phd advisor feedback

blog @ precision

Mentor magic: how to build a strong relationship with your phd advisor.

Imagine embarking on a challenging journey through a dense, unfamiliar forest. The path is winding, filled with obstacles, and occasionally, the way forward seems completely hidden. Now, imagine you have an experienced guide by your side—someone who knows the terrain, understands the pitfalls, and can point out the best routes to take. This guide is akin to your PhD advisor in the academic world. A PhD advisor plays a crucial role in a student’s academic journey, much like a guide ensuring you reach your destination safely and efficiently.

The relationship with your PhD advisor can significantly impact your academic and professional development. A strong advisor-student relationship fosters a supportive and productive environment where ideas flourish, research progresses smoothly, and academic goals are achieved. Conversely, a weak relationship can lead to misunderstandings, stalled progress, and unnecessary stress.

Consider the process of conducting research. Whether you’re engaging in qualitative methods —delving deep into participant experiences through interviews and focus groups, quantitative methods —analyzing numerical data to find patterns and test hypotheses, or mixed methods —integrating both approaches for a comprehensive understanding, your advisor’s guidance is invaluable. They help refine your research questions, provide insights on methodology, and offer critical feedback to enhance your study’s rigor and relevance.

In this post, we’ll explore the magic behind building a strong relationship with your PhD advisor. We’ll discuss understanding the advisor’s role, finding the right advisor, establishing clear communication, setting mutual expectations, building trust and respect, seeking feedback, navigating challenges, maximizing the advisor-student relationship, and maintaining a long-term connection. By the end, you’ll have a map for fostering a productive and rewarding partnership with your advisor, ensuring your journey through the academic forest is as straight forward and successful as possible.

Understanding the Role of Your PhD Advisor

A PhD advisor is more than just a supervisor; they are a mentor, guide, and sometimes even a critic, all rolled into one. Their responsibilities are multifaceted, encompassing both academic and personal support, guiding research questions, methodologies, and offering critical feedback. They can act as your dissertation mentor and writing assistant . At the core, a PhD advisor’s primary role is to guide you through your research journey, helping you refine your research questions, develop a robust methodology, and ensure your work meets the rigorous standards of your discipline. They offer critical feedback on your proposals, drafts, and final dissertation, ensuring that your work is both original and impactful. 

Beyond the academic realm, advisors play a significant role in shaping your professional development. They introduce you to the broader academic community, helping you network with other scholars and professionals in your field. This can be through conferences, seminars, or collaborative projects. Advisors often provide opportunities for co-authoring papers, which is invaluable for building your academic portfolio. They can also offer career advice, from navigating the job market to preparing for interviews and presentations.

It’s essential to set realistic expectations for this relationship. Understanding that your advisor is there to guide you, not to do the work for you, is crucial. They will provide the tools and feedback necessary for your success, but the drive, initiative, and hard work must come from you. Regular and proactive communication is key. Schedule consistent meetings to discuss your progress, address any challenges, and seek dissertation advice on the next steps. Be prepared for these meetings with specific questions or topics to discuss, demonstrating your commitment and organization.

Recognize that your advisor also has their own commitments and responsibilities. They might be juggling multiple advisors, teaching duties, and their own research projects. Therefore, patience and respect for their time are important. If you encounter difficulties, whether in your research or in the advisor-student relationship, addressing them openly and constructively can prevent minor issues from becoming significant obstacles.

In essence, understanding the role of your PhD advisor and setting realistic expectations are foundational steps in building a strong and productive relationship. Your advisor is your guide to surviving the PhD marathon , helping you navigate the complexities of qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-method research. By acknowledging their role and aligning your expectations, you can create a partnership that not only supports your academic success but also enhances your professional growth.

Finding the Right Advisor

Selecting the right PhD advisor is a critical decision that can profoundly influence your academic journey. The advisor you choose will be your primary guide, mentor, and supporter, so it’s essential to consider several key qualities to ensure a compatible and productive relationship.

First and foremost, look for an advisor whose research interests align closely with your own. This alignment is crucial because it ensures that your advisor will have the expertise and enthusiasm to guide your project effectively. If your research involves conducting interviews or focus groups for qualitative research , you’ll benefit from an advisor who has a strong background in these areas. Similarly, if your work is quantitative, involving statistical analysis or experimental design, an advisor skilled in these methodologies will be invaluable. For mixed-methods research, find someone who appreciates and understands the integration of both qualitative and quantitative approaches.

