Note: Previously, we posted an anonymous message from one student who got bad advice from an advisor, and received this response: -dt

On 15 Jan, you posted a note from a grad student who wasn’t sure what to do about an advisor who was going to be the next chair of the dept., but had almost made the student take courses which would not have allowed the student to teach the following year. While I am only in my first year as a grad student, I am 30 and spent the last year talking to quite a few professors I knew about how to succeed as a grad student. EVERY ONE of them talked about selecting an advisor who *makes time for you.*

One of them even told me to not spend too much time worrying about the exact research I did for my dissertation. While I needed to be reasonably close to my intended field (since it would affect any hiring decisions made), he emphasized that the work I would do getting my PhD should be enough to get the degree and worry about “learning” later on in my career (when I actually had a paying job).

Unfortunately, as Ronda pointed out, you need to remove yourself from this situation without creating any enemies. While it will be painful, GO OUT OF YOUR WAY to convince the professor IT’S YOUR FAULT that you need weekly sessions for guidance. Having access to your advisor is a reasonable expectation, if he’s being difficult already-you’re probably going to get in bigger trouble later. Also, do not tell ANYONE in the department ANY negative things about the old advisor. Gossip runs rampant and no one should be trusted. (Advice from another professor.) Good luck.

- From a A Boston Doc-Talker:

—

Maybe we have beaten this advisor thing to death, but here’s my two cents worth. I have an advisor I like very much, and I am very satisfied with her. Yet I also go to the chair of my department sometimes. He has different ideas, different perspectives, etc. It is valuable to me (and, I think, important to my student career here) to solicit advice from such varied sources. However, inevitably conflicting advice will arise. What I have found-much as I hate to admit this-is that profs see so many people and have so much on their minds that SOMETIMES THEY SIMPLY DON’T EVEN REMEMBER WHAT IT WAS THEY TOLD YOU. Some of the times I have agonized and fretted and worried about who would be offended turned out to be an incredible waste of psychic energy. Hear me right, I am not saying that they do not care about us, and I am not suggesting rampant senility in higher education institutions…. I am just trying to ease a few minds. Often what sounds to a student like advice that MUST BE FOLLOWED may actually be, in the professor’s mind, an offhand suggestion that happened to be the advice of the hour.

- From a Michigan Doc-talker

—

…and Ronda Dave’ writes:

Dear Doc-talker, You’ve touched on several advisor issues that deserve comment, all dealing with the communication gap that so often seems to exist between advisors and advisees. Graduate students often don’t know how to interpret advisors’ and committee members’ comments-they don’t know which ones are important, or which ones are “mandatory.” And often, even if they think the advice is important and mandatory, they don’t know precisely how to comply. This “communication gap” is such a ubiquitous problem for thesis-writing graduate students that it deserves serious discussion.

One reason the problem exists is because professors differ in how they provide feedback. Some tell students what to do in very unequivocal, didactic terms. “Do not use a correlational approach. Use a comparative analysis for this design.” or “Omit this discussion from your literature review. It is dated.” These kinds of instructions are easy to follow. The problem arises when comments aren’t specific and direct. “You might want to explore an alternative analysis for this design.” or “How does this discussion relate to the current literature? Is it sufficiently relevant?”

However it may seem, elliptical communication is not another hurdle advisors purposely put in the dissertation path to increase its difficulty. In fact, sometimes it’s the nicest advisors who give the fuzziest advice. Some advisors, of course, simply don’t take the time to “direct” students. Some prefer a “laissez faire” approach to advising. They make comments like, “Unclear.” or “Why?” in the margins of your drafts. They leave it to you to figure out the specifics and respond. Other advisors are reluctant to “spoon feed” guidance to students. They think it belittles graduate students to be ordered to “carry out the advisor’s instructions.” Still other advisors believe they can extract higher thinking, better production, or greater effort from students by being opaque in their advice and forcing the student to “think.” And other advisors, often the nicest ones, in an attempt to save your ego while they criticize your work, use oblique expressions to draw your attention to a problem without actually telling you what it is. In their efforts to help you save face, they leave it to you to “discover” the problem on your own.

For all these reasons and others, most professors give advice that is open to interpretation. You’ll need to answer the questions, “How directive is my advisor? Is the advice specific enough for me to know what to do next? And if you honestly need greater direction, ask for it.

There is a further problem that all advisors acknowledge-they sometimes change their minds. Sometimes they forget what they say from one time to the next, but more often they change their minds because they gain more information that *changes their perspective* about how your study should go. Certainly in my efforts as an advisor I often saw things differently from one meeting with a student to the next. As you rewrite and rethink and refine your study, your communication of it to your advisor will reflect this development. Your own greater insight of where you’re heading lets your advisor give more specific and helpful advice.

