hate my phd supervisor

15 things to remember if you’ve started to hate your PhD

Jun 1, 2021

Have you checked out the rest of  The PhD Knowledge Base ? It’s home to hundreds more free resources and guides, written especially for PhD students. 

It’s entirely normal to hate your PhD from time to time. The further you travel on the PhD journey, the more you start to resent the thesis. 

That’s natural – spend years working on something, often with little immediate reward, and it natural that you will start to crumble. 

Here we’ve put together a list of 15 things to remind yourself of if you’re started to lose motivation. They’ll remind you of all that’s special about your thesis and, hopefully, inject some enthusiasm back into your relationship with it. 

Interested in group workshops, cohort-courses and a free PhD learning & support community? 

The team behind The PhD Proofreaders have launched The PhD People, a free learning and community platform for PhD students. Connect, share and learn with other students, and boost your skills with cohort-based workshops and courses.

1. you should work less.

I find that most people fall into one of two camps.

There are those who throw themselves into their work, always chained to their desk and never feeling like they’re on top of things.

Then there are those who get easily distracted, putting things off to the last minute and feeling guilty that they’re always a little behind.

In both cases the outcome is the same: long hours spent working, with the fatigue and the stress that comes with it.

But what about doing less work? What about being more selective with your time, and more selective with what’s on your to do list, such that you didn’t have as much to do at all?

It means accepting that your value and output is not measured on the basis of how many hours you put in, or how much work you get done. It’s measured instead on the quality of the work, and on the level of focus you can achieve.

So if you find yourself burning the candle at both ends, ask yourself whether what you really need to do is work less.

2. Don’t Push Away Negative Thoughts

3. remember that your phd is trying to drown you, 4. routines come and go.

For many, the simplest way of making the PhD journey more manageable is to develop consistent routines. 

For me, that involves going on a morning walk, exercising a few times a week, getting my emails and admin done first thing in the morning, and going to bed at roughly the same time.

But it’s easy to slip out of routines. We may be away from home, or the holiday season may disrupt our daily rhythm.

Whatever it is, we can start to drop the good habits we carefully nurture and start to pick up unhealthy ones – we might start exercising less, eating more processed foods, or staying up late.

When that happens to me, I can quickly start to feel anxious about whatever it is I’m working on. That makes sense; if routines introduce stability into our lives, it’s logical that disrupting those routines can mean we feel ungrounded and out of sorts.

If you can relate this holiday season, go easy on yourself. Like everything in life, this is temporary. As long as you’re conscious of what good routines looks like, and as long as you’re conscious that you’re temporarily departing from them, it won’t be long before you get back into healthy habits once the thing disrupting your routine has passed.

5. Ask Yourself: Are You Biting Off More Than You Can Chew?

6. set your intentions, 7. embrace the crappy drafts, 8. remind yourself that phds are hard.

Finding your PhD hard is kind of the point.

Repeat after me: if you’re finding your PhD hard it doesn’t mean you’re a failure, it means you’re doing it right.

9. Keep failing

10. remember that you’re never going to please everyone, 11. you’re going to get criticised, 12. don’t focus (too much) on the problems, 13. you have to admit when you’re wrong, 14. ask yourself: am i a perfectionist.

Most of the PhD students I talk to are perfectionists. You probably are too. 

With perfectionism comes a desire to have control over day-to-day life, knowledge of what’s going to happen in the short term, and the certainty that the PhD thesis will be, well, perfect. 

And then along comes coronavirus. 

Your day-to-day life has been disrupted as you work from home and away from you normal routines, you’ve got no way of knowing what will happen in the short or long term, and you may worry that your thesis will be sub-optimal as you step away from fieldwork, labs and supervisors.

The perfectionist in you is panicking, right? 

Perfectionism is a double-edged sword. On the one hand it can fill you with drive, passion, dedication and motivation. It can inspire you to try your hardest and do your best. It’s likely what got you on to your PhD programme in the first place. 

But at the same time, it has a dark side. For as much as it can inspire, it can lead to panic. Anxiety, worry and dread often follow in the footsteps of perfectionism, such that when you lose control over your reality, or when you get things wrong, make mistakes or produce something sub-optimal, you panic. What starts off as a simple mistake can quickly become the end of the world.

Part of the challenge of doing a PhD, and particularly in the current context, is learning to embrace imperfection and recognising that sub-optimal does not necessarily mean failure. Managing perfectionism involves reminding yourself that you’re only human, and that humans face stresses, make mistakes and sometimes struggle to produce their best work. Even the brightest and most competent of people have off days. 

The more you can remind yourself of that, the better equipped you’ll be to deal with what life throws at you and your thesis. 

15. Lastly, Remember That It’s Okay Not To Be Productive

Your PhD thesis. All on one page.

Use our free PhD structure template to quickly visualise every element of your thesis. 

Share this:

Thanks for the encouragement and all… but, I keep failing, and I understand it is a process. But because of my failures I’m about to be fired from my PhD. 🙁 It is hard, yes. I keep messing up and failing, yes. I’m getting fired, yes.

Thanks for the kind words. I hope things work out for you.

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search The PhD Knowledge Base

Most popular articles from the phd knowlege base.

The PhD Knowledge Base Categories

• Your PhD and Covid
• Mastering your theory and literature review chapters
• How to structure and write every chapter of the PhD
• How to stay motivated and productive
• Techniques to improve your writing and fluency
• Advice on maintaining good mental health
• Resources designed for non-native English speakers
• PhD Writing Template
• Explore our back-catalogue of motivational advice

How to Cope with a Problematic PhD Supervisor

Completing a Ph.D. is a significant academic achievement that requires dedication, hard work, and the guidance of a supportive supervisor.

Are you facing challenges with your PhD supervisor?

Do you often feel ignored or belittled by them?

If you answered ‘yes’ to any of these questions, it’s clear that your PhD journey isn’t going as smoothly as you hoped.

However, there are strategies you can employ to cope with a problematic PhD supervisor and improve your relationship with them.

In this article, we will discuss different types of Problematic supervisors and provide strategies for dealing with each type, allowing you to navigate your PhD journey more effortlessly.

It may seem unfair, but difficult supervisors often get away with their behavior due to their past achievements and reputation as academic researchers.

Making a formal complaint against your supervisor may only complicate matters further. Instead, focus on developing strategies that can help reduce your PhD woes and bring you and your supervisor on the same page.

Table of Contents

Types of Problematic PhD Supervisors

To begin, it’s important to identify the type of supervisor you’re dealing with. According to the book “Coping with Difficult People,” there are seven categories into which difficult people can be divided.

• Hostile aggressive
• Silent & unresponsive
• Super-agreeable
• Know-it-all expert

Additionally, two more types have been identified in the book “The Smart Way to Your Ph.D.: 200 Secrets From 100 Graduates.”

• Micro-manager

Let’s explore each type and discuss strategies to handle them effectively.

1. Complainer

Any supervisor of this type will constantly have something to complain. It would not be incorrect to suggest that this type of supervisor is born with the ability to see faults in a student’s work.

To cope with a supervisor that constantly complains, you can do the following:

• Listen – You should actively listen to the complaints voiced by the supervisor in order to deal with them appropriately later on.
• Acknowledge – You must then acknowledge your supervisor’s comments in a suitable manner. To acknowledge, you could use phrases like “I understand what you’re driving at,” “I understand where you’re coming from,” or “I see why you’re concerned with xyz section of my research paper.”
• Intervene – If you think that your supervisor’s complaint is illogical, step in and explain why you disagree with that particular point. It could be beneficial to use phrases like “With your permission, I would like to contradict your point here” or “With all due respect, I beg to differ on this point.”
• Avoid accusation – Your supervisor should not perceive your words as an accusation when you express your thoughts to them. Instead, you should provide facts to support your claims on any topic that has been troubling your supervisor. Keep the conversation from turning into an accusation-reaccusation sequence. The sentence above could be expanded in the way that follows: “With all due respect, I beg to differ on this point and the following are the reasons: X, Y, & Z.”
• Get to problem-solving – In addition to providing your supervisor with facts and figures, you need to give solutions to the problems that he or she has brought up during the meeting. ”I understand why you’re concerned about the xyz section of my research paper,” for example. Respectfully, I beg to differ on this point, and X, Y, & Z are my reasons. Do you still think it to be an issue? If so, what changes do you suggest I make to this section to ensure that this particular chapter meets your expectations? It should be noted that complaining supervisors don’t always complain about a specific research issue in an effort to find a solution. They would rather do this to gain admiration and appreciation for their ability for finding faults. So, appreciate them in order to satisfy their unspoken desire for recognition.