Another key quality is the advisor’s availability and commitment to mentoring. Some professors, despite their expertise, may be too busy with their own research, teaching, or administrative duties to provide the level of support you need (Brown & Kosovich, 2015). It’s important to find someone who has the time and willingness to engage with your work regularly. Ask current or former students about their experiences and observe how potential advisors interact with their students during seminars or meetings.

Effective communication is another critical quality. You need an advisor who can provide clear, constructive feedback and with whom you feel comfortable discussing your ideas, challenges, and progress. Compatibility in communication styles can significantly impact the efficiency and enjoyment of your research process.

To identify and select a compatible advisor, start by researching faculty members in your department or related fields. Review their published work to gauge their research interests and methodologies. Attend their lectures or seminars to get a sense of their teaching style and personality. Reach out to potential advisors to discuss your research interests and see how receptive they are to your ideas. This initial interaction can provide valuable insights into how supportive and approachable they might be.

Seek recommendations from peers, professors, and other academic consultants. They can provide honest insights into the working styles and strengths of different faculty members. Additionally, consider the advisor’s track record of mentoring successful PhD students. Advisors who have guided many students to completion and publication likely have a solid mentoring approach.

Aligning research interests is paramount. An advisor whose interests overlap significantly with yours will be more invested in your project and more capable of providing relevant and insightful guidance. They will also be better positioned to introduce you to a network of scholars and resources pertinent to your field, further enriching your academic experience.

Establishing Clear Communication

Effective communication is the cornerstone of a successful advisor-student relationship. Regular and open communication fosters mutual understanding, ensures alignment of expectations, and helps to promptly address any issues that may arise during your PhD journey. Establishing clear communication channels early on sets a positive tone for your working relationship and paves the way for a productive collaboration.

The importance of regular and open communication cannot be overstated. Frequent interactions with your advisor help to keep your research on track and helps to save you from a situation of never ending edits . Regular check-ins ensure that both you and your advisor are aware of your progress, any challenges you are facing, and the next steps in your research. This ongoing dialogue helps to prevent misunderstandings and ensures that you are both working towards the same goals.

Setting up initial meetings to discuss expectations and goals is a crucial first step in establishing clear communication. During these initial discussions, discuss research interests, objectives, and timelines. Set expectations regarding communication preferences and feedback. This is similar to the initial setup with dissertation services . Discussing your advisor’s expectations regarding meeting frequency, communication preferences, and feedback turnaround times will help set the groundwork for a smooth working relationship (Sammons & Ruth, 2007). Be open about your own expectations and any concerns you may have, and listen actively to your advisor’s guidance and suggestions.

Effective ways to communicate include a mix of formal and informal methods. Email is a common and convenient way to share updates, ask questions, and send documents for review. However, emails can sometimes lead to misunderstandings due to their lack of tone and immediate feedback. To mitigate this, make your emails clear and concise, and follow up on important points during in-person or virtual meetings.

Scheduled meetings, whether in-person or via video calls, provide a more interactive platform for discussing your research in detail. These meetings allow for real-time feedback, clarification of complex issues, and collaborative problem-solving. Regularly scheduled meetings, such as weekly or bi-weekly check-ins, help maintain momentum and ensure continuous progress. It’s beneficial to prepare an agenda for these meetings to ensure all relevant topics are covered and to make the best use of both your time and your advisor’s.

Progress reports are another effective communication tool. These reports can be monthly or quarterly summaries of what you have accomplished, any challenges encountered, and your plans for the next period. Progress reports provide a structured way to keep your advisor informed and demonstrate your commitment and diligence. They also serve as a valuable record of your research journey, which can be useful for both you and your advisor in tracking your development and planning future work.

In addition to these formal methods, don’t underestimate the value of informal communication. Brief check-ins after seminars, quick questions during office hours, or even casual conversations at academic events can strengthen your relationship with your advisor. These interactions help build rapport and make it easier to address more significant issues when they arise.

Setting Mutual Expectations

Establishing mutual expectations is a fundamental step in building a strong and effective relationship with your PhD advisor. Clear expectations help prevent misunderstandings, foster a collaborative working environment, and ensure that both you and your advisor are on the same page regarding your research journey.

The first step in setting mutual expectations is having an open discussion about what both parties expect from each other. This conversation should cover a wide range of topics, including the frequency and mode of communication, the type of feedback you need, and your advisor’s expectations regarding your work ethic and progress (Phillips & Johnson, 2022). Discussing these elements early on helps to align your goals, or to develop a win-win relationship, and ensures that there are no surprises later in the relationship. It’s important to be honest and upfront about your own expectations and to listen carefully to what your advisor expects from you.

