, left when they wanted, all that mattered was producing the result you were asked to work on by some fairly generous time. Hell, one guy lived on London with his girlfriend while doing a PhD in Southampton. I think he spent less than 6 hours in the department per term. Personally I always worked something like 2pm to 8pm, including weekends. As for my supervisor, well she was awful. I'm certain she didn't read my PhD before I submitted it, despite being asked to, she didn't know the answer to basic, relevant questions. Not a single word or equation in my thesis had anything to do with her. Fortunately I managed to develop a good work ethic by myself, which now serves me well in my job where I'm pretty self motivating and directing. My supervisor's other student wasn't so lucky. She (the student) asked to take on another supervisor and the supervisor said "No, it's your fault you're doing badly, not mine". That escalated to a meeting with the head of department, who said "Take a second supervisor but on your head be it".



If you feel you can produce the work and you can demonstrate that during the last few months while juggling both you have maintained a sufficient level of work then make it clear to your supervisor that if necessary you'll go over his head to speak to someone. It is not unreasonable to time shift your work during a PhD, everyone has responsibilities for various things. If your supervisor still has a rod up his backside then, if you think you can do it, go it alone or change supervisor. Unless you're spectacularly lucky and have a supervisor who does active work with you, rather than just giving you tasks to do on your own, you'll be fine. By now you should have an idea what area you want to do your thesis on anyway.

Perhaps you found that you were pushed to the extreme by your PhD, assuming you have a PhD (I don't know, I don't pay enough attention here) but that isn't really true. Like I said, I knew people who never turned up to the office and did work when they pleased. I personally liked to work afternoon/evening but I know people who work 7am to 2pm, leaving the evening open to do with as they please. My area was mathematics and theoretical physics and some of the greatest researchers in those areas famously only worked 2 or 3 hours a day for their research. If someone works in a lab then there's a certain amount of grind which must be done but sorry, your blanket statement is just not universally valid.

I wouldn't agree there. If the OP can demonstrate he has been able to juggle both without compromising his work then it isn't unreasonable to stand his ground or go over his supervisor's head. A reasonable head of department wouldn't just dismiss him out of hand.

While I don't deny that people live and breath their research when doing their PhD and often go through weeks, even months, of pulling 12+ hour days it isn't necessarily to the exclusion of all else. In fact, I would say that if you spent 3+ years doing work every waking second (aside from visits to the bathroom and eating) you have the wrong work/relaxation balance. I worked 8 hour stints every day for 4 months to write up my 350 page thesis, without any assistance from my supervisor and with no collaborators. I still had time to visit my girlfriend 200 miles away regularly and had every morning free to do with as I pleased.

Yes, if someone is thinking of starting a PhD they have to be prepared to spend extended periods of time doing nothing but their research day after day, but it isn't for the entire time of the PhD. Regardless of how much someone might love their work, that simply isn't healthy and it isn't the reality of most people's PhD. I don't know if you had a particularly harrowing PhD or you have some desire to make it sound like the 12 trials of Hercules but you're not giving a very level description of the typical PhD.

It might be reasonable to expect a 9-5 office time from a researcher but unless there's exceptional circumstances a supervisor cannot force you to do those times on a regular basis. Yes, some people do meet their supervisors at weird times or at their houses or even for a meal but I'm pretty sure there's basic laws which prevent what you're describing from being enforceable. European laws about maximum work hours per week for instance. Yes, people might decide to work more, if they need to, but you cannot be forced to do that sort of thing, especially if you're able to demonstrate sufficient research during normal hours.

You're describing individual idiosyncracies of people's supervisors, determined by mutual willingness and personal quirks. Only a supervisor with a clear personality disorder would report you for incompetence or insufficient work because you don't go to their house at 10pm on a Sunday, provided you're clearly meeting reasonable work hours and producing work. Yes, if you refuse to speak to your supervisor then there's an issue but if you say "I'm in the office 7 hours a day, every weekday, and often at weekends and I'm available at reasonable hours for meetings" (and you can prove it) then they cannot call you on it. People work funny hours during PhDs because they are willing to and generally there's a level of mutual willingness from supervisor and supervisee. If the issue were forced and someone didn't want to go to their supervisor's house at 10pm on a Sunday there isn't going to be grounds for dismissal. A supervisor who takes on students and who then makes themselves unavailable is in the wrong, not the student. If a professor knows they will be away for months at a time then they should not take on a student or they should make it very clear from the start and offer an interim supervisor or sort something out both parties agree on. My supervisor got pregnant end of my 1st year and buggered off for 6 months of my second year. I had to ask for a second supervisor, the other student put in an official complaint. Do you think my supervisor would have had a leg to stand on if she'd complained I hadn't seen her for 6 months, when I was in the office every day and she was at home with a baby? No bloody way.

I think your advice is terrible. You're painting a PhD as some trial through hell. Yes, at times it can be, at times you have to do 14 hour days with no help and no guidance, but that's only for small periods of time. A few months at most. It isn't the 3 years of having your fingernails pulled out you seem to be trying to paint it.

If the research is good, the department is made aware of any grievances, work commitments are met and everything is done by the book then you can just say "F U" to your supervisor if needs be. It's not advisable and it will make getting a postdoc place harder if you don't have mindblowingly awesome research with loads of citations, but if you've got the balls you can do it.