2. Hostile-Aggressive

This particular group of supervisors or advisers tends to be confrontational, unfriendly, impolite, rude, and aggressive by nature. Such a supervisor will simply reject all of your ideas and drafts, leaving you disappointed in nearly every meeting.

To cope with this type of supervisor, employ the following strategies:

• Bide your time : Wait for the person to get calm before speaking to them so that your voice may be heard and understood.
• Be assertive – Once the supervisor’s drilling speech has lost momentum in the meeting, you should respond to the supervisor’s concerns about your PhD with assertiveness, supporting your claims with logic and reliable sources of information.
• Maintain eye contact: Look the supervisor in the eyes while you speak. This will demonstrate your confidence and optimism, which will enable you to take control of the situation and direct the conversation towards finding a solution.

3. Silent & Unresponsive

Though rare in academia, some supervisors may fail to return calls or emails and might skip addressing your questions during meetings.

To cope with such supervisors:

• Open-ended questions : Asking open-ended questions is the best way to get as much information as you can. For instance, Professor, what do you think of the solutions I have suggested for problems brought up during the previous meeting?
• Pausing helps : When you believe your question or doubt has not been well addressed, try pausing for a few moments to allow the professor to break the ice and address the question or doubt with a suitable explanation.
• Sum-up the conversation : Reiterate the points covered before the meeting finishes and ask the meeting’s supervisor to confirm your understanding. This would ensure that the supervisor properly identified and filled in any gaps in your understanding and that you had a clear set of goals to meet before the next meeting began.
• Follow up regularly: If your supervisor has asked you to work on one specific aspect of your PhD thesis, you must agree to a deadline and set a meeting time to discuss the progress of the work. The secret to success when dealing with this kind of supervisor is constant follow-up.
• Use your own judgement: If the supervisor doesn’t address any concerns you have with the PhD thesis, you may need to use your own judgement and email the supervisor to let them know the plan of action you intend to take.

4. Indecisive

Have you ever had a PhD supervisor advise you to start working on a certain research topic and then later propose that you change to a different one because the initial topic is no longer looking particularly promising? If so, you would describe that kind of supervisor as being indecisive.

Indecisive supervisors feel uncomfortable making solid decisions because they are worried that their decisions would be improper and ineffective.

You could employ the following strategies when dealing with a indecisive supervisor:

• Assertiveness is what works best with this type of supervisor. You can explain why a certain research project is worthwhile after your supervisor has rejected the study plan by being assertive. This would assist in restoring your supervisor’s trust in both you and the research you are conducting.
• Before meeting with an unclear supervisor for assistance, you must take responsibility of the PhD Thesis and conduct extensive study on your own. You won’t be able to convince your supervisor of your choices regarding your PhD Thesis until you are knowledgeable about the field of research.

5. Super-Agreeable

A supervisor in this category would always appreciate your work and would rarely bring up any facts that would anger or displease you as a student. If such a supervisor makes a promise, it should not be trusted blindly because the majority of the time, empty promises are made by this kind of PhD supervisors.

In short, you cannot rely on this type of supervisor for much assistance with your PhD thesis. You might employ the following strategies when dealing with this kind of supervisor:

• Speak out : Don’t wait for your supervisor to point out flaws in your work. Instead, discuss all of the problems you faced while drafting various sections of your PhD thesis with the supervisor and ask for solutions. Ask the supervisor if they are completely satisfied with the PhD thesis work that has been completed so far to prevent making significant changes in the later stages of the research work.
• Look out for unrealistic commitments — A super-agreeable supervisor is skilled at creating false promises, as was already indicated. You must therefore look out for these false commitments and figure out how to get around them. For instance, if your supervisor has promised to give you a letter of recommendation in response to your request for one, you cannot rely on that promise because it is possible that the supervisor may cause unnecessary delay in the delivery. In this situation, you must create an outline for the requested letter and give it to the supervisor, asking that they issue the recommendation letter as soon as possible. By taking this step, the letter will be delivered more quickly and reach you.
• Actively listen for humour- This kind of friendly supervisor will often use humour to draw attention to the research paper’s flaws. Therefore, it is your responsibility to always your ears open and pay attention to such humorous remarks in order to enhance the content of your PhD thesis.

6. Negativist

A negative PhD supervisor will continually highlight the negative aspects of your completed work in order to lower your morale. Your academic efforts will never be appreciated by this kind of supervisor.

To deal with a negative supervisor, you can employ the following strategies:

Avoid being influenced by the supervisor’s negative behavior. Instead, you can try to use the negative attitude of the supervisor as motivation to work harder and produce better results. Instead of focusing on the supervisor’s demoralizing behavior, try to focus on the issues you are trying to solve. Do not engage in arguments that, you know, will greatly increase the level of tension between you and the supervisor. If your negative supervisor is not willing to support you in any way, ask peers and other professors for assistance.

7. Know-it-All Expert

This type of supervisor, as the name suggests, is very knowledgeable in the field and would not be satisfied with any work that was not well-researched.

Supervisors in this category have extensive knowledge in their research area and expect well-researched work.

The following strategies can help you deal with a supervisor who is an know-it-all expert supervisor.

• No matter how talented you are as a researcher, you should always be polite when speaking with this type of supervisor. It’s possible that you won’t get the best support if you try to wow people with your knowledge of a certain field of research.
• Before meeting with this type of supervisor, you should equip yourself with the necessary knowledge. You could evaluate the issues you are facing and ask the supervisor for help solving them with a little preparation before the meeting.
• At the end of every in-person meeting, always thank your supervisor for offering valuable comments and guiding you in the right direction.

8. Micro-manager

A micro-managing supervisor is one that closely examines every aspect of your PhD work and keeps track of each deadline set up to review the current project and determine the best course of action. You can even receive a call from this kind of supervisor at odd hours to talk about the ongoing research project.

If your supervisor micromanages, you can do the following:

• You should take notes during each meeting with your PhD supervisor and agree on a due date for the revised  draft. This ensures that you are not interrupted before the agreed-upon deadline ends and that you complete the agreed-upon revision on time.
• The supervisor should be politely informed of your working hours so that they know when to contact you for an update (if necessary).

9. Super-Busy

A supervisor like this would have very little time to devote to your PhD research. Students who have been allocated a super-busy PhD Supervisor must remain self-motivated in order to effectively complete their PhD Thesis.

Here are some suggestions to help you deal with a supervisor who is super busy:

• Please conduct independent research to find solutions to the problems you are having with your PhD thesis if you can’t schedule a meeting with your supervisor.
• After that, send the supervisor an email outlining the steps you’ll take to address any research-related issues.
• If the supervisor detects any fault with the course of action you have chosen, you might receive some constructive feedback that will help you continue in the right direction.
• Seek alternative support: If your supervisor is consistently unavailable, consider seeking support from other faculty members or researchers in your field. They can provide guidance, feedback, and support for your research when your supervisor is too busy.
• Be organized: Plan and prepare for your meetings in advance. Make a list of specific questions or concerns you want to discuss and prioritize them to ensure you make the most of the limited time you have with your supervisor.
• Be concise: When communicating with a busy supervisor, keep your messages or conversations concise and to the point. Clearly articulate your main ideas or questions without excessive detail or unnecessary information.
• Respect their time: Be mindful of your supervisor’s schedule and commitments. If they have limited availability, try to schedule meetings well in advance and be punctual. Be respectful of their time during meetings by staying focused and not going off on tangents.
• Proactively seek feedback: Instead of waiting for your supervisor to provide feedback, take the initiative to seek feedback from other knowledgeable individuals in your research area. This will help you progress in your work and minimize the impact of your supervisor’s busy schedule.
• Be self-reliant: Take ownership of your research project and become more self-reliant. Conduct thorough literature reviews, engage in independent problem-solving, and seek resources and information outside of your supervisor’s immediate guidance.
• Establish clear expectations : Have open and honest conversations with your supervisor to establish clear expectations regarding communication, deadlines, and milestones. Clarify what support you need from them and discuss how you can work together effectively despite their busy schedule.
• Network with peers: Build connections with other PhD students or researchers in your field. Sharing experiences, challenges, and resources with peers can provide valuable support and guidance throughout your PhD journey.

Remember, every Ph.D. journey comes with its unique challenges.

By adopting a proactive approach, seeking support, and staying focused on your goals, you can overcome obstacles and successfully complete your doctoral studies.