Once you have discussed these expectations, it’s crucial to establish clear guidelines for feedback and deadlines. Agreeing on a timeline for submitting drafts and receiving feedback helps to keep your research on track and ensures that both you and your advisor can manage your time effectively. For example, you might agree to submit a chapter draft by the end of the month and receive feedback within two weeks. This clarity helps to avoid any last-minute rushes and ensures that you have enough time to incorporate your advisor’s suggestions.

Understanding your advisor’s working style and preferences is another key aspect of setting mutual expectations. Every advisor has their own approach to mentoring, and getting to know this can help you adapt your working style to fit theirs. Some advisors may prefer regular, detailed progress reports, while others might favor brief, informal updates. Similarly, some may provide detailed, line-by-line feedback, while others might offer broader, conceptual guidance. By understanding these preferences, you can tailor your interactions to suit your advisor’s style, making the working relationship more efficient and harmonious.

It’s also important to discuss and agree on how to handle potential challenges or conflicts. For instance, agree on a protocol for addressing potential conflicts. This is a strategy often employed by data consultants (Briganti et al., 2020). Having a plan in place for these situations can help to resolve issues quickly and amicably, without disrupting your progress.

Setting mutual expectations also involves understanding and respecting each other’s boundaries and limitations. Your advisor likely has other commitments, such as teaching, research, and administrative duties, so it’s important to be mindful of their time and schedule. Likewise, you should communicate any personal or professional constraints that might impact your research timeline. This mutual respect helps to build a trusting and supportive relationship.

Maintaining a Long-Term Relationship

The relationship you build with your PhD advisor doesn’t end at graduation; in fact, it can be a valuable and enduring professional connection that benefits you throughout your career. Maintaining a long-term relationship with your advisor involves staying in touch, leveraging their network, and showing appreciation for their support.

Keeping in touch after graduation is crucial for sustaining your relationship. Regular updates on your career progress, new projects, and achievements keep your advisor informed and engaged with your professional journey (Felten & Lambert, 2020). This doesn’t mean inundating them with frequent messages, but periodic emails or calls to share significant milestones, seek advice, or simply to catch up can keep the connection strong. Attending conferences or events where your advisor might be present is another excellent way to stay connected. These face-to-face interactions, even if occasional, help maintain a personal touch in your professional relationship.

Building a professional network through your advisor is one of the most valuable aspects of a long-term relationship. Your advisor likely has an extensive network of colleagues, former students, and industry contacts. By staying in touch and engaging with your advisor’s network, you can gain access to a wealth of opportunities, including collaborations, job openings, and industry insights. Don’t hesitate to ask for introductions or referrals when appropriate; most advisors are more than willing to support their former students in building a successful career.

To ensure a lasting and positive relationship, it’s important to show appreciation for your advisor’s support. Simple gestures of gratitude can go a long way. Sending a heartfelt thank-you note or email after a significant accomplishment, acknowledging their role in your success, is a meaningful way to express your appreciation. Publicly recognizing their contributions in your published papers, presentations, or at professional events can also demonstrate your gratitude. Additionally, consider giving back to your academic community in ways that reflect the support you received. For example, participate in mentoring younger students and alumni events. This can reinforce the support you received from dissertation experts .

Another effective way to show appreciation is to keep your advisor informed about how their guidance has impacted your career. Sharing specific examples of how their advice helped you navigate a challenging situation or achieve a goal reinforces the value of their mentorship. This not only shows gratitude but also strengthens the mentor-mentee bond by highlighting the tangible outcomes of their support.

Building a strong relationship with your PhD advisor is akin to cultivating a lifelong partnership that begins with your academic journey and extends well into your professional career. This relationship, like any meaningful connection, requires effort, understanding, and mutual respect. By focusing on key areas such as understanding your advisor’s role, finding the right advisor, establishing clear communication, setting mutual expectations, and maintaining long-term contact, you can create a robust and supportive mentor-mentee relationship.

Imagine your academic journey as a long-distance marathon, with your advisor as your coach. In the early stages, they help you develop a training plan, providing insights and feedback to improve your performance. Throughout the race, they offer encouragement, help you navigate obstacles, and keep you focused on your goals. Even after you cross the finish line, their support continues, guiding you through subsequent races and new challenges. Just as a marathon runner values the continuous support of their coach, you too will find immense value in the sustained guidance and mentorship of your PhD advisor.

