Question for PhD DUers.

[DrWeird]

Did you ever have to leave your research group a couple of years into your program due to... err... irreconcilable differences between you and your adviser?

If so, what sort of impediments did you run into?

[Maddy McCall]

1. I can't imagine having to do that.

Hypothetically, of course, couldn't you find a new advisor?

Also, I can't imagine abandoning the program when you're that far into it.

Is this your chair of your committee? Is there no one else in the program under whom you can work?

[DrWeird]

4. That's what I'm talking about, finding a new adviser.

nt

[rogerashton]

2. No, but I have seen it happen.

What can be done about it will depend a lot on the program. The obvious answer is to try to find another principle advisor within the same program. That could mean some shift of emphasis for your own research. But if that would create bad blood within the department, or if you are working in a lab directed by a powerful grant rainmaker, that could be problematic too. If so, all I can say is, bad break, old chap.

[autorank]

8. You make a good point but people should be aware of this.

University and department personnel do not operate in a vacuum. It doesn't matter if the adviser is a 'rainmaker' or the Deans nephew. This is a matter of procedure, rules, and explicit and implied promises. Universities get student's to buy into just this type of thinking, namely that it's a "bad break" instead of irresponsible or unethical conduct. Ultimately, if you are willing to advocate and fight for your rights, it doesn't matter if your adviser has pictures of the Dean with a 'pet goat,' right is right. Bring pressure to bear and do not ever take any bull shit from some pious, arrogant, and professionally challenged professors.

I've seen people prevail in any number of situations when they were wiling to push back and, in some cases, willing to obtain counsel.

Screw authority figures that abuse their power.

[rogerashton]

15. If it is a case of abuse of power,

then it should be fought -- although the cost of fighting might be high.

But there is such a thing as bad chemistry, with no (demonstrable) fault. And sometimes more creative grad students get themselves into that sort of situation when less creative ones would not.

A grad student from another department (who hangs out in my office now and then) was in yesterday, saying that although he makes it a policy never to express an opinion (until 2012, he said) he had slipped and been quite critical of a paper by a job candidate. The paper, however, had been accepted for publication by a major journal, and as he described it, the methods were the traditional ones. I understood his argument that they were not really adequate in context, but I also understood the view of his profs: it was at the same standard that their own research was! I don't really think the guy is in any trouble -- he really is quite brilliant -- but if someone were to decide on the basis of this that the student "just doesn't get it about research in our field" I would hardly see that as abuse of power. Wrong, but not unethical.

[stray cat]

3. Is there another advisor willing to work with you?

The main thing is to have somewhere else to go. As long as your advisor isn't the head of a department and is not on your commitee I don't think there is usually a serious impediment as long as you can make other arrangements.

[Angry Girl]

5. ouch... that may be a problem

As you probably already know, being in a PhD program is all very political. Depends on how big a honcho your adviser was and whether you have any honchos who will defend you against him/her. You may even be better off transferring universities, depending on your case.

Good luck!

[BeyondThePale]

6. I did not, but I have seen it happen ...

a number of times. The reality is that both the adviser and the student contributed to the break-up--although generally not in equal parts (sometimes the responsibility lay more with the student, sometimes more with the mentor, and sometimes it was just a bad fit).

The bottom line is that you need to consider what you want to accomplish (both in terms of the doctoral program and career plans) and decide what setting is going to help you best meet these goals. It maybe staying with the adviser, it may be switching mentors, or it may be going to a different program).

I think that the biggest impediment is lost time. Can you simply pick up where you left off with a new mentor, or will you need to change your program of research. Obviously, ill-will can be an issue--so I would do everything that I could to preempt that by talking openly with all of the parties involved (and perhaps bringing in an area or department head to facilitate the switch of advisor's).

BTW, if you are one of my grad students, I hope that you let me know personally before you make a change!!!!

Seriously, best of luck.

[autorank]

7. No, but

If my adviser screwed me, I would have made that an issue with the department. I presume there is a committee in place so you should have two other people to go to. If the difference is methodological and it's come up two years into the process, there is something seriously wrong. The adviser should have been clear up front. If you ignored him, then that's a different situation. I got my PhD later in life on a "self scholarship." I was very clear with my department and committee that I was in a hurry and that all issues and concerns needed to be addressed at the start. As part of the clarification, I told them that I didn't have a lot of time to fart around because the degree was central to me resuming the old income stream. They were quite helpful.

I think that a breakdown between you and your adviser two years into things is the fault of the adviser(the representative of the department and university) and that the department has to 'make you whole' very quickly. Unless you made some major change right before the 'irreconcilable differences', the responsibility goes to the university as represented by the adviser.

Don't take any crap from these people if your solid in your position, which I'm sure you are. I've seen situations like this resolved internally even when there was bad blood between candidate and adviser. I also know that there is a potential contract issue and resulting liability in the case a verbal or written contract is breached. Don't know where you live but I'd check into this if the department doesn't come around quickly and do the right thing.

[EstimatedProphet]

9. I almost did

My advisor was concentrated evil. She'd start the day every day by coming up to the lab and screaming at us at the top of her lungs, then running away. She always had specific venom for me too.
I seriously was looking into finding another advisor, and had another project lined up, but it fell through. I finally decided to stay based on the fact that I knew it would piss her off so much to see me make it through.