Your research and contribution to your field are valuable, and you have the resilience to thrive, even in the face of a problematic supervisor.

Related Posts

Developing a strong vocabulary for academic writing: tips for phd researchers, how to email professors: sample emails and tips, how to use meta ai for phd research, tips to prepare phd viva-voce presentation slides, top 18 phd viva questions | examples, who is a good peer reviewer, mastering the art of academic writing: strategies for ph.d. researchers, how to become a postdoctoral researcher, top 10 fellowships to support phd studies in usa, how long does it take for phd in usa | structure.

Comments are closed.

Meta Gorup, Melissa Laufer

When Relationships Between Supervisors and Doctoral Researchers Go Wrong

3 November 2020 | doi:10.5281/zenodo.4213175 | 1 Comment

Gorup & Laufer on how control is exercised and abused within relationships between doctoral supervisors and their students, what happens when PhD students challenge this control, and how we break free of this cycle of control.

Doctoral researchers represent a crucial group within the academic workforce. They importantly contribute to their departments’ and universities’ research efforts by, among other, carrying out data collection, running experiments, helping with or leading publication writing, presenting at conferences, and sometimes applying for research funding.

In 2018, doctoral programs across OECD countries enrolled over a million and a half doctoral students and granted a total of nearly 278,000 PhD or equivalent degrees (OECD n.d.).

However, this large, vital group of researchers faces numerous challenges connected to managing a several-years-long research project while learning a host of new skills and  coming to terms with the unwritten rules of academia. It is thus perhaps not unexpected – although rarely openly talked about – that around 50 percent of doctoral researchers discontinue their doctorates (Council of Graduate Schools 2008; Groenvynck et al. 2013; Vassil and Solvak 2012).

In this blog post, we explore what is behind this worrying statistic. Specifically, we examine the role the relationship between doctoral supervisors and their students plays in the latter’s decision to discontinue their doctorates.

Melissa Laufer

We first shed light on the existing research pointing to the crucial role of supervisors in and their control over students’ doctoral journeys . Furthermore, we demonstrate that supervision-related issues are a common concern among PhD students. We then show that doctoral researchers’ problems with supervisors are often exacerbated by an institutional environment which discourages PhD students from addressing these issues.

The remainder of the text presents our own study of international doctoral student dropout , revealing patterns of ‘control’ and abuse thereof by doctoral supervisors which in several cases played a decisive role in the PhD students’ decision to discontinue. Drawing upon the empirics of our study, we explore:

• How is control exercised and abused within relationships between doctoral supervisors and their students?
• What happens when PhD students challenge this control?
• And how do we break free of this cycle of control?

Supervisors Play a Central Role

While the reasons for a doctoral researcher’s decision to discontinue their doctoral studies are multifaceted – from personal and family issues to departmental and disciplinary cultures (Gardner 2009; Golde 2005; Leijen et al. 2016) – issues with supervisors often contribute to a doctoral student’s decision to discontinue their PhD (Gardner 2009; Golde 2005; Jones 2013; Leijen et al. 2016).

This is hardly surprising since, to a doctoral student, their supervisor is commonly “the central and most powerful person” who controls many crucial aspects of the PhD trajectory: the doctoral researcher’s integration into the academic community and discipline, the topic and process of their dissertation research, their career path following the doctorate (Lovitts 2001: 131), and sometimes the PhD students’ funding (Golde 2005; Laufer & Gorup 2019).

Doctoral Supervision Needs Improvement

The essential role of doctoral supervisors in the PhD students’ experience and success makes the statistics that report on persistent supervisory issues all the more worrisome.

A global survey of over 6,300 PhD researchers initiated by Nature found that doctoral researchers based in Europe were very likely to list “impact of poor supervisor relationship” as one of their top five concerns (Lauchlan 2019). In the UK, a study of over 50,000 postgraduate research students – which included both PhD-level and research master’s students – found that 38 percent of respondents listed “learning and support” as an area in need of improvement, and out of those, 46 percent referred to various supervision-related is sues (Williams 2019).

What is more, the previously mentioned Nature survey found that 21 percent of respondents experienced being bullied. Among those, 48 percent listed their supervisors as the most frequent perpetrators of bu llying (Lauchlan 2019)

A Disempowering Institutional Environment

What further hinders those doctoral researchers who experience difficulties with their supervisors is an institutional environment which disempowers them to proactively address their situations. Because PhD students “are in a subordinate and dependent position socially, intellectually, and financially,” they are unlikely to challenge those superior to them (Lovitts 2001: 34–35).

Studies report that doctoral students “fear” raising an issue to or about a supervisor (Metcalfe et al. 2018) and are plagued by “fear of repercussions” because they cannot address their concerns anonymously (Lauchlan 2019). At the same time, universities are generally seen as reluctant to address supervision-related problems (Metcalfe et al. 2018) and academics tend to place the blame on PhD researchers for their issues rather than on the doctoral program or the university (Gardner 2009; Lovitts 2001).

To this point, a survey of almost 2,500 doctoral researchers at the Max Planck Society in Germany reports that only half of doctoral students who experienced conflicts with those senior to them reported the conflicts to an institutional body. Among those who did, over 50 percent indicated the reports were not dealt with in a satisfactory manner (Max Planck PhDnet Survey Group 2020).

The International Doctoral Student Experience

One group of PhD researchers particularly vulnerable to the extreme challenges of the doctorate is international doctoral students (IDSs). They are required not only to adjust to a new academic system but also to a new society (Le & Gardner 2010; Campbell 2015; Cotterall 2015).

I DSs make up 22 percent of doctoral enro llments across OECD countries (OECD 2020), with their dropout rates comparable to local students, at circa 50 percent (Groenvynck et al. 2013). However, despite similarities in discontinuation rates, studies point out that IDSs are especially susceptible to disempowerment .

They are more inclined to experience issues with their su pervisors (Adams and Cargill 2003; Adrian-Taylor et al. 2007; Campbell 2015) and may encounter discrimin ation (Mayuzumi et al. 2007). The previously mentioned Max Planck Society survey (2020) for instance found that non-Germans were exposed to more bullying from supervisors than their German colleagues, with doctoral researchers coming from outside the European Union experiencing the most cases at 15 percent.

A Study of International Doctoral Student Dropout

Our 2019 study, The Invisible Others: Stories of International Doctoral Student Dropout , also highlights the vulnerability of IDSs. Specifically, it demonstrates how their statuses as cultural outsiders and academic novices contributed to their disempowerment and the eventual discontinuation of their studies.

We conducted in-depth life story interviews with 11 IDSs who had discontinued their doctorates at a Western European university. Across their narratives, we identified a pattern of ‘control’ that was exercised, and in some cases abused, by those in positions of power as well as institutionalized within the university structure.

Moreover, eight out of 11 participants described how issues with their supervisors to a greater or lesser degree prompted them to discontinue their doctorates .

Supervisors Controlling the Academic Conversation

Below we look at a selection of a broad spectrum of aspects in which supervisors exercised control over their IDSs’ doctoral journeys and show how the scale of power regularly tipped in the favor of supervisors.

Problematic Feedback and Mentorship Practices

Nearly all the IDSs reported some level of dissatisfaction with their supervisors’ feedback and support practices, with some explicitly pointing to supervisors’ control over their progress, learning and even future career.

Some IDSs explained, for example, that it was difficult to get any time at all with their supervisors, in some instances also sharing that this was not a challenge for local students. One PhD student described how they – as internationals – were “ all on our own completely, since the very beginning .”

One participant reported how the feedback he received largely focused on pointing out deficiencies and how he was not given opportunities to engage in dialogue about his work. This made him feel that the comments were delivered from the supervisors’ “ clearly defined position of power .” Similarly, another IDS explained how he felt he was “ not learning anything because I’m doing all that she’s [the supervisor] saying .”

For one research participant, the extent of his supervisor’s control explicitly extended to his future career. Initially, the supervisor agreed with the PhD student’s choice to discontinue and offered to write recommendation letters for his doctorate applications elsewhere. However, our interviewee later found out that his supervisor told a potential employer that he was not actually interested in pursuing a PhD.

Struggles Over the Ownership of the Research Project

A number of IDSs also felt their research projects were largely controlled by supervisors who did not give them the freedom to choose their research topic or decide how to approach it.

One doctoral researcher described how he felt that the “ research project doesn’t belong to me ,” together with feelings of “ working for someone else .” Another IDS shared that she was successful in winning an external grant which was supposed to give her the freedom to choose her research topic. However, in reality, she “ couldn’t make any decisions [about] my own work ”.