For instance, consider the story of a doctor who maintained a strong relationship with her PhD advisor long after graduating. Initially, her advisor guided her through the intricacies of qualitative research, helping her navigate the complexities of her dissertation on community health practices. After graduation, the doctor stayed in touch, periodically updating her advisor on her career progress. When she encountered a challenging project at her new job, she reached out for advice. Her advisor not only provided valuable insights but also introduced her to a colleague with expertise in the field, leading to a successful collaboration and a significant career milestone for the doctor. This enduring relationship, built on mutual respect and continuous engagement, exemplifies the long-term benefits of a strong advisor-student connection.

In conclusion, your PhD advisor is not just a guide for your dissertation but a mentor who can significantly influence your academic and professional trajectory. By investing in this relationship, you ensure a supportive and enriching journey through your PhD and beyond. Embrace the mentor magic, foster a strong connection, and you will find a valuable ally in your academic and professional endeavors.

Briganti, J. S., Ogier, A., & Brown, A. M. (2020). Piloting a community of student data consultants that supports and enhances research data services. International Journal of Digital Curation , 15 (1), 11-11. http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6951-8228  

Brown, C. L., & Kosovich, S. M. (2015). The impact of professor reputation and section attributes on student course selection. Research in Higher Education , 56 , 496-509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-014-9356-5

Felten, P., & Lambert, L. M. (2020). Relationship-rich education: How human connections drive success in college . Jhu Press.

Phillips, E., & Johnson, C. (2022). How to Get a PhD: A handbook for students and their supervisors 7e . McGraw-Hill Education (UK).

Sammons, M. C., & Ruth, S. (2007). The invisible professor and the future of virtual faculty. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning , 4 (1), 3-13. https://itdl.org/Journal/Jan_07/article01.htm

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• CAREER COLUMN
• 10 December 2021

Managing up: how to communicate effectively with your PhD adviser

• Lluís Saló-Salgado 0 ,
• Angi Acocella 1 ,
• Ignacio Arzuaga García 2 ,
• Souha El Mousadik 3 &
• Augustine Zvinavashe 4

Lluís Saló-Salgado is a PhD candidate in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. Twitter: @lluis_salo.

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Angi Acocella is a PhD candidate in the Center for Transportation & Logistics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge. LinkedIn: @angi-acocella.

Ignacio Arzuaga García is a PhD student in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. LinkedIn: @ignacioarzuaga.

Souha El Mousadik is a PhD student in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.

Augustine Zvinavashe is a PhD candidate in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.

When you start a PhD, you also begin a professional relationship with your PhD adviser. This is an exciting moment: interacting with someone for whom you might well have great respect and admiration, but who might also slightly intimidate you.

Access options

Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals

Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription

24,99 € / 30 days

cancel any time

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 51 print issues and online access

185,98 € per year

only 3,65 € per issue

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-03703-z

This is an article from the Nature Careers Community, a place for Nature readers to share their professional experiences and advice. Guest posts are encouraged .

Competing Interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Related Articles

Why you need an agenda for meetings with your principal investigator

• Research management

Massive Attack’s science-led drive to lower music’s carbon footprint

Career Feature 04 SEP 24

Tales of a migratory marine biologist

Career Feature 28 AUG 24

Nail your tech-industry interviews with these six techniques

Career Column 28 AUG 24

How can I publish open access when I can’t afford the fees?

Career Feature 02 SEP 24

Why I’m committed to breaking the bias in large language models

Career Guide 04 SEP 24

Binning out-of-date chemicals? Somebody think about the carbon!

Correspondence 27 AUG 24

No more hunting for replication studies: crowdsourced database makes them easy to find

Nature Index 27 AUG 24

Postdoctoral Associate- Genetic Epidemiology

Houston, Texas (US)

Baylor College of Medicine (BCM)

NOMIS Foundation ETH Postdoctoral Fellowship

The NOMIS Foundation ETH Fellowship Programme supports postdoctoral researchers at ETH Zurich within the Centre for Origin and Prevalence of Life ...

Zurich, Canton of Zürich (CH)

Centre for Origin and Prevalence of Life at ETH Zurich

13 PhD Positions at Heidelberg University

GRK2727/1 – InCheck Innate Immune Checkpoints in Cancer and Tissue Damage

Heidelberg, Baden-Württemberg (DE) and Mannheim, Baden-Württemberg (DE)

Medical Faculties Mannheim & Heidelberg and DKFZ, Germany

Postdoctoral Associate- Environmental Epidemiology

Open faculty positions at the state key laboratory of brain cognition & brain-inspired intelligence.

