I am not sure what cardinal error it is your supervisor is supposed to have made here? Am I misreading this?

Did they out and out criticise you?
Did they demean you or imply you are worthless in any way?
Did they make an explicit untrue direct comparison between you and this other "perfect" student?

Doesn't seem so. If they did, you can make a complaint, and I would be behind this course of action 100%.

From what I gather he demonstrated, using a real life example of someone who can work well and balance having a child with an academic career. So what he isn't her supervisor? I often use examples of people who I have nothing to do with, when trying to illustrate a point. Are you seriously telling us you expect him to be at the beck and call of your personal insecurities, as well as the insecurities, jealousies and resentments of everyone else he happens to be supervising?
People talk about supervisors being incompetent and being "Biatches", and I think this can be taken too far. Believe me I had an awful supervisor. For me that means NO supervision, work plagiarised, deliberate sabotage- things that can end your career. They are scientists not life coaches. Its unrealistic to expect them to be warm and fuzzy nursery school teachers tiptoeing around peoples feelings and being afraid to make comments just in case someone finds offence.

To be honest, it sounds like you are more annoyed at yourself. That you aren't as organised and together as this rival. By attacking your supervisor it really does feel like you are just shooting the messenger.

In the light of all below, I must say, there is absolutely nothing wrong in using examples (good and bad) to illustrate a point. It should not be taken to be comparison, it should not be interpreted in that light unless it is intended that way. For me it is an instance of a prof advising masters students on the dos and donts of PhD life, using two examples: one in front of them for being organized etc, and another not in front of them for showing accomplishments while handling difficulties. This does not go to say that the first person is not accomplished and the second person disorganized. The other day when I couldnt search for something online, another studetn found the stuff (not my sup's stuent) my sup sent me an email with the link and I replied saying something like yes, my searching skills will improve with time, sorry. she immediately replied saying "remember, X (the student who found it) has been honing his for years!" (so that I dont worry). Often sups also speak of ex students and how they worked things out. This is a completely different situation than one in which there is 'comparison' between cases. I think we must learn to distinguish between the two.

BHC - are you replying to me or Lim?, because as far as I can make out, Lim seems to be more in line with your way of thinking about this than mine. Also, I haven't discussed my relationship with my supervisor so I don't understand why you would be asing me about that.

I am generally annoyed about the slap dash attitude universities have about PhD supervisor training - I too have had a supervisor whose behaviour reached way beyond that described by Lim. But I still think wheeling people (these are not things, they are people) out as examples when they are not there as bad form, unprofessional and very unnecessary. I'm not saying it would dent any body's ego, but I do think it reiterates the culture assessing the merits of students' work (behind their backs - something which was rife in my department)with other students, and there are many reasons why that is just plain wrong. There has to be some sort of boundary between student and supervisor, and supervisors do need to acknowledge some responsibility, as professionals, for what they are paid to do. I am not saying they are all lke that, but I do thnk it is more than ok to talk about the negatives of sup student relationships, especially on this forum.

And by the way, I am not someone with a fragile sensitive disposition in these situations - I just care about professionalism. If I were as you described, I'd be upset by your comments, which are verging on personal and not doing you any favours.

I see what Lim described as the thin end of a very nasty, destructive wedge which, as you know, is prettty rife in HE.

I'd just take it with a pinch of salt. Maybe the other woman's work is amazing, but then maybe her kids are ignored and maybe her marriage has fallen apart behind closed doors - who is to tell!?

Just remember that this is not an academic thing, its a human thing, and you would be sorely mistaken if you think this kind of thing doesn't happen in every office across the country on a daily basis.

She is probably jealous that you are a lot younger, so it can go both ways.

Oops. I had mistaken Eska for Lim. Apologies. My fault entirely. Also for the record, I agree with the lack of supervisor trainng in universities.

I guess my point was directed to a movement within education (and wider society) that plays to blame, fear and insecurity rather than hold up people as something positive to aspire to. Its all part of the movement where you can no longer tell kids in school that they have failed a test, but have "deferred success". Or why sports days have been cancelled because if someone comes first, then everyone else gets upset.

The truth is we are different and we do have varying abilities. The field we have chosen is very competitive. Academia is entirely based on comparison, whether theory A vs Theory B, or whether student X gets a scholarship over student Y, or whether university 1 gets a better RAE than university 2. You can't hide it.

I don't see what is "unprofessional" about making comparisons. While supervisors have a duty to be non-destructive, PhD students also have an equal responsibility to be emotionally resiliant, and be able to take on board feedback without reacting defensively.

Ok BHC! I get your point about academia being competitive, but I don't think comparing students to eachother would make them any better able to compete. It would demand an unrealistic simplification of their research and skills anyway, which would be a rubish way of giving feedback. It's just not productive and strikes me as lazy and careless.

======= Date Modified 17 Feb 2009 19:30:40 =======
Eska - when we go on the job market being compared with our peers is precisely what will happen, so I think you're being a bit unrealistic, as surely if we don't know what others have done etc then we're going to get a very nasty shock in a horribly competitive market if we can't compete? And the only way of knowing whether we have enough to stand a chance is to compare ourselves with our peers who managed to get jobs. I heard that in the US various top economics departments rank their PhD students who are seeking jobs and only write references for them if they apply for 'suitable' level jobs...



But I am genuinely interested by your concept of professionalism in supervision; if I've understood your posts correctly, you think that supervisors should never mention other students, and shouldn't discuss your work with their colleagues so in essence sort of work in a vacuum with you. Is that right? It's just if my very professional supervisors hadn't told me what other students of theirs had done in certain circumstances, if they hadn't suggested that I read student x's book chapter on y as it was very good, and indeed if my main supervisor hadn't asked a professor in a different field for his take on a problem that I was really struggling with and where she couldn't see a way forward either, then my PhD would have taken a lot longer and been worse. So I think I disagree with you. In fact, I don't think your model, if I've understood it correctly, would be possible at my ex-university as they have to write a report of your progress each year that gets read (as does a sample of your work) by two other staff members who then do your progress review. So there's bound to be discussion. And indeed I'd be worried if less experienced supervisors didn't seek the advice of more experienced people about any problems they and their PhD students were facing. Are you really saying all of that sort of activity is in your mind unprofressional?

Bewildered, yeah, there has been quite alot of misunderstaning.

I did not mention assessment of students' work with fellow academics - ie not with students. Of course, that is absolutely necessary, as are the written reports etc you mention. And preparation for references. Nowhere would I dream of raising an objection to that so I'm not sure where you got that idea from. Also, yes talking to students about the research of others in the context that it would point them in the direction of useful reading matter etc is more than ok and vey useful. I absolutely raise no objection to that.

And you know, if you have successful conference papers, if you get your research published in respected journals, this will more than equip you to assess how well you are doing in your field. Much of the time a PhD's main competitors are people from across the globe so why knowing your (or in some cases, some academic with an office down the hall from) your supervisor thinks you are better or worse than another student in your department is not very useful and I feel has alot more to do with bad habits on the part of supervisors than anything that will actually help students.

What I object to is conversations instigated by supervisors in which 'this student is better than that student' or 'you are better than that student' or as I encountered 'at least you didn't stumble through in total confusion like the lad before you I realliy don't know what to do with him'. All that told me was that getting a new sup was becoming a more urgent task.

It is amusing to watch BHC's transformation from a critic of supervisors and the academic system in general to a supporter now he is a postdoc. To me, it just seems he wishes to bat on behalf of his own self interest rather than taking any serious considered view of academia.

Hell yeah. If there is one thing that my years in academia have taught me is that if you don't bat for your self, no one else will. My life is like a university version of "Scarface".

But its wrong to infer that I have gone from being a critic of supervisors to being a supporter of the system. All that has changed is that I am critical down the chain as well as up it.

Having this self-interested perspective doesnt preclude me from making observations about the system. Its sucks at every level, but its the only way I can do what I want to do.

>>What I object to is conversations instigated by supervisors in which 'this student is better than that student' or 'you are better than that student' or as I encountered 'at least you didn't stumble through in total confusion like the lad before you I realliy don't know what to do with him'. All that told me was that getting a new sup was becoming a more urgent task. <<

Isnt this just human nature? Isn't that what other posters are doing when they make comments like "She is probably jealous that you are a lot younger, so it can go both ways." or "There is another student beating themselves up that they weren't asked". How can PhDers ask supervisors not to do this kind of thing, when they do it themselves? (or post docs for that matter).

Hey BHC, I'm getting de ja vous, we've discussed this before. But here goes anyhow. Yes, I think it may well be human nature, but so are alot of things that aren't appropriate in certain professional settings.

Comforting and chatting with your peers is a whole different ball game to a supervisor /off loading/trying to hack handedly motivate (or whatever their reasons are) by, as I see it, gossiping to a student about other students.

A supervisor's relationship with a student is one of authority and responsibility so certain boundaries are appropriate. If they need to off load in this way they should invent their own forum!!! or find aomeone at work they can grouch to.

What hasn't been mentioned is how soul destroying and unproductive it is to be constantly undermined by your supervisors regardless of whatever method they use! Some of the time they just say it without thinking and some of the time it is inappropriate but they often don't realise it (not that this excuses them but it goes back to their lack of social skills!) A little praise goes a long way if it is deserved! They are not trained to be supervisors or to manage people (that is why they're in not industry) and many just abuse the system! What makes it worse is the attitude of the hierarchy who often just brush it under the carpet so as not to rock the boat! Or make excuses for them which doesn't help!

The system needs to change as the way it works at the moment there is too much power given to the supervisors and not enough support for students! The checks on the students are just for rubber-stamping purposes to show that they care when in reality it's to cover their own backs so you can't about lack of supervision etc ... Or maybe it's the whole attitude of academia where it is very competitive for so little! Often outsiders don't realise this as they think it's all ivory towers and there isn't so much competition as in the private sector as there is not so much money involved!

Maybe it's time to actually value students instead of seeing them as inconvienent people who just complain! Alot of it is done to cover their own backs and insecurities and they want to use students to show off and compete amongst themselves!! Or maybe they realise that we are the future academics and want to bring us down even before we've started so we always doubt ourselves and are too insecure to start changing how things are done and improve it for the future!

Doodles, that may well be the case for many, but I don't think it can be said to be a generalisable complaint though...completely reverse situations are also visible, and they aren't really too few to count..

Well those are the lucky few! Having spoken to many students I find this is the common experience from different unis and even the experience of a friend abroad although I don't know that much about the system where he studied I can't generalise about it but the supervisor was something else! Anyway I'm sure there are people who have wonderful experiences and really enjoy their PhDs and I really congratulate those people who are so lucky! But most students you talk to have issues with their PhDs at sometime or other and your memories of it depends on whether the good out weigh the bad! I'm sure even people who don't/didn't enjoy their PhDs do/did have good moments occasionally, just the bad outweigh the good!

I was just giving my opninon on it and the effect that bad supervisors (and there are an awful lot of them out there!) can have on people regardless of what method they use as they generally either do it unintentionally due to lack of social skills or do it to motivate people as various people have suggested on this thread! I used to think academia was great and had the view of many non-academics that it was a nice environment and not as cut-throat as industry but that was before I started my PhD! Having been immersed in the system for a while I have found that it is not as everyone imagines it and is every bit as competitive especially as there is less money around so everybody gets protective of their turf! This is not an ideal environment to work under as people are protective of their ideas incase it gets stolen etc... Ideally people should feel confident about helping each other other as some of the best discoveries come unexpectably from talking to different people and looking at a problem from a different angle! This is an idealised view which one person can't acheive but if more people share this view it can happen! But as the system is so inert I do not think it will happen unless something is done about it! Hey I'm just being realistic as I've had my eyes opened! And don't get me wrong there are exceptions to the case as there are good supervisors there who are willing to help their students in anyway they can and others as well!

Wow, this thread has really taken off! There was me thinking I was just having a bit of a moan about feeling a bit crap lol. Well many interesting points, personally I do believe praise where praise is due, picking up on doodles point I believe it goes a very long way in a task such as a PhD. My colleague who is doing her PhD that I mentioned before, does work very hard, and I do believe my supervisor was just relaying to the students the discipline required when you have external things in your life to your work, such as children etc. I do think I was being sensitive, probably just because as we all know we do all tend to feel like we could do more, and like everyone else is doing so much better, for a lot of the time, so hearing evidence of that just got me down.

Im pretty lucky my supervisor is a lovely man, very busy, so often doesnt chase me as much as I probably need chasing for chapter drafts etc, but I think ive been hit with the lucky stick compared to some of the people ive spoken to about theirs. I agree supervisors need to do more training on actually 'HOW' to supervise, its a lot more than just reading drafts. As Joan Bolker says, it comprises being a counselor, parent, friend, task master and critical thinker. Its a heck of a role. How many people can say their supervisor does all of that! I think we dont necessarily need all of that but some would be nice when we hit our doldrums. Just a thought.