Some IDSs also reported the supervisors’ micro-management and lack of trust in them. One research participant explained how her supervisor

was completely behind my back, all the time. Like if I was coming in from an experiment, he would be like, what are the results? … He was all the time behind me and there was no trust in what I was doing, I was surveilled all the time.

This doctoral student was not alone in experiencing a constant pressure to perform and feeling surveilled. One IDS even shared he thought his supervisor “feels like she owns a person.”

Funding in Supervisors’ Hands

Another aspect where the supervisors’ power abuse was very apparent was finances, likely more so because at the case study university, supervisors were in large part directly in control of the PhD students’ funding.

Some IDSs reported how they were promised funding for a full PhD of four to five years, but were told after a year or two that their contract would not be extended. One research participant shared:

during the job interview on Skype and on site I have been told that there was funding for a PhD. That they would make a contract until the end of the first year, at the same time I would apply for an external grant … but not to worry because there was the funding for the entire project. … Which turned out not to be true.

In a couple of cases, doctoral researchers were offered only short-term contracts – of a few months – after their initial one or two-year contract expired. One research participant described what his supervisor did when she perceived at the end of his first two-year contract that he might not be able to finish his PhD:

she [supervisor] told me that she was only going to sign my contract for three months. … So that will give me like the added pressure and should be like a testing time, if I was going to be able to finish my PhD.

Following an evaluation after the first three months, the supervisor planned to continue extending this IDS’s contract every three months rather than offer him a longer-term contract.

Supervisors Using the PhD Students’ Status as Internationals

For IDSs coming from outside the European Union (EU), the supervisors’ control over their funding was also linked to the control over the PhD students’ immigration status. To stay in an EU country, non-EU students need to prove they have financial means to do so – and if their contract ends, that is put at risk.

One research participant shared how his supervisor explicitly referred to her control over his stay in the country:

she [supervisor] told me if I didn’t meet … all the deadlines that she had made for this project … she wouldn’t sign my contract and … that would put my residence here in [the country] and in Europe at risk, if I didn’t do exactly what she said. So that was openly like a threat. … so I think she used that. I mean … like a point of power, like … your stay here [in this country] relies on me.

Another narrative underlying some of our interviewees’ accounts was their perception that IDSs were more vulnerable to exploitation by their supervisors. One interviewee explained that he was “ an easy target for her [supervisor] ” because “ [s]he thought it doesn’t matter how bad she treats me or any other international students. ” He speculated that this group of PhD students was less likely to discontinue their doctorates because it was more difficult for them to find another opportunity in a country away from home. Thus, they were likely to put up with more mistreatment than their local counterparts.

Challenging Supervisors’ Control

As the previous examples illustrate, supervisors exercised and abused their control in various aspects of the PhD students’ lives. Although in most cases, doctoral students were aware of this control and openly spoke about it, it also seemed to be understood that there was little they could do to counter it. In the words of one IDS, “ nobody ever dared to talk to the professors .”

Those who brought up issues to their supervisors were often disappointed and disillusioned with the results. Some IDSs reported that challenging their supervisors resulted in the supervisors becoming furious, storming out of the room or threatening the PhD student with no contract renewal.

Another problem identified by our research participants was that there was simply not enough oversight of what was actually going on behind the scenes. An IDS shared,

apparently I was one of the many who had been quitting in this lab, which is strange because I thought, come on, there has to be some kind of follow-up on this … In the same lab, you have all these students quitting, don’t you think you have a problem? With this group?

At the same time, this PhD researcher seemed resigned to the situation. When asked if she had officially approached anyone about her issues, she responded,

I didn’t because who’s my reference? … I mean what is going to change, really, you know? I didn’t see it was going to help me out. Or who to go to, to begin with.

This notion that professors were somehow ‘untouchable’ was echoed in a number of doctoral researchers’ accounts. As a result, in relation to issues with their supervisors, only two of our interviewees used official university resources such as filing an official complaint with the faculty ombudsman or speaking to the internationalization office.

Moreover, these university resources did little to help the PhD students who approached them. One IDS who got in touch with the internationalization office and the office overseeing her scholarship was told they could not help her because “ this is quite a [personality] problem. So it’s not very academic. So they can’t really interfere .”

Another doctoral student shared how the faculty ombudsman dismissed and joked about his complaints when his supervisor offered him a series of short-term contracts in place of a longer one. Moreover, the intervention had no effect on the supervisor and his supervisor later explained to the PhD student that this practice was legal – and therefore acceptable.

Breaking the Cycle of Control

In the doctoral researchers’ accounts above, we see how supervisors, due to their seniority and institutionalized positions of power, may exercise and abuse their control over various aspects of the doctoral journey. For a number of our interviewees, this abuse was made worse due to their international status .

The fact that supervisors have the power to undertake the actions like those we illustrate above with limited to no consequences speaks to a much larger issue. We are no longer talking about a few bad apples in the barrel, but a systematic problem occurring across academia , as evident from the abovementioned surveys initiated by Nature (Lauchlan 2019) and the Max Planck Society (Max Planck PhDnet Survey Group 2020).

But this cycle of power imbalance does not need to continue. The change begins by rethinking how we characterize the doctorate. In academia folklore, the doctorate is often fashioned as a trial, a time of enormous hardship, of which only the fittest survive – but not without battle scars. Instead of seeing the doctorate as a grueling rite of passage, we need to shift our focus to building confident, empowered scholars , who value collaboration over competition.

Such change can be sparked by focusing on practices embedded within the institutional environment. In our practitioner-geared publication, Pathways to Practice: Supporting International Doctoral Students , we discuss in detail the small and larger steps institutions, supervisors and (international) doctoral students can take to create an inclusive doctoral experience for both international and local PhD students.

In this blog post, we would like to highlight two steps university stakeholders can take to ensure a more empowering institutional environment:

• We encourage institutions to set up training for supervisor s to reflect on their supervision styles and the assumptions embedded within them. Supervisors should also gain insight into giving constructive feedback and building professional partnerships with PhD students.
• We propose a number of formal and informal support structures institutions may make available to doctoral students, ranging from setting up an independent ombudsperson to forming peer and collegial support communities, such as study groups, workshops and online forums.

However, the concerns we raise in this blog post about power imbalances in the relationship between doctoral supervisors and their students are symptomatic of a phenomenon occurring across all levels of academia: the privileged few have power over the subordinate majority. Consequently, the larger question at stake is: how do we change deeply ingrained behaviors in academia that perpetuate inequalities?

Some of these issues are complex and may require a system-level overhaul, but others are within our reach. The relatively simple change actions we propose above can be a good starting point for how we want to shape the next generation of scholars. Let us begin by bringing the discussion of power abuse in academia into the light and, step by step, empower doctoral students, supervisors and institutions to break free of the cycle of control .

Adams, K., & Cargill, M. (2003). Knowing that the other knows: using experience and reflection to enhance communication in cross-cultural postgraduate supervisory relationships. Christchurch: paper presented at Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia Conference.

Adrian-Taylor, S. R., Noels, K. A., & Tischler, K. (2007). Conflict between international graduate students and faculty supervisors: toward effective conflict prevention and management strategies. Journal of Studies in International Education , 11 (1), 90–117.

Campbell, T. A. (2015). A phenomenological study on international doctoral students’ acculturation experiences at a US university. Journal of International Students , 5 (3), 285–299.

Cotterall, S. (2015). The rich get richer: international doctoral candidates and scholarly identity. Innovations in Education and Teaching International , 52 (4), 360–370.

Council of Graduate Schools. (2008). Ph.D. completion and attrition: analysis of baseline demographic data from the Ph.D. Completion Project. Washington D.C.: Council of Graduate Schools.

Gardner, S. K. (2009). Student and faculty attributions of attrition in high and low-completing doctoral programs in the United States. Higher Education , 58 (1), 97–112.

Golde, C. M. (2005). The role of the department and discipline in doctoral student attrition: lessons from four departments. The Journal of Higher Education , 76 (6), 669–700.

Groenvynck, H., Vandevelde, K., & Van Rossem, R. (2013). The PhD track: who succeeds, who drops out? Research Evaluation , 22 (4), 199–209.

Jones, M. (2013). Issues in doctoral studies – forty years of journal discussion: where have we been and where are we going? International Journal of Doctoral Studies , 8 (6), 83–104.

Lauchlan, E. (2019). Nature PhD survey 2019. London: Shift Learning. Available on: https://figshare.com/s/74a5ea79d76ad66a8af8 Last accessed on 22 October 2020.