The laboratory focuses on understanding the mechanisms of brain intelligence and developing the theory and techniques of brain-inspired intelligence.

Shanghai, China

CAS Center for Excellence in Brain Science and Intelligence Technology (CEBSIT)

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Community Blog

Keep up-to-date on postgraduate related issues with our quick reads written by students, postdocs, professors and industry leaders.

What Makes A Good PhD Supervisor?

• By Dr Harry Hothi
• August 12, 2020

A good PhD supervisor has a track record of supervising PhD students through to completion, has a strong publication record, is active in their research field, has sufficient time to provide adequate supervision, is genuinely interested in your project, can provide mentorship and has a supportive personality.

Introduction

The indicators that you’ll have the best chance of succeeding in your PhD project are multi-factorial. You’ll need to secure funding, find a research project that you’re interested in and is within your academic area of expertise, maybe even write your own research proposal, and find a good supervisor that will help guide you through PhD life.

As you research more into life as a doctoral student, you’ll appreciate that choosing a good supervisor is one of the most important factors that can influence the success of your project, and even If you complete your PhD at all. You need to find a good supervisory relationship with someone who has a genuine research interest in your project.

This page outlines the top qualities to look for as indicators of an ideal PhD supervisor. But before we get to that, we should be clear on precisely what the supervisor is there to do, and what they are not.

The Role of a PhD Supervisor

A PhD supervisor is there to guide you as you work through PhD life and help you make informed decisions about how you shape your PhD project. The key elements of their supervisory role include:

• To help ensure that you stay on schedule and maintain constant progress of your research so that you ultimately finish your PhD within your intended time frame, typically three to four years.
• To advise and guide you based on their knowledge and expertise in your subject area.
• To help you in the decision-making process as you design, prepare and execute your study design.
• To work with you as you analyse your raw data and begin to draw conclusions about key findings that are coming out of your research.
• To provide feedback and edits where necessary on your manuscripts and elements of your thesis writing.
• To encourage and motivate you and provide ongoing support as a mentor.
• To provide support at a human level, beyond just the academic challenges.

It’s important that you know from the outset what a supervisor isn’t there to do, so that your expectations of the PhDstudent-supervisor relationship are correct. A supervisor cannot and should not create your study design or tell you how you should run your experiments or help you write your thesis. Broadly speaking, you as a PhD student will create, develop and refine content for your thesis, and your supervisor will help you improve this content by providing you with continuous constructive feedback.

There’s a balance to be found here in what makes a good PhD supervisor, ranging from one extreme of providing very little support during a research project, to becoming too involved in the running of the project to the extent that it takes away from it being an independent body of work by the graduate student themselves. Ultimately, what makes a good supervisor is someone you can build a rapport with, who helps bring out the best in you to produce a well written, significant body of research that contributes novel findings to your subject area.

Read on to learn the key qualities you should consider when looking for a good PhD supervisor.

Qualities to Look For in A Good PhD Supervisor

1. a track record of successful phd student supervision.

A quick first check to gauge how good a prospective supervisor is is to find out how many students they’ve successfully supervised in the past; i.e. how many students have earned their PhD under their supervision. Ideally, you’d want to go one step further and find out:

• How many students they’ve supervised in total previously and of those, what percentage have gone onto gain their PhDs; however, this level of detail may not always be easy to find online. Most often though, a conversation with a potential supervisor and even their current or previous students should help you get an idea of this.
• What were the project titles and specifically the areas of research that they supervised on? Are these similar to your intended project or are they significantly different from the type of work performed in the academic’s lab in the past? Of the current students in the lab, are there any projects that could complement yours
• Did any of the previous PhD students publish the work of their doctoral research in peer-reviewed journals and present at conferences? It’s a great sign if they have, and in particular, if they’re named first authors in some or all of these publications.

This isn’t to say that a potential supervisor without a track record of PhD supervision is necessarily a bad fit, especially if the supervisor is relatively new to the position and is still establishing their research group. It is, however, reassuring if you know they have supervision experience in supporting students to successful PhD completion.

2. Is an Expert in their Field of Research

As a PhD candidate, you will want your supervisor to have a high level of research expertise within the field that your own research topic sits in. This expertise will be essential if they are to help guide you through your research and keep you on track to what is most novel and impactful to your research area.

