3 ms·

If you get the first one wrong the rest of the list will not matter at all. The most important questions are, who will my advisor be? What is the completion rat

by jboggan 11y ago

If you get the first one wrong the rest of the list will not matter at all. The most important questions are, who will my advisor be? What is the completion rate for graduate students under their care? What kind of personal network does the advisor maintain and what kinds of roles do the graduating PhDs go into? I wish I had known to ask that sort of thing. My advisor typically kept a lab of a dozen postdocs and a single PhD at any given time. I think in 25 years of being a research professor with sizeable grants that advisor only graduated 4 doctoral students, and a rather distressing proportion of the postdocs left not only academia but science after that lab. I would also try to hang out with the current doctoral students and assess their psychological well-being.

redraga 11y ago
While this is completely valid advice, it might not be applicable with junior faculty who may not have graduated many students. I chose my advisor (who was as assistant professor at the time) based on the belief that I'll get to publish aggressively since it's in both of our interests. But I had no way of knowing how hard it would be to work with her. And I wasn't the only person who felt this way; I saw my fellow group mates (all of us joined the group at around the same time) and other collaborators express similar sentiments in course of time. But since I'd already sunk in time, I decided to stick around. I was able to successfully complete my PhD, but I took more time than expected. Moreover, I was no way near as productive as I'd hoped to.
kxr 11y ago
^ A thousand times this. Vet your advisor like there's no tomorrow. This is trickier than it sounds because the best source on this is your advisor's current or past grad students, and they often won't open up cause they don't know you. Your filter should then be: "if they don't give you great/enthusiastic feedback about their advisor, play it safe and look elsewhere."
Obi_Juan_Kenobi 11y ago
It is the most important factor, but I disagree that it's that easy to tell (if that's part of what you're implying). Some people can actually do very well in what appear to be hostile labs. Some needs lots of space, while others do best with close monitoring. It ultimately just comes down to whether the advising relationship works or not, and it's nearly as complicated as romantic relationships. One thing that I like to stress is that you don't have to like your advisor. You should probably not dislike them, but what matters is how you play off each other and work together. An example: some advisors will put the people in their lab in somewhat adversarial positions. There will be two or more people working on similar projects, and the more successful of them will start to get more and more of it. For certain types, this situation is actually very motivating and can produce two differentiated projects that support each other. For others, it will undermine their confidence and wellbeing to a terrible degree. There can be a lot of resentment among both parties. While I would generally consider this a warning sign, you must recognize that this can be a good environment for the right person. The difficulty is that it's hard for you to know what works for you until you do it. There's no best formula, you just have to choose as best you can.

by jboggan 11y ago

redraga 11y ago

While this is completely valid advice, it might not be applicable with junior faculty who may not have graduated many students. I chose my advisor (who was as assistant professor at the time) based on the belief that I'll get to publish aggressively since it's in both of our interests. But I had no way of knowing how hard it would be to work with her. And I wasn't the only person who felt this way; I saw my fellow group mates (all of us joined the group at around the same time) and other collaborators express similar sentiments in course of time. But since I'd already sunk in time, I decided to stick around. I was able to successfully complete my PhD, but I took more time than expected. Moreover, I was no way near as productive as I'd hoped to.

kxr 11y ago

^ A thousand times this. Vet your advisor like there's no tomorrow. This is trickier than it sounds because the best source on this is your advisor's current or past grad students, and they often won't open up cause they don't know you. Your filter should then be: "if they don't give you great/enthusiastic feedback about their advisor, play it safe and look elsewhere."

Obi_Juan_Kenobi 11y ago

It is the most important factor, but I disagree that it's that easy to tell (if that's part of what you're implying). Some people can actually do very well in what appear to be hostile labs. Some needs lots of space, while others do best with close monitoring. It ultimately just comes down to whether the advising relationship works or not, and it's nearly as complicated as romantic relationships. One thing that I like to stress is that you don't have to like your advisor. You should probably not dislike them, but what matters is how you play off each other and work together. An example: some advisors will put the people in their lab in somewhat adversarial positions. There will be two or more people working on similar projects, and the more successful of them will start to get more and more of it. For certain types, this situation is actually very motivating and can produce two differentiated projects that support each other. For others, it will undermine their confidence and wellbeing to a terrible degree. There can be a lot of resentment among both parties. While I would generally consider this a warning sign, you must recognize that this can be a good environment for the right person. The difficulty is that it's hard for you to know what works for you until you do it. There's no best formula, you just have to choose as best you can.