Laufer, M., & Gorup, M. (2020). Pathways to practice: supporting international doctoral students. Amsterdam: EAIE. Available on: https://www.eaie.org/our-resources/library/publication/Pathways-to-practice/pathways-to-practice-supporting-international-doctoral-students.html Last accessed on 22 October 2020.

Laufer, M., & Gorup, M. (2019). The invisible Others: stories of international doctoral student dropout. Higher Education , 78 (1), 165–181.

Le, T., & Gardner, S. K. (2010). Understanding the doctoral experience of Asian international students in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields: an exploration of one institutional context. Journal of College Student Development , 51 (3), 252–264.

Leijen, Ä., Lepp, L., & Remmik, M. (2016). Why did I drop out? Former students’ recollections about their study process and factors related to leaving the doctoral studies. Studies in Continuing Education , 38 (2), 129–144.

Lovitts, B. E. (2001). Leaving the ivory tower: the causes and consequences of departure from doctoral study . Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

Max Planck PhDnet Survey Group. (2020). Survey report 2019. Available on: https://www.phdnet.mpg.de/145345/PhDnet_Survey_Report_2019.pdf Last accessed on 22 October 2020.

Mayuzumi, K., Motobayashi, K., Nagayama, C., & Takeuchi, M. (2007). Transforming diversity in Canadian higher education: a dialogue of Japanese women graduate students. Teaching in Higher Education , 12 (5–6), 581–592.

Metcalfe, J., Wilson, S., & Levecque, K. (2018). Exploring wellbeing and mental health and associated support services for postgraduate researchers. Cambridge: Vitae. Available on: https://www.vitae.ac.uk/doing-research/wellbeing-and-mental-health/HEFCE-Report_Exploring-PGR-Mental-health-support/view Last accessed on 22 October 2020.

OECD. (n.d.). OECD.Stat: graduates by field. Available on: https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=EDU_GRAD_FIELD Last accessed on 22 October 2020.

OECD. (2020). Education at a glance 2020: OECD indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing.

Vassil, K., & Solvak, M. (2012). When failing is the only option: explaining failure to finish PhDs in Estonia. Higher Education , 64 (4), 503–516.

Williams, S. (2019). Postgraduate research experience survey 2019. York: Advance HE. Available on: https://www.advance-he.ac.uk/knowledge-hub/postgraduate-research-experience-survey-2019 Last accessed 22 October 2020.

There are so many issues with the quality and attitude of supervisers, in my view – at least in the UK system.

Some of the challenges that I experienced were:- 1) A supervisor who spent a lot of time telling me how certain people (and even a faculty member) – and he named names – had only got their PhDs because he had written their thesis for them, or built their experiemental equipment, run their clinical trials etc. He seemed to almost believe that the world did not turn without his assistance.

2) He regularly wanted to take-over and design or work-out sections for me. I kept telling him that I wanted it to be my work and that the only way I could learn was to do the work. I wanted to know that I had earned it, but he did not stop or respect that and it caused disagreement and bad feeling.

3) There was no help or understanding for the things I really needed his help with; a poor administration where my ID card/computer and library access kept beinng cancelled every three weeks for three years. A computer that could not cope with all I demanded of it and could not cope with the extensive calculations and graphics processing.

4) There was never any time or interest in discussing what I had learned or discovered during my work – I felt so cut-off and isolated. For me, the joy of a doctorate was learning something surprising and new. But this was lost, as I had no one to share it with.

5) His mood would either be over the top nice, where everything was wonderful – or utterly condemning and condescending, depending on the day. So during one meeting I might feel pleased with myself and during the next, for exactly the same points of discussion, suddenly my work was complete rubbish. So I could never trust or believe him either way and that left me feeling wary, on-edge and bewildered.

6) Many supervisors appear to have little understanding or concern for the university rules and purpose of supervising and just muddle along doing whatever they deem fit.

7) Many have long forgotten the struggles and loneliness of research at doctoral level and view students as cannon fodder.

8) When I tried to raise a complaint, they just closed ranks and ignored me. The only way to get them to address my supervisory issues was to go through the formal complaints process and ask for it to be looked at by another faculty. The result was them saying that they had added my supervisor to a “watch list” and they would have liked to get rid of him, but for legal reasons they could not. But they still let him supervise !

9) The university seemed to be split into a myriad of defensive islands that were at war with each other and no one really listened or helped. Whenever a problem arose, the standard practice seemed to be to refer the person to another group of department and then it turn, that group would deny responsibility and you would be passed somewhere else – and so it would go on. In my case, even writing an e-mail to the “President” (as Vice-chancellors like to call themselves now – how pretenious) and the VP Education got nowhere, as my complaint as bounced back to my faculty – who continued to ignore it. So what was the point of the falsely proclaimed “exceptional student experience” ?

10) Faculty like to think that they work really hard and I am sure some do – but my research group/faculty would disappear for two hour lunches and, on Fridays, never come back until Monday. My supervisor would often not turn-up for supervisory meetings and I would find him having coffee and hiding behind a broad-sheet newspaper in the nearby Costa Coffee.

11) The best part was when my supervisor recommended a comference for me – which I paid the fees, booked the flights etc for – only to discover that it did not exist and was a phoney/scam conference. When I complained, he claimed that I had not paid attention – fortunately, I kept a copy of his e-mail with the link he sent me to that supposed conference.

12) When I finally started with a new supervisor, he was upset because the reearch topic I had been given by the previous Professor was actually an area he had “taken” from my new Professor. So I was dragged into a long-standing, ‘silent’ war of mistrust between them.

13) There was an unspoken but firm ritual where other academics names might be added to a paper’s author list, even though they had no involvement – just to boost a colleague’s research profile.

The fundamental issue seems to me to be the lack of supervision of supervisors. It all seems to work on the principles of a gentlemen’s club, where – when something goes wrong – no one mentions or acknowledges it. The academic equivalent of a black hole could open-up and they would just walk around it and comment on how clear the sky was around there. SO bizarre..,…

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

First we need to confirm, that you're human. ninety ÷ = 9

Author info

Meta Gorup is a doctoral candidate at the Centre for Higher Education Governance Ghent at Ghent University in Belgium. Her research explores topics in research management and doctoral education through the lens of university members’ identities and university cultures.

Melissa Laufer is a senior researcher in the research programme “Knowledge &; Society” at the Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society. She is interested in investigating change processes at universities.

• Share on twitter
• Share on facebook

How to deal with inadequate PhD supervision

Vishal vora won compensation from soas over a claim for poor support in his doctoral studies. he explains the steps others can take if they have a similar complaint.

• Share on linkedin
• Share on mail

Since Times Higher Education reported earlier this month that I received compensation from Soas, University of London over PhD supervision failures, I’ve been overwhelmed by the number of students who have reached out to me with stories that are alarmingly familiar.

What has been most interesting is that it’s not just research students who have been in touch: a fair number are completing taught master’s and undergraduate degrees at other London institutions.

The question I am asked most is how to start a complaint. It seems that students are, at a very basic level, unaware of how to deal with conflicts with their university.

The very first thing that students facing such difficulties must do is to be honest with themselves and ask whether or not they have a valid complaint. University students today are treated as customers, which is how many see themselves. With that comes a sense of entitlement that they have paid for a service and therefore expect to receive a specific desired outcome, regardless of their conduct.

I believe that the student-institute contractual relationship places obligations on both parties – students must produce work, of a reasonable standard and to deadline, in order for it to be marked in a timely fashion. They must attend all lectures and commit to the course. If the student can show that they have held up their end of the bargain, and that the institution has failed to follow through on its part of the agreement, then there is a process to follow.

Students need to be efficient in their communications about any complaints; they must identify the issues and propose a resolution – all the while remaining calm and clear in all correspondence.

I’d advise a student in any sort of grievance with a university to be meticulous about record-keeping, ideally logging all their interactions in a notebook. Approach the complaints process as you would research: be methodical, account for all the variables and, above all, be comprehensive. Deal with matters head-on.

Make use of the Data Protection Act 2018, in particular the powerful “subject access request” (SAR). You are entitled to see any data relating to you that the university may hold. For example, you could request a copy of your supervision records. This would require the university to contact all supervisors and ask them to submit any records they have on you. But this also means that you need to be timely in making such requests because staff may leave, and emails, documents and written records may be deleted.

Use the free template letter available from the Information Commissioner’s Office website to make such a request. And always ask for electronic copies of any data because word searching and cataloguing are easier in that format.

