I don't mean lie. I mean emphasize something else. Emphasize the cosupervisor's area of science - even that mini project he did with that supervisor - and how it chimes with his interests, he wants to go more in that direction. Then it's about the science. Much easier.

A friend of mine switched her PhD and this was her overt reason for doing so. The real driving factor was that she did not get on with the style of one of her supervisors. It worked, she had no regrets, and there was no need for confrontation or controversy.

Anyway I wonder if one of our suggestions could work...

Totally! Both of my PhD references were from the same department, and one of them was the actual potential supervisor!

I remember your earlier post! It does sound promising but you just need to sit tight and wait and see!!

I'm all for upfrontness, but think it's better to say it is about your changing research interests... Less room for it to be taken personally / as a criticism of supervisory style/input.

I don't think it will hinder you if you write a really great personal statement. The main thing is to do your best to demonstrate how you meet each of the criteria, with specific examples etc. Applying for jobs is a bit like other things, like writing a paper... I think you get better at it each time.

What specific experience are you / do you feel you are lacking?

Thank you! I decided against doing it, as the editor happens to be in my specific area, though the journal has broader scope, so they can choose the reviewers! Here's to not sealing my own fate :)

Ah I didn't realise they could only choose one. That's helpful to know! I didn't want to feel like I had sealed my own fate if they were all horrible!

Just wondered, do you tend to suggest reviewers when submitting a paper for publication?

I've never done it before, and have had good reviewers regardless (offering relevant and useful feedback on my work)... This time I am considering suggesting two whose work I have become familiar with and feel is relevant to my own. Just not sure whether to bother!

It sounds as though you really think you aren't going to get as much out of the current PhD situation as you'd like to. Moving seems the best bet. Just see if you can get that funding guaranteed for the time that you need!

I think that often the student thinks that all supervisors are meant to be committed supervisors, whereas actually, in reality, you get these "phantom" (or "on paper") supervisors. The problem is, it tends to be an unspoken thing!

This is really great advice! Wish I'd done this. And I love the term phantom supervisor!!!

Hello,

Would it be possible to complete your phdin 3 years? That way, there is enough funding. Or would it be possibly to actually transfer at the end of this year, so that you have already completed some of the work and have the first year literature reviewing etc under your belt? Or maybe you could tell the professor that you'd love to move to his lab and you're very grateful for the opportunity, but is there anyway he could guarantee that extra year's funding?

You are in your first year, which is a really good time to think about moving if you aren't happy and that's what you want to do. The further you get into it, the harder it may be to feel you can switch elsewhere.

No one really knows what the picture will be after the pandemic, but personally I would not let fear of that make me stay somewhere I really wasn't happy if there was an opportunity to go elsewhere albeit with a little less security.

By the way - is the language the only issue? Is it possible for you to learn some of the language and see if that helps the situation? You could trial it till the end of the year. That could be another option.

Hope this helps in some way...

I'm interested to hear what other people suggest about this too. Personally, I think that although it is annoying it is just one of those things. The main thing is, you have two good supervisors, one of whom is reliable. If anything, I'd say now is the time to get used to the fact the the second one isn't prioritising your emails (perhaps as he is very busy or maybe because he just regards it is lower on the list of priorities as he is the secondary supervisor) and plan accordingly. So that would mean planning your work so that you submit it to them for feedback way in advance of your own deadlines (e.g., for submitting papers or for submitting the thesis), and trying to plan so that you have other things you can be working on in the meantime. I know it is frustrating - once I waited months to get feedback on a paper I wanted to submit.

Another option could be to formalise your plans with them. That is, share a timetable with them, and actually ask them to indicate when they would be able to read drafts or do x by, and put it onto that timetable which you all agree to. I don't like this kind of approach myself as I find it too formal... but it is super efficient... It would just be important to approach it with them in a way that doesn't seem bossy or demanding (sometimes tricky when you're trying to take control of things).

Glad that your PhD is going well so far! :)

You're welcome - I hope you got something written that you're happy with. When I was doing this I was able to send it to my supervisor and another academic for feedback, which helped a lot. Maybe you can do that too.

Best
Tudor

Hi Clara_ra

Do you already have your research idea and are just trying to write it up in a statement? If so then does this help at all?