Hi. I am not sure about how to tell my eager supervisor to stop piling on experiments in the last 4 months of my phd?

My phd is in sciences and I have had to jump between departments - for the last 2 years. Not sure how he managed it, but he wrote the grant for my phd in areas that he himself does not have ANY expertise in

It's the usual story of the ambitious supervisor trying to extend their wand of skills but as he doesn't have any direct expertise - all the experiments end up taking much longer than need be.

At the end of it, I have to have a level of expertise to confidently defend my experiments, but as I keep jumping not just techniques, but departments every 6 months, it all feels a bit disjointed and I don't actually feel I know any of my experiment well enough to defend it effectively - esp when the examiners are experts in one field, where as I have to defend 3-4 different fields.

Is putting myself in the throws of yet another unknown department/ experiment in my final months a good idea? How can I tell him to bugger off?

Jo

You are going to have to try and assess whether you have enough right now to complete your PhD and if not, what exactly you need. With only 4 mo to go you surely don't need anything really off-topic or new. Can you get a second opinion from a head of dept or graduate tutor? Have you told him what you just told us - only more tactfully? Does he have or has he had other students? When you have a supervisor who doesn't really know your topic you have to really take responsibility for these decisions yourself and/or get advice elsewhere. My supervisor was also keen to dabble in my area but never really got to grips with it. I have got brief but expert feedback from a couple of other people who are experts in parts of my topic to help me know when my project is actually ready to wrap and go.

thanks for feedback. Your idea of talking to the head is a good one, which is exactly what I was thinking of doing. My experiments are technically very demanding so having a good grasp of the area is a must. Half my problems involved lack of expertise and having to re-invent the wheel somewhat. I don't mind that at all, but I need my project to tell a coherent story at this moment, which it does not at the moment.

My supervisor and I are in the ULTIMATE disagreement regarding the final experiment. He wants it more inline with what he is doing so he feels he has contributed a level of input to my project. So far he has not! However his techniques are completely new to me and some of my data which is inconclusive can not be answered through his methods, therefore leaving me with many more unanswered questions.

I would like to do my final experiment in an area so I can tackle some missing links directly and have made many suggestions - however it is once again not in his area of expertise, but what I have been doing for the last year and his objections seem purely based on that and not my ability to have a coherent structure in my phd.

The ultimate decision should be mine I feel if I am defending my experiments, but as he is my supervisor he can pretty much do what he likes and has the final say alas!!

Will he supply extra funding to do these experiments? Because presumably doing them would extend the time you spent on your PhD, and maybe past your funding.

Not sure if I want to put that idea in his head just yet. I have finalised a draft contents page and divided my results into chapters for discussion with a retired professor from my dept. Am meeting her on friday to show her the results and seek impartial advice on where the project could finish.

The conclusions I draw from my expts are just as valid as my supervisors' but mine will generate more meaningful conclusions from my current results if I continue with my designed expts. If the professor arrives to the same conclusion as my supervisor, I may have to bite the bullet and do it but will wait till then.

Thanks for posts bytheway. I have managed to change my very negative stress into a very constructive process thanks to you lot. Cheers you lot !!:-)

Hi Jo,

I see the problem. While it can be excellent to have an eager and highly motivate supervisor, it can also be difficult particularly in the final stages.

Always remember that
1. you are the boss
2. you are the only one who really knows what you are doing
3. you need to understand what you are doing and why you are doing it.
4. your supervisor is not the one examining the PhD (if you are in the UK)! and has therefore no say in whether you will pass or not.
5. the examiners will see your phd from a totally new point of view and will have no idea of your supervisors input or behaviour; they only know that this is your work and you need to defend it and explain your reasoning behind it. In the end you will be alone so make sure it's all sound!

Just my two cents. Don't know if it helps.

thanks Go :)