what did the one-line say? Some supervisors are just like that, short and sweet comments. Did you ask them to elaborate?

It sounds to me as if you were cross yourself. which wouldn't help

You have to realise that your supervisor is your key to your phd, so you need to get on a better footing. they might be a know-it-all and tell you so but there must be a reason you were paired. If they are unhappy with your work, don't criticise them, ask what you could do better, then maybe add later. "OK, I'll work on that. I should have probably contacted you sooner about this- your initial feedback was quite brief and I should have asked you to elaborate on this". As you say- you got "mad" because they didn't take responsibility for not giving you feedback- that's absurd. It's in YOUR interest to get what you need out of your supervisor, getting mad won't work.

All academics have a mountain of teaching, marking, admin and supervision to get on with before they can focus on the research that they actually want to do, it probably won't matter to him or her if they lose another responsibility (YOU) so bear that in mind; they have the upper hand, end of.

ooh! I'm so happy for myself!! :D

I'm chuffed to say I just scored a research asst role part time to work alongside my revisions. It couldn't have come at a better time.

They're trying to start me on around 19k pro rata, but the scale goes to 25k. I want to negotiate as the post is part time (always equates to more hours!), also they wanted a grad, I've got an MRES and just have to resubmit my phd. I think I'm good value.

It's fixed term for only a few months anyway so I won't progress up the salary scale in that time.

Other issues are the lead researcher is on sabbatical so I will actually be the assistant but will do a lot of the work on my own. Plus I have childcare to pay for. All in all, 25k pro rata will reflect the role requirements, my skills and qualifications and be more affordable.

This seems a good start but does anyone have any further advice on negotiating?

only thing is, I just had the call and said I wanted to discuss salary so I'm waiting for a call back right now!

Thanks for all the replies that people are leaving, it is useful to think about the problem from different angles.

I think there is a general misunderstanding here that the supervisor and institution are on the same side, the situation is complex but that certainly is not the case as it is conveyed to me by HOD. I have complained already at the right time through the proper channels. I'm not interested in the supervisor getting a ticking off or doing better next time, not very collegial I know, but I am interested in the practicalities of how to see the revisions through which at this time boils down to money.

I am sure that the funding body would be interested to know that their funded students aren't getting even the minimum of support but I imagine that would be the sort of complaining that does burn bridges.

I have already looked in to as many charitable organisations as possible but every single one was out of bounds to me, despite being brought up in the UK, schooled here etc. I have a different nationality which precludes me from applying for any of the awards that I found out about already, but always happy to hear suggestions.

I wonder if anybody else has tried formal mediation for academic matters? I agree that it might be difficult to prove beyond doubt that no supervision meant a poorly turned-out thesis, (though this seems pretty obvious as I type) but I guarantee that the people involved know this to be the case and wonder if it might come out given the right context.

Additionally, when a student is given revisions of this nature they won't get another second-chance to submit, at the very least one might expect a supervisor to advise as to whether a thesis is ready for submission or not. In my case if anyone had looked over my work I suspect they might have advised me to defer and submit a better-prepared thesis. In fact this was the examiners' main comment; the thesis had potential (which I showed in the viva) but didn't seem ready. As such it is very difficult to see how I shouldn't blame my supervisor!

Well I have looked in to Manon Gauthier, and that case was a student suing the institution, I then stumbled upon the idea of mediation. What do you think? I would formally ask the person in question to pay a fair sum for messing me about at an absolutely crucial time, something which would reflect that he bears some responsibility for the position I am now in. I would have contacted him directly but I am wary of anything being misconstrued.

I have to disagree with you Treeoflife, supervisors have a responsibility to students to oversee their project, it is a requirement of the role, or at least is purported to be in my student handbook. I would have even been happy with "guidance" but the point I wish to make is that I received no guidance, "ask me in May/ July/ October" is not guidance. I have the support of my department in making a complaint, but the person my complaint relates to has moved on, there is nothing the dept. can do or could have done. I am looking for alternatives to this. My argument with my supervisor boils down to an agreement that he would perform a certain role which he clearly did not do, I think there is a case to make because I got no guidance, not just "bad" guidance which is always subjective. I suppose in legal-ish terms this is a breach of contract or some such thing.

Even if I don't pursue this any further there must be someone with this experience, or at least it is a general question- how can students under the remit of supervisors at a different institution secure the input that they require?

I don't want to sound ungrateful to those that have posted strategies for getting on with work, but that is not the issue here at all and I am happy with my strategy for approaching the revisions, if I can get the time to do them without financial hardship or worse.