Legal measures and the courts should, at all costs, be a last-resort option. If you have failed to resolve the issue directly, your next move should be to use the institution’s internal complaints procedure. All these details will be easily accessible on the university’s website, and a Google search can help to locate the relevant documents.

Search our database of more than 7,000 global university jobs

Usually the procedure, regardless of the university, will involve completing a short student complaint form, stating the type of complaint you wish to bring, the issues, your grounds and your resolution.

Complete this form and provide any and all relevant documentation and evidence. This will make dealing with your complaint much easier for the investigator in charge. Usually this person is an academic from another department.

Their job will be to investigate the issues, speak to the relevant people concerned (including you) and then write a report. Having been through this process three times, I assure you, it’s easy to complete and the investigator will want to ensure that fairness is achieved.

Should you not be happy with the outcome of this process, you are entitled to appeal on strict grounds. Again, look for guidelines on the university’s website. Such appeals are usually narrow in construction.

You will be issued with a completion letter when you have exhausted the internal process. This will allow you to have your case reviewed by the Office of the Independent Adjudicator (OIA). I took my case to this body but found its involvement to be unhelpful. This process works only if your university complies and provides documentation. In my case, this didn’t happen properly. In general terms, however, the OIA did assign a caseworker quickly, who seemed to understand my issues.

Although I didn’t get the answer I wanted from the OIA, this didn’t stop me from negotiating with the university. My advice here is simple: do not settle; take charge and ownership of your case.

As negotiations broke down in my case, I had no choice but to issue a legal claim. I did this by following the pre-action protocol, which is a series of steps that one must take to bring a claim to court. I used Money Claim Online to issue the claim, and wrote detailed particulars of the claim. Here, the previous investigators’ reports were very helpful because they included summaries of the issues previously dealt with.

In addition to taking these steps, students must also be aware of the personal investment that they will have to make in this process. There is a huge power imbalance between student and institution, so you will need to be highly motivated, organised and energised. I’ve been asked a lot about whether I ever felt threatened during my ordeal with Soas, and the fact is, I did. But I felt I had little choice. I was stuck, and no one was willing or able to help me; I didn’t have the funds to instruct a solicitor to act on my behalf, and I found the students’ union’s attitude to be unhelpful.

In making a complaint, you must also be prepared to fight a long battle – most likely alone, and most likely to an unsatisfactory ending.

In the end, Soas settled the claim and paid up, in full, with interest. Bringing this action has corrected several major wrongs that the university made during my six years there. However, it cost me an incredible amount of time and took a great emotional toll. And while I am left with a sense of satisfaction, I’m disappointed that the university director still refuses to issue a formal apology, as was recommended by one of Soas’ own investigators.

I hope that if you’re unhappy with the support your institution is giving to you, this advice will make you feel empowered to take matters into your own hands and make your complaint. Keep your chin up and keep going.

Vishal Vora is a legal academic at the Max Planck Institute and a research associate in the School of Law at Soas, University of London.

Register to continue

Why register?

• Registration is free and only takes a moment
• Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
• Sign up for our newsletter

Or subscribe for unlimited access to:

• Unlimited access to news, views, insights & reviews
• Digital editions
• Digital access to THE’s university and college rankings analysis

Already registered or a current subscriber? Login

Related articles

Soas to pay former student £20K over ‘no supervision’ PhD

Law graduate urges research students to ‘take institutions to task’ on inadequate supervision

PhD supervision: give and you shall receive

Terrible tales attest that some see this activity as a nuisance or worse, rather than as something that can benefit supervisor as much as student, says John Gill

On smarter supervision and smarter PhDs

Featured jobs.

Want to Get your Dissertation Accepted?

Discover how we've helped doctoral students complete their dissertations and advance their academic careers!

Join 200+ Graduated Students

Get Your Dissertation Accepted On Your Next Submission

Get customized coaching for:.

• Crafting your proposal,
• Collecting and analyzing your data, or
• Preparing your defense.

Trapped in dissertation revisions?

What to do if your phd advisor is ignoring you, published by steve tippins on june 27, 2019 june 27, 2019.

Last Updated on: 3rd June 2022, 04:35 am

“My PhD Advisor is ignoring me!” I hear this type of statement surprisingly often from students and clients. While sometimes it’s just a case of nerves on the part of the student, there are times when someone’s PhD advisor really is ignoring them.

In this post I will try to explain why your advisor might be ignoring you and possible actions that you can take.

What to Do if Your PhD Advisor Is Ignoring You

• Understand university policy
• Write your Chair
• Set up a phone call
• Ask for a new committee member

Jump to the Action Steps here.

Why is my Phd Advisor Ignoring Me?

Why do advisors ignore their students? Some simply feel that doctoral work should be an independent process–and that’s not necessarily a bad thing. Others may be underpaid and overloaded with work. In rare cases some may actually be negligent. Either way, you’ll want to do something about it. But first let’s explore the possible reasons why your PhD advisor might be ignoring you.

Nervous tension

Is your PhD advisor actually ignoring you? It does happen, but if you’ve been living off of coffee and instant noodles and staring at your computer screen 23 hours a day for the past week, it may be worth evaluating if your perception is accurate.

The dissertation writing process can be enormously stressful. Sometimes, a student working late will discover a critical problem with their paper and email their advisor about it at 10 pm. 

They’ll wake up at 6:30 am to start work again and check their email, but there’s no response. They have breakfast and check again at 7:15. By 8 am, they’ve checked their email four times, each with increasing anxiety about the lack of response. 

Meanwhile, the professor is maintaining a healthy work-life balance by not checking his or her email outside of working hours. Depending on how many students a professor is advising and how many other responsibilities they have, they may not even get back to you within 24 hours. 

It’s a good idea to check in with your advisor when you start working together about what sort of response times you can expect, and how they prefer to communicate.

Perhaps email works best for them, or maybe they prefer to schedule a phone call. Maybe Wednesday afternoons are a particularly good time to be in touch. The more you can communicate with them about what works best, the better relationship you will have.

A culture of less support

Many doctoral students go through what I call the  “go wander in the woods and see what you find” model. See my post on this topic. Basically you are left on your own to find what you need to complete your study. While this can be overwhelming, it’s also incredibly rewarding to know that you did it almost all by yourself. 

Becoming a scholar capable of independent thought and research is part of the purpose of the dissertation requirement, so you may receive less support than you’re used to simply as a natural part of the process. Professors may expect you to be capable of handling many aspects of the process on your own.

However, you shouldn’t be left totally in the dark. You have a PhD advisor for a reason–because you need support designing your study, settling on your methodology, and refining your research questions. There is a difference between hand-holding and providing critical support, and a good advisor will understand this and be available for your needs, within reason.

Lower salaries

An additional factor to consider is how institutions pay advisors. At many schools, faculty are part time/adjuncts. This is very cost efficient for the school as minimal benefits are paid and tenure is not part of the equation. 

Under this scenario your advisor may be getting paid something in the neighborhood of $100 a month to work with you. This number may seem very low based upon your tuition dollars but it is very close to actual figures at several institutions (this could explain some of the turnover that you see among faculty).

With numbers like these, faculty may ration their availability to match compensation levels. I have never heard this stated overtly but in an economically rational world it would be easy to see this happen. Regardless of whether it is benign neglect or rational economic behavior, the end result is you waiting for responses.

What You Can Do if Your PhD Advisor is Ignoring You

If you find yourself in a situation where you are feeling neglected or that your submissions seem to have fallen into an abyss, there are some things that you can do. Don’t escalate to the last option immediately; there could be a legitimate reason for a delay and you don’t want to burn any bridges unnecessarily. 

Here are the steps you can take if your PhD advisor is ignoring you.

1. Understand university policy and gently hold people to it

Before you start contacting people, I suggest that you look into your school’s policy regarding document review times. Most schools have a policy that work must be returned within a certain time period. 

If you find that you are still within the allotted time then you will have to be patient and work on other things (for example, you can never spend enough time reviewing the literature). If, however, you find that your Chair/committee has exceeded the allotted time then move on to the next step.

2. Write your Chair 

Sometimes people forget or situations beyond their control arise. Respectfully reach out to your Chair and ask about the status of your most recent submission. This may get things moving and get you where you want to be.

3. Set up a phone call

If an email does not get the desired results, set up a call with your Chair. A phone call can allow you to express your concerns in a respectful way and let your Chair. Sometimes this is all that’s needed to get things back on track. 

4. Complain

If you still feel your PhD advisor is ignoring you, then it is time to bring your concerns to the attention of your academic advisor and perhaps the program director (or whatever title your school uses). 

Schools do not like to have students complain and when they do they usually take action. Your Chair does not like to hear from his/her boss that there have been complaints. This can clear things up quickly.  However, I urge you to exhaust all the other options first.

5. Ask for a new committee member

After all options have been exercised the last thing to try is to ask for a new Chair. Be aware that schools are reluctant to do this and even if they do, it can cause a delay as a new Chair is brought up to speed.

There are times when things move more slowly than expected. Some seem to be systemic and other times people need to be prodded to help things move forward. This is your degree, so it is up to you to both stay on top of things and remember to start with kindness. It really is true that catch more flies with honey. Good luck!

PS. If you’re looking for additional support, I also coach students who are in the process of writing their dissertations. Or, if you’re in need of an editor for your dissertation , we’ve got you covered.

Steve Tippins

Steve Tippins, PhD, has thrived in academia for over thirty years. He continues to love teaching in addition to coaching recent PhD graduates as well as students writing their dissertations. Learn more about his dissertation coaching and career coaching services. Book a Free Consultation with Steve Tippins

Related Posts

Dissertation

Dissertation memes.

Sometimes you can’t dissertate anymore and you just need to meme. Don’t worry, I’ve got you. Here are some of my favorite dissertation memes that I’ve seen lately. My Favorite Dissertation Memes For when you Read more…

Surviving Post Dissertation Stress Disorder

The process of earning a doctorate can be long and stressful – and for some people, it can even be traumatic. This may be hard for those who haven’t been through a doctoral program to Read more…

PhD by Publication

PhD by publication, also known as “PhD by portfolio” or “PhD by published works,” is a relatively new route to completing your dissertation requirements for your doctoral degree. In the traditional dissertation route, you have Read more…

• How it works

How to Deal with an Unhelpful Dissertation Supervisor

Published by Alvin Nicolas at August 13th, 2021 , Revised On August 22, 2023

A dissertation supervisor  helps students with their dissertation , advises them about the project’s requirements and aids them throughout their research. Supervisors support us through our hard times and make sure that we overcome the academic challenges thrown at us.

However, there may be times when things might get heated between students and supervisors – when both are under pressure and looking to solve a lot of problems in little time. And at that very moment, you might want to learn more about how to deal with the unhelpful dissertation supervisor.

Expect to face many problems if you come across a dissertation supervisor who is not willing to help; is rude at times and does not seem to understand you as a student and the  challenging phase you’re going through.

If you find it difficult to impress your dissertation supervisor and maintain a good relationship with them, some rules will get you through this challenging time. See below for some tips on ‘How to Deal with an Unhelpful Dissertation Supervisor’.

Also Read:  How to write a dissertation – Step by step guide .

Tips to Deal with an Unhelpful Supervisor

Rule # 1: communicate effectively with unhelpful dissertation supervisor .

Communication is the key. Even if your dissertation supervisor is unhelpful and does not offer any guidance, clearly mention all your dissertation-related concerns.

For example, there might be an instance when your unhelpful dissertation supervisor is in a perfect, understanding mood and could offer a workable solution to any problem you are facing despite their unhelpful nature. Keep the door of communication open at all times, and make sure to attend all meetings.

Stay determined, and you’ll be able to complete your dissertation successfully.

Rule # 2: Be Patient and Persistent with your Unhelpful Dissertation Supervisor 

Getting help from a dissertation supervisor who isn’t very accommodating can be daunting. There may be times when your supervisor might not help you at all, even if you’re badly stuck with your dissertation. In times like these, try to be patient and continue with your research.

Though it might be pretty tricky for you to continue in such a situation, there is nothing much that you can do about it. Changing an unhelpful dissertation supervisor or submitting an application for a supervisor change would take up a lot of your time. You could instead invest in focusing on your dissertation.

Stay determined, and you’ll be able to  complete your dissertation successfully .

Looking for dissertation help?

Researchprospect to the rescue then.

We have expert writers on our team who are skilled at helping students with dissertations across a variety of disciplines. Guaranteeing 100% satisfaction!

Also read: How to Write a Dissertation in a Week

Rule # 3: Seek Help from Peers

When you’re finding it hard to seek guidance from your academic supervisor, get in touch with your peers. This may not sound like a great idea, but there is a chance that some of them might be in the same boat as yours.

Talk to them about the issues you’re facing in completing your dissertation and see how they can help you. Organising a group session once a week or two will help to address your dissertation-related concerns.

Discuss complicated aspects and sections of your dissertations and see how this works out for you.

If you cannot find answers to your questions, you can contact us via email – [email protected] or telecom –  +44 141 628 7786. At ResearchProspect, we have Master’s to PhD qualified writers for all academic subjects so you can be confident of having your dissertation project completed to a First Class quality  promptly.  Click here to learn more about our ordering process .

Rule # 4: Don’t Get Emotional

When you’re  stressed and tensed about your dissertation , there are chances that you’d also get emotional. You might find no one to assist and guide you in times of need. However, to emerge successfully out of this situation, you need to make sure you keep your emotions in control and not let them get the best of you.

Emotions will further ruin your situation, and you’ll gain nothing from them. Stay strong and believe in yourself. In the case where you’re working on a PhD thesis, dealing with an unhelpful dissertation supervisor becomes even more difficult.

The situation intensifies because there’s a lot at stake, and you might be left scratching your head over how to deal with an unhelpful dissertation supervisor. Regardless of the situation, do not let the emotions get the better of you.

Keep the  door of communication  open at all times, and make sure to attend all meetings.

Rule # 5: Stay Assertive

Staying positive during difficult times is never easy, and you need to overcome this challenge. When working on your dissertation, make sure you’re confident of the elements you’ve included in your dissertation, and be sure that you’re working in the right direction.

Staying positive and assertive will help you learn a new perspective on how you can work without help and guidance. Thus, this way, even without a supervisor, you’ll be able to  produce a flawless dissertation .

Dealing with an unhelpful dissertation supervisor is a nightmare but can be managed by following the tips we have shared with you. As a student, you should focus on your work and stay determined to complete your dissertation on time .

Your main goal should be to  produce a dissertation that is perfect, as well as authentic and reliable . Thus, keep your focus on writing a dissertation to help you achieve an ‘A’ grade.

Here are some comprehensive guidelines for you to understand  How to Write a Great Dissertation Paper.

How can ResearchProspect Help?

ResearchProspect academics can provide much-needed academic guidance if you have not been able to get help from your dissertation supervisor.  Our writers can either solve your problem or provide guidelines on how you should be approaching a certain problem so you don’t get stuck.

Stuck with complicated elements of a dissertation paper such as  Dissertation Methodology ,  Dissertation Statistical Analysis , and  Dissertation Findings & Discussion ? Our writers have years of experience in developing high-class dissertation papers. Please sit back and relax while our experts do the hard work for you.  Click here to fill out our simple order form to get instant quotes .

Frequently Asked Questions

Can you do a dissertation without a supervisor.

While possible, it’s highly recommended to have a supervisor for a dissertation. A supervisor provides guidance, expertise, and feedback crucial for successful research and writing, enhancing the quality and validity of your work.

You May Also Like

When writing your dissertation, an abstract serves as a deal maker or breaker. It can either motivate your readers to continue reading or discourage them.

Learn how to write a good declaration page for your thesis with the help of our step-by-step comprehensive guide. Read now.

Your dissertation introduction chapter provides detailed information on the research problem, significance of research, and research aim & objectives.

USEFUL LINKS

LEARNING RESOURCES

COMPANY DETAILS

• How It Works

How I broke up with my supervisor.

This post, written by a PhD student, who wishes to stay anonymous, was sent to me late last year. Due to my new job, it’s taken me a long time to edit it down and make sure it doesn’t identify the student or their supervisor. I think you will find it an interesting story that highlights the tensions we all experience around the ‘finish at all costs (and on time)’ mentality.

Insitutions are feeling financial pressure to complete candidates within 4 years and put this pressure onto supervisors, who then pressure students. But s ocial media, by connecting students with each other, is giving some the courage to push back against this pressure. Supervisors might feel they are doing their best for a student by behaving as described in this post, but are they really? I’ll be interested to hear what you think in the comments.

My carefully worded email to my supervisors said I wanted to discuss our processes at the next supervision, and named that I’d been feeling disheartened and shut down , which I was sure was not their intention. Instead of the usually effusive response, the reply was ‘OK’. I cried a lot that week, and could feel myself slipping into the helpless depression that comes from feeling powerless and bullied.