Personally I barely spoke to my supervisor the last year of my PhD. I didn't go to see her when I got my PhD awarded. I don't keep in touch. I have no idea what she does now, she is no longer part of the faculty and I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if it's because she did bugger all for 4 years. It made for a very stressful few months but coming out the other side of it I certainly think I have a better work ethic and self motivation than I had going into the PhD. I might not wish it on anyone else but being ultra chummy with your supervisor isn't essential. The relationship between her and the other student was even worse. That went to official grievances. But the student stood her ground and got the PhD in the end. Not as good as she might have done but she didn't throw away the 4 years.

A supervisor doesn't have to be in your viva, many decide not to be. Even if they do sit in, they cannot chip in and help you beyond the most basic of things and even that is considered quite out of order. There's generally someone from the department there, the internal examiner but quite often they aren't familiar with your specific area and so defer to the external, who is supposed to be the expert on the thesis topic. Like I said, I didn't get ANY help from my supervisor. Not a single word, equation, suggestion, idea, anything, in my thesis came from her. She was worse than useless for me, because I expected some help, she made initial motions to seem like she would help but then sat on her arse. I wrote a 70 page paper single handed and got it accepted by a reputable journal. I remember telling her I got it published, after I'd given a 45 minute presentation on it to the department (part of our duties as postgrads), where one professor had expressed loudly his surprise I'd done it single handed. I didn't even mention her in the conclusions, though I mentioned a few other people. Her expression made the whole 4 months of working by myself worth it, just to stick it to her. Unfortunately the other student wasn't so lucky, they'd co-authored a paper and then the supervisor dragged her heels. The student couldn't publish it by herself, it would be a violation of ethics to do it without all authors' permissions.

So if you can produce the work, can demonstrate it to the department, are willing to go the nuclear option of telling your supervisor to take a hike, you can do a PhD by yourself. It's not to be recommended but it can be done.

Well I can tell you from personal experience you're wrong.
Click to expand...


PhD in the UK are clearly very different compared to the rest of the world, which may explain their reputation on the global stage.
I agree with a lot of what you are saying but I think you are wrong in others.

Of course you don't have to accept to meet your professor at 10pm on a weekend. My point was that it may be in your best interest to, not that anything directly bad will happen.

i stand 100% behind my point that you need to maintain some kind of healthy relationship with your otherwise you will likely have serious issues.

My professor was exactly as yours, he didn't contribute to my thesis at all and was only ever detrimental. However, If I didn't keep him remotely happy I would be sent packing, as he demonstrated on more than 1 occasion by firing people. Your supervisor has the ultimate power in deciding if you are ready to submit a thesis and if he is not cooperating or supporting you then you will never get a PhD. Your professor has to sign off that you are ready to submit, For sure you can quit and approach another professor to finish the last hurdle but that is more time and stress, and lends to political arguments over publications names on the thesis. I know someone who quit their phd halfway through writing a paper and joined another lab in another university - the paper was never allowed to be published because no agreement was made on authors and institutions.



In Switzerland and the US your supervisor has to be present and even has the right to fail you. Cases where external experts approved of the thesis and defense but the poor person's very own supervisor failed them are not unheard of. It happened in my university, not that I knew the person or the prof. This was one of the difficulties in arranging my defense - getting 2-3 external experts, internal expert, president and my professor to be present in the same location on the same day is very tough. In a 4 month window and a set of 8-10 external experts and 4-6 internal experts to choose from (and pretty much any professor to be the president) there was only 1 day where some solution could be met and it took me nearly 6 weeks to organize. A good friend had so much difficulty he actually had to start his post-doc and then a year later come back and do his defense!

Despite hating my professor he proved useful in my viva. Not in helping me respond to the experts in anyway but sorting out some political issues surrounding the project.. Committee presidents have no knowledge of the project or work so cannot provide support but merely ensure a fair defense.


As to 9-5 working times, this is fairly common. Where I did my university about half the lab had this and the other were completely ad-hoc. When I was leaving there was talk about having 9-6 hours (or some subset like 10-4) enforced to equalize labs and to ensure that interdepartmental meetings could be simpler, ensure simpler access for the students and improve experiences for visitors.
We would often have TV crews turning up at the last minute to report about recent papers etc, if the discovery channel turns up and half the lab is empty and people are missing then its not a good image. Due tot he nature of our work we were often a showcase lab so when foreign dignitaries, investors, heads of state, CEOs walk in they want to see people working, not a ghost town.
 
Last edited:
Art said:
You have technicians who do stuff for you? Pffft, fancy-pants! :p

DIY all the way. Might take a lot of time but there's no waiting around...!
Click to expand...

Not me personally! Other people, health and safety, all that rubbish. I don't know the specifics other than they're very slow.
 
And to clarify, my comments are not based solely on my personal experience but from many colleagues and friends all over the world.
 
I'm surprised you're held to a 9-5 thing. When I did mine people turned up when they wanted, left when they wanted, all that mattered was producing the result you were asked to work on by some fairly generous time.
Click to expand...

That's the major thing that I remember from mine. Rock up at 10am and leave at 4pm if you want. As long as you make your meetings and obligations, and show progress, it didn't matter. As long as you were reachable/available.

OP's supervisor sounds like a douche.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom