======= Date Modified 08 00 2010 00:00:29 =======
Hi,

Just writing here in case someone can offer good advice about this. I have, in my opinion, an intelligent supervisory team. Experienced, well funded and well known. I am after all in a very prestigious university. The problem is that I feel the level of research they expect me to do is much higher than I am capable of at the moment. In meetings, when i present my results to them, i rarely get any supportive comments. Instead, i will first be cross examined thoroughly regarding the results i get. If i fail to answer the questions well enough, they will start to drill into it, give negative comments about my ability to be a phd student and make faces to vividly show their disappointment. Sometimes I do manage to answer the questions rather well I think but they never showed their agreement. Just silence.. then they move on to the next question until they find one that i cannot answer.

This makes me feel very demotivated after every meeting as I come out from them feeling I did nothing right. The meetings happen once in 3-4 weeks or so. I dread every meeting and feel down most of the time. I am afraid to do experiments and generate more results since I feel they'll just be shot down in the meetings.. Its been 14 months into this (supposedly) 36 months phd and the only thing that kept me going is that I am awarded a very good scholarship and that I am very interested i the subject I am working on now at the moment. Changing supervisors is not really an option I think since there's no other interesting projects around and I've invested a lot of work in this.

I dont think I am that stupid since I did graduate from the same prestigious university with 1st class but completing this Phd looks immensely difficult mainly because I keep getting this setbacks from my supervisors... I would love to complete this phd... but how do I do it?

Phd_fh, I think that having acquired a 1st class degree from a prestigious institution you are certainly not incapable, so you can get that out of your mind. I think that the problem is that your supervisors are expecting too much of you and are being too critical. Doing a PhD is not about re-inventing the wheel and not a case of creating amazing results or developing new theories. I have often said this, but doing a PhD is about training to be a researcher and demonstrating your development. So what if you don't do amazing research? You only have 3 years to acquire all the skills you need, perform data collection and analysis and then write it up. You've probably heard this before, but your best research is done after your PhD, when you've learnt to be a researcher.
I think that your supervisory team is too critical and you need to approach them, tactfully, and talk to them about how you feel after you have had your meetings with them. If anything, your supervisory meetings are supposed to motivate you, not the other way. It's really nice that they take such and interest in your work and work with you so closely, but their comments and actions do you no favours. If they think it fare to countenance disappointment and roll their eyes, then ask them what you need to do, what they expect - ask them to be more constructive in their feedback. Given your description of their actions, it seems that you can never hope to please them by being passive. And you're now at the point where you are fearful of actually doing experiments, lest they act disappointed, then I think you need to be more explicit about what you plan to do with them and act upon. If they say something like 'well, whay are you doing that?', then you can explain your aims to them and what you hope to achieve and see what they think. Just explain to them, that you need a bit more guidance to satisfy their standards (it seems hard to know what they want).
On an unrelated note, I have often anticipated that this is a major problem of these prestigious institutions - expecting you to run before you can walk, like some assembly conveyor belt on high-speed.

thanks for the reply Walmin. It seems that you have a lot of experience with phd supervision. How I hope my supervisors are as understanding. Will act on your advice.

Thanks again for the help

Hmm, drilling into the topic and questioning you will help you learn. But being entirely negative and just shooting you down is not constructive, I think some supervisors really don't understand (or don't care) about the basics of good management. I also think there can be an element of ganging up in these meetings, no one wants to look like the soft touch. Is there a member of the team who is more approachable? I wonder if you could go to them and explain that you're having serious doubts about your abilities and finding it hard to put their feedback into context, could they clarify what they expect at this stage? I'd also second wally's suggestions, when you get feedback feel free to engage with it and say "Ok, so how would you suggest I modify my approach?". It looks mature and will help you get something useful out of their criticism. Also, do they have other phd students? If so, it might be worth talking to them to see if their experience is similar, my guess is that your abilities are not the problem ;-)