As it happens I was not trying to do anything too radical with my approach to research and writing. I wanted to understand the big picture of my research field, try to learn some theory and apply it appropriately. I wanted to write about my insights on policy and current practice in relation to my topic area, based on published, scholarly literature. Basically I wanted to come out confident I had contributed something to knowledge via my topic , gained valuable skills and expertise, but still have lots more to learn. Personal growth and insight would come in parallel with the academic skills as part of the complex PhD journey.

This was not the paradigm presented to me in, what turned out to be, my final meeting with my now ex-supervisor.

Her vision of what ‘research training’ entails is to stay totally focused on your topic. My summary of her description is this: Don’t talk to anyone, don’t write anything non-academic. The topic is not what is important – all that matters is getting finished and being able then to move on to something interesting and collaborative. If I asked a question, expect to be told to find my own answer. If that answer is wrong, be sent away to come up with another one. Spend months alone with the data, going over and over until eventually a lightbulb moment happens. Don’t go to conferences, they distract you. Exclude everything else from life until it is done, because it is the piece of paper that matters, and opens doors to other opportunities.

This is the way of modern academia. It’s a game, and this is the way to play it successfully . This is how she had been supervised, with a powerful mentor who fast-tracked her to completion and a high position within a short time of arriving at the university.

This reminded me of when, aged 11, I prepared for religious confirmation, and said to my mother that I wasn’t sure if I believed in god or not. ‘Get confirmed first and think about it later’ was her reply. The process, and deep thinking or wide learning were deemed less important than the status at the end. As an 11 year old I saw the inappropriateness of my mother’s advice, but went along with it anyway. I am better now at standing up for what I believe in. (I’m still an atheist.)

In our last supervision session my request to discuss how we worked, my inability to make progress with her way of responding to my work in progress, the tears pouring down my face, were not mentioned. Instead I was given a description of how they all work when writing an article together: ‘this is shit, rewrite it’, no politeness or support, which apparently ends in an article being finished quickly.

The page from Stylish Academic Writing (Sword, 2012) describing what made a good article, which I had sent in the interests of sharing something I was reading, was mocked as being wrong and not in line with current practice. The page from Stylish Academic Writing  (Sword, 2012) describing what made a good article, which I had sent in the interests of sharing something I was reading, was mocked as being wrong and not in line with current practice. If I didn’t like this approach maybe I could go to a different faculty and find a ‘feminist supervisor’, who won’t mind if I take 10 years to complete. This response showed neither an understanding of feminism nor my own intention to complete in a timely manner

The upshot of this meeting was: “No hard feelings, find a supervisor better suited to your style. I’ll sign the paperwork.”

I don’t doubt that this fast track, focus-on-the-task-and-get-finished-approach is common. It suits the hard, vocation-oriented direction universities are taking. They are businesses first, institutes of learning second. It bothers me, though. What kind of scholars is this fast-track paradigm creating? What impact is it having on the breadth of knowledge and depth of understanding, and the development of creative thinking and opportunities for excellent teachers to pass on thoughtful approaches and considerate practice?

Through social media I have learned that there are alternative ways to approach an idea , learn about a topic, publication and discussion. I know I’m not alone in my desire to learn deeply, to receive thoughtful input, to share ideas and to develop the courage to step out into the field.

Throughout Twitter has been an associate supervisor , guiding me, offering support and encouragement, the latest research about my topic. It’s provided instant community, with a hive mind to answer questions or suggest resources. It has been an important aspect of my candidature to date, and has contributed significantly to the resilience and confidence I feel as I seek a new supervisor to work with IRL to help me get finished in a timely manner, with deep learning along the way. Thanks, everyone!

Postscript 4 December 2012

I wrote the piece above just after the rift with my ex-supervisors happened, when I was full of grief, outrage, and frustration. Since then I have found new supervisors who are determined to keep me focused and finished , but are also open to a diversity of approaches and working in a way that suits me. I had been accepted to present at a conference in November, and nearly withdrew because I was feeling so disheartened, but decided to go, and shake off the previous negativity.

After my presentation I was approached by a respected academic in my field who said she liked my topic, approach, and way of thinking, and was I interested in doing a post-doc? Yes, please! While this was just a casual query, and no concrete offers have been made, as I do have to finish the PhD first, I have been buoyed by this interest and confidence, my work is progressing nicely, and I’m feeling good.

I’m glad to hear it all worked out Anonymous! How about you? Have you found yourself pressured to complete in a way that you think was detrimental to your own development as a researcher and scholar? Or do you think we need to respect the time limits that are set?

Share this:

The Thesis Whisperer is written by Professor Inger Mewburn, director of researcher development at The Australian National University . New posts on the first Wednesday of the month. Subscribe by email below. Visit the About page to find out more about me, my podcasts and books. I'm on most social media platforms as @thesiswhisperer. The best places to talk to me are LinkedIn , Mastodon and Threads.

• Post (606)
• Page (16)
• Product (6)
• Getting things done (258)
• On Writing (138)
• Miscellany (137)
• Your Career (113)
• You and your supervisor (66)
• Writing (48)
• productivity (23)
• consulting (13)
• TWC (13)
• supervision (12)
• 2024 (5)
• 2023 (12)
• 2022 (11)
• 2021 (15)
• 2020 (22)

Whisper to me....

Enter your email address to get posts by email.

Email Address

Sign me up!

• On the reg: a podcast with @jasondowns
• Thesis Whisperer on Facebook
• Thesis Whisperer on Instagram
• Thesis Whisperer on Soundcloud
• Thesis Whisperer on Youtube
• Thesiswhisperer on Mastodon
• Thesiswhisperer page on LinkedIn
• Thesiswhisperer Podcast
• 12,127,564 hits

Discover more from The Thesis Whisperer

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Type your email…

Continue reading

What to do if your doctoral supervisor is unresponsive or disengaged

Advice and recommendations on what steps to take if your doctoral supervisor is unresponsive or disengaged..

Every supervisory relationship is different so use your judgement to decide which steps to take, what the appropriate timescale is and what your personal approach should be.

Read this guide for additional information on what to expect from your doctoral supervision and how to make the most of it.

You may also wish to consider the Responsibilities of the Supervision Team as well as the Responsibilities of the Doctoral Student , both of which are appendices of QA7 which sets out the principles for doctoral study (including integrated PhDs and Professional Doctorates).

• For a short period (e.g. 1-2 weeks)

Check they are not on holiday or on leave; check their online calendar or ask close colleagues (e.g. other members of the supervision team, department support contact ).

Check whether their other doctoral students have heard from them.

Send a friendly email or message to check they are OK.

Ask yourself how urgent it is; does the matter require their immediate attention? If it is urgent, send an explicit email (highlight it is urgent by putting the word "urgent" in the heading of the email), go to their office or call.

• For a longer period (e.g. 3-4 weeks)

You might not want to wait this long before taking these actions if it is an urgent issue.

If it is non-urgent and they continue to not engage then you can:

Talk to a member of staff informally to ask for advice (e.g. other members of the supervision team, Doctoral College department support contact , Director of Doctoral Studies or someone else you trust). They may be able to give suggestions on how to proceed, or help broker the discussion.

Send a direct email requesting a quick response explaining why you need their input. Explain you are stuck and can’t make progress (be mindful they may have their own personal challenges of which you are unaware).

Ask for a meeting to discuss the process for future engagement. Set expectations - how do you want the relationship to work and what progress would you like to make?

If there is continued lack of engagement from your supervisor talk to the Director of Doctoral Studies or Head of Department. This is a more formal option as it is likely that the DoS or HoD would need to communicate with the supervisor in order to set expectations. Discussions will remain confidential and they may not need to be communicated directly to your supervisor.

• If the problem persists

If you find that it is often difficult to contact your supervisor(s) and you have tried resolving it using the above methods, you can confidentially report an issue affecting your research by accessing a link available in your six-monthly progress reports or by reporting an issue online . This link will connect you to a simple form that when completed can be routed via the Doctoral College to your Faculty/School Director of Doctoral Studies or the Academic Director of the Doctoral College, who will get in touch to discuss the issue in confidence.

If required, there is a formal process to change supervisor or raise a complaint:

• to change your Supervisor, complete PGR8
• student complaints policy and procedure

If issues are more serious or you would prefer some independent advice, then you can contact the following teams for advice and support:

• The Independent Advice Service for PGR students
• Student Support
• SU Advice and Support

Support for doctoral students

If you have any questions, please contact us.

Doctoral College support

On this page.