Likewise, the upgrade example I gave was to illustrate the difference in work that I produced with and without guidance, because phds are only assessed at the end, the upgrade is the only comparison I could give to illustrate that I am capable of producing passable thesis material.

I will look in to the case you mention, meaninginlife if only for comparison because I am not sure that the precedent would apply in UK, do you know? In any case, thanks for mentioning it.

Finally just to clear it up, I'm not asking my ex-supervisor for a reference, or even contemplating doing so ever. I doubt I will need this reference as I have offers of references from others which I am happier with.

Thanks for your replies, Nick 1 and Tatjana. The reason for even thinking about suing is the possibility to support myself and family through the revisions; without an income I can barely afford time to work on them, the only way would be to pay for childcare with a credit card, which is not attractive.

My first post was brief due to a word limit, but I think I can prove that lack of supervision has had a material effect on my outcome; I am being asked to make changes which I had asked my supervisor about, on several occasions. I received no reply so decided not to make the changes. I also asked several times whether I should ask for a supervisor within my dept before it was too late, and each time my supervisor replied to assure me he was just unavailable until such-a-date, then I would contact again and be fobbed off til a future point etc. etc. All of this is recorded in e-mails.

No phd student, and certainly not me, really has the expertise and judgement to see a thesis through without guidance, that's why we're matched to a supervisor in the first place. It's not too far of a stretch to imagine that without supervision a student won't do as well as a student with supervision.

Take for example my upgrade to phd, I stormed through it with very positive feedback, I think this is because I had worked according to plans made with the guidance of a supervisor. After that I got nothing, hence key structural problems in the thesis I had submitted. At the same time a colleague in the dept had their thesis read over 3 times prior to submission, by two professors. I had a draft of four chapters read in 2012 and someone took pity on me and skimmed my thesis after I submitted it, in prep for my viva (4 weeks later).

I'm not sure how a claim against a supervisor might impact on future references. The reason I am even contemplating a civil case is because the institution cannot do anything now that he has moved on, and he wasn't working for them when he f*cked me off. I am not the only one, as it happens, and the institution are very apologetic and doing what they can.

In my experience even if you get a great supervisor there's no guarantee they won't go elsewhere during your phd. A phd takes a long time start to finish, so it is worth bearing in mind what a potential supervisor's career trajectory might be. ALso, do not automatically assume that they will stick with you even if they leave, certainly this does happen, and sometimes very effectively, but in my own experience there is no mechanism to ensure that you will actually get any help out of a supervisor at another institution.

My constructive advice would therefore to be look for an institution that supports your subject area, ideally with more than one member of staff and one or two research groups which are applicable to you, that way you have options if you find your supervisor is not great for any reason, and if anyone leaves, their replacement will likely have similar expertise.

Hi, underwater, another technique which might help you to start small is the pomodoro method. You do nothing but work for 25 minutes to complete a "pomodoro" (named so after the little tomato kitchen timers). there's a website which will log your completed tomatoes so you don't even need a kitchen timer. I have found it an excellent motivating tool, there's something really satisfying about completing a tomato that makes you just want another one..... good luck!

Hi everyone,

I'm a new poster on here, but an occasional reader. I've sometimes found others' stories and discussions really helpful during jmy time as a phd student, and have been impressed with the discussions that take place on here, so I thought it might be a good sounding board for something I am plotting.....

I recently had my phd thesis examined and unfortunately scored a set of major revisions. None of the revisions were particularly difficult, just that it would mean restructuring some parts of the thesis. I was a fully funded research council student, but now have no income so due to family responsibilities, I take care of kids most days so my partner can work to support us all. Hence, revisions are coming very slowly indeed.

What links this situation to the post title is the fact that I received very little supervision in the last 3 years. A combination of sabbaticals, research leave and a supervisor who went to another institution just combined to mean I had very little input. What is most annoying is that I asked my errant supervisor countless times about many of the issues that came up as revisions. This is just a very brief synopsis but to make my point, I can show that with supervision the extent of my revisions would have been significantly less. Therefore, I would not be in the financial/ work situation I am in at the moment.

I have complained but my uni can do very little to address the supervisor who has left. What makes me think about suing is that I can quantify the losses that these revisions are costing me very well indeed, every day I spend at work on revisions must be paid for in lost earnings or childcare!

Is this a bit petty? Perspective would help. Thanks, Grizzle