On the other hand, if you consistently feel more confused about your study when you leave your advisor’s office than when you enter, you may want to get a second opinion from someone else (especially someone not on the committee and not politically involved with the department).

Another reason advisors give fuzzy advice is because they really don’t know what you should do. The “next” thing for you to do or the “right” step for you to take may not be clear to either you or your advisor when you meet. So he or she may suggest you do something, more as a brainstorming technique than as a directive. If this happens, it may seem like “changing one’s mind” or “advice of the hour,” but it’s really just a shotgun approach in the hope that you’ll gain the necessary information by your “random mental thrashing about” to make a more informed decision.

Another issue you mention is conflict among different sources of advice. This is a delicate issue because it inevitably involves your advisor’s ego, and of course your advisor’s advice has priority over other points of view. David Sternberg has an excellent discussion in his book, How to Complete and Survive a Doctoral Dissertation, which has to do with the “social calculus” of dealing with conflicting committee advice. He suggests you first analyze how serious the parties are about their respective positions. And if they both seem adamant, to get them together with other people and present the conflict to the group so they can see how you are caught in the middle. Many students are too “shy” to object to advice with which they disagree. So they begrudgingly attempt to please everyone who gives them advice by incorporating it at all costs, often jeopardizing the integrity of the study. Other students feel powerless to object, elevating the advisor’s advice to the status of a “commandment.”

Both of these attitudes can lead to problems with your motivation down the line. If you incorporate other views and suggestions which really go against your grain, you can find yourself less interested to work on the dissertation as it becomes “less and less yours.” So it’s important to continue to shape it “closer to your heart’s desire” as you progress.

Many advisor communication problems can be circumvented by using a “thesis journal” in which you maintain careful notes of what transpires during meetings with advisors and committee members. No one, not even you, will remember everything that transpires over the years a thesis takes. Unfortunately, the “difficult decisions” your advisor makes are the very ones he or she is likely to forget (like dismissing a particular “pet” theoretical approach that another committee member suggested).

So we encourage all students working on theses to maintain a “thesis journal” in which they document who said what, and when. We are not suggesting, however, that students openly SHARE their journal with their committee members unless it is advantageous to do so. The best idea is to fill out the journal AFTER the meeting, rather than during it. And you may or may not want to take the journal with you to meetings.

Now to come, dear Doc-talker, to your specific situation, where you agonized over your advisor’s directive only to discover she didn’t remember what was said, let alone care whether you followed the advice, which apparently conflicted with other advice you wanted to take. You’ve discovered that your advisor’s not particularly “invested” in the advice she gives you. And you’ve found that her advice sometimes conflicts with the advice from your department chair, which often agrees more with what you want to do. Based on these insights, you can probably assume that your advisor won’t object to your not following her advice, as long as you have a justification for doing things a different way. One thing you don’t want to do is use someone else’s opinion as the justification for why you’re not taking her advice. So never say, “Well, Dr. So and So told me it would be better to do such and such,” because that puts her ego at risk. It would be better to bring up Dr. so and so’s argument as your own, and practice it sufficiently in your own mind to make it as convincing as possible. Thanks for your comments, Doc-talker. and good luck! How have other list members handled the advisor-student communication gap?

- Ronda Dave’

—

I was able to handle some of my own anxieties about conflicting advice after finding that I could be completely open with one committee member concerning this very issue. What gave me some measure of peace was the reassurance that while committee members may have different opinions about my approach, what I needed to be concerned with was having good, sound reasons for the decisions I had made-rather than trying to make what seemed to be the RIGHT decisions in everybody else’s eyes-and so be prepared to defend my own decisions. Others on the committee might disagree and I could probably expect this to some degree, but so long as I showed evidence of being aware of other positions as I took my own stand, the work would be defensible.

So, if you can answer the question, “Why did I go this route?” in a manner which shows knowledge of the options and sound reasoning, you will have a respectable defense. (Or so I was told, and I’ve since graduated.)

My contact with a professor who could be open and honest about all aspects of the dissertation work was invaluable. I strongly support the suggestion that you find such a person-someone who knows the system, appreciates the difficulties associated with getting the degree, and is also acquainted with the personalities on your committee. One may feel stupid asking for clarification or exposing personal difficulties, but it is far better to ask the questions early on than find out later that the “suggestion” was something they wanted you to do before you graduated. (In my experience, I had fulfilled every objective presented in my research proposal, only to discover that an earlier “suggestion” was something that they would insist upon. Six more months.) And if you don’t know the nature of the advice when it is given, it may help to ask right then, “I’m trying to weigh your advice appropriately. Is what you’re describing something which you consider absolutely essential to this work? Help me understand how it will influence the results, or why it wouldn’t be better to do such and such.” Or, “I’ve gotten some conflicting advice on this. How would you suggest I handle it?” All the best.

- From an anonymous Doc-talker