[MemphisTiger]

10. I don't have a PhD but I just got my Masters procedure the same

just minus two to three years and a dissertation instead of a thesis. I shared and office with two other PhD candidates. If your research is funded by your principle adviser, you may have to abandon the research you have completed thus far. This would set you back with respect to your dissertation. Also, depending on how large your department is you could find another adviser. If your new research is still in the same field/specialty, chances are your former adviser my be on your committee. This could be very awkward depending on how you break with the adviser. I would be very delicate if you decide to change major advisor's.

[DrWeird]

11. Alright, here's some more details.

I'm being funded by my P.I. So leaving him would obviously mean I'd have to abandon the project. That's probably not to bad, since the first year was all course work and T.A.ing and the second year was thesis work, but it's hardly gotten off the ground. My adviser's blaming me for that, but he's full of shit. He's been threatening to drop me, I don't think he's aware I'm considering dropping him.

When I started here, I got all kinds of warnings about how bad the sub-division of my department is, and how abusive my adviser is. I pretty much ignored it at first. Then, just a couple of weeks ago I noticed how my adviser haraunged a newer student, and it was completely ridiculous. I've lost all respect for the guy. We get post-docs that come through, they're always surprised at how cutthroat the department is. One guy just had enough one day and went back to England. I've heard rumors that you won't make it by just switching advisers in the same sub-division. They've got a sort of a gang. I don't know how much of that is true. Plus there's a new guy coming in later next month. My other option, I'd imagine, is getting a masters in this department and transfering to a related department, most of my course work will transfer.

I'm going to talk to some people in the department. An instructor who's not involved with research, and probably the chair. I thought I'd run it by you good people and see what kind of experiences you've had.

[ydya]

13. If there is any risk of repercussions within the same Dept., I'd say take

your Masters and transfer. And, by the way, I know many advisors are quite short with their tempers in various ways. I have no patience for that. I always felt that you are in graduate school to learn. If you are essentially in the first year of lab work, there is no excusse for someone getting off on you for failure. A good advisor finds a way to teach, and work with the student's best strengths. So try and find a boss who likes to teach, not crack the whip all the time.
I know that in reality many labs depend heavily on grad students for their publications and therefore grant renewal; but if you already knew how to do all that from your second year, why dont they give you the freakin degree right then?
One last thing: I also know, from my days in grad school, of students who just dont work, or listen or follow simple rules, or simply dont cut it. In such cases, I think the advisor has a right to get upset; but persecuting a studednt doesnt help. There are committees and meetings to resolve precisely such issues. The advisor should be mature enough to sound off a couple of warnings and if there's no improvement, call a meeting and bring a resolution to the matter. But many dont, as they'd rather use even inefficient students as cheap labor for 5 years than cut bait and do the right thing.
Anyways, take these points into consideration when you pick a new boss.
Good luck.

[midnight armadillo]

16. That's a tough break

I know someone at my PhD program at Boston U whose advisor told him to take a hike after two years - he wasn't satisfied with the student's work, but according to the student it appeared to be a personality conflict. The student is now happily productive in a totally different group (for you physics guys, he went to theoretical condensed matter from experimental high energy...).

You definitely need support from other faculty members in the department. It may be that they're well aware your advisor is shitty towards his students. Ultimately the important thing is that you get some decent work done in a field you find interesting and learn to be an excellent researcher. I've bounced all around from topic to topic over the years due to circumstance and opportunity. I'd encourage you to look around in more pleasant areas of the department for a new research advisor, and it may be possible to incorporate some of your past efforts into your final thesis. It's pretty common for the first two years of grad school to produce little real work, since there's so much other stuff to take care of.

[madison2000]

12. I had 3 advisors in 5 years because of faculty turnover

in a small department. It was very frustrating. The third advisor was the worst, as he was back to teach only five years after graduating from the same school. His primary goals were to impress the older faculty and get tenure. He approved a reading list I had made up for an exam, and then a year later he said, oh you can't use this list. It was awful. He tried to steer me towards a dissertation topic in which I had no interest, and I realized I had no choice. Changing advisors would be like changing marriage partners in a small town... I left after 8 years with lots of debt and only a masters degree.

Because graduate students are so poor there is not much legal activity in higher education. So there is not much protection. Graduate advisors can do things like ignore your phone calls, play politics with students, and change their minds about things without penalty. It makes me sick to think about it.

[Dzimbowicz]

14. Nope

Actually I got on rather well with all of my professors and do so to this day. The only difficulty was with one professor whose books actually sell on the commercial market. He was never around, always working on his latest project, hence very difficult to contact. Luckily for me, he was not my dissertation advisor. Whenever we turned in research papers to this particular professor, we wondered whether or not he was really reading them before giving a grade. So, we decided to run a little experiment: in random patterns, and at random locations we would work silly phrases into out narratives. The result: either he graded them without reading them or he just didn't care.

[Donkeyboy75]

17. I never did

but a couple of people from our group took that route by changing research advisors. The average PhD in our department was 5.5 years. I got out on the average four months ago, and the two that joined the group when I did but subsequently left are still at the university. It will certainly cost you time, but it's difficult to lay out the impedients because the framework of the PhD differs so much from university to university (and even from department to department).

I would say that you should leave the group. You will certainly be there a long time, and it's just not worth it. I'd take the MS and transfer schools, personally.