Your supervisor doesn’t necessarily need to have all the answers to questions that arise in your specific PhD project, but should know enough to be able to have useful conversations about your research. It will be your responsibility to discover the answers to problems as they arise, and you should even expect to complete your PhD with a higher level of expertise about your project than your supervisor.

The best way to determine if your supervisor has the expertise to supervise you properly is to look at their publication track record. The things you need to look for are:

• How often do they publish papers in peer-reviewed journals, and are they still actively involved in new papers coming out in the research field?
• What type of journals have they published in? For example, are most papers in comparatively low impact factor journals, or do they have at least some in the ‘big’ journals within your field?
• How many citations do they have from their research? This can be a good indicator of the value that other researchgroups place on these publications; having 50 papers published that have been cited only 10 times may (but not always) suggest that this research is not directly relevant to the subject area or focus from other groups.
• How many co-authors has your potential supervisor published with? Many authors from different institutions is a good indicator of a vast collaborative professional network that could be useful to you.

There’re no hard metrics here as to how many papers or citations an individual needs to be considered an expert, and these numbers can vary considerably between different disciplines. Instead, it’s better to get a sense of where your potential supervisor’s track record sits in comparison to other researchers in the same field; remember that it would be unfair to directly compare the output of a new university lecturer with a well-established professor who has naturally led more research projects.

Equally, this exercise is a good way for you to better understand how interested your supervisor will be in your research; if you find that much of their research output is directly related to your PhD study, then it’s logical that your supervisor has a real interest here. While the opposite is not necessarily true, it’s understandable from a human perspective that a supervisor may be less interested in a project that doesn’t help to further their own research work, especially if they’re already very busy.

Two excellent resources to look up publications are Google Scholar and ResearchGate .

3. Has Enough Time to Provide Good PhD Supervision

This seems like an obvious point, but it’s worth emphasising: how smoothly your PhD goes and ultimately how successful it is, will largely be influenced by how much time your research supervisor has to provide guidance, constructive academic advice and mentorship. The fact that your supervisor is the world’s leading expert in your field becomes a moot point if they don’t have time to meet you.

A good PhD supervisor will take the time to meet with you regularly in person (ideally) or remotely and be reachable and responsive to questions as and when they arise (e.g. through email or video calling). As a student, you want to have a research environment where you know you can drop by your supervisors’ office for a quick chat, or that you’ll see them around the university regularly; chance encounters and corridor discussions are sometimes the most impactful when working through problems.

Unsurprisingly, however, most academics who are well-known experts in their field are also usually some of the busiest too. It’s common for established academic supervisors to have several commitments competing for their time. These can include teaching and supervising undergraduate students, masters students and post-docs, travelling to collaborator meetings or invited talks, managing the growth of their academic department or graduate school, sitting on advisory boards and writing grants for funding applications. Beware of the other obligations they may have and how this could impact your work relationship.

You’ll need to find a balance here to find a PhD supervisor who has the academic knowledge to support you, but also the time to do so; talking to their current and past students will help you get a sense of this. It’s also reassuring to know that your supervisor has a permanent position within your university and has no plans for a sabbatical during your time as a PhD researcher.

4. Is a Good Mentor with a Supportive Personality

A PhD project is an exercise in independently producing a substantial body of research work; the primary role of your supervisor should be to provide mentoring to help you achieve this. You want to have a supervisor with the necessary academic knowledge, but it is just as important to have a supportive supervisor who is actively willing and able to provide you constructive criticism on your work in a consistent manner. You’ll likely get a sense of their personality during your first few meetings with them when discussing your research proposal; if you feel there’s a disconnect between you as a PhD student and your potential supervisor at this stage, it’s better to decide on other options with different supervisors.

A good supervisor will help direct you towards the best outcomes in your PhD research when you reach crossroads. They will work with you to develop a structure for your thesis and encourage you to set deadlines to work to and push you to achieve these. A good mentor should be able to recognise when you need more support in a specific area, be it a technical academic hurdle or simply some guidance in developing efficient work patterns and routines, and have the communication skills to help you recognise and overcome them.

A good supervisor should share the same mindset as you about finishing your PhD within a reasonable time frame; in the UK this would be within three to four years as a full-time university student. Their encouragement should reflect this and (gently) push you to set and reach mini-milestones throughout your project to ensure you stay on track with progress. This is a great example of when a supportive personality and positive attitude is essential for you both to maintain a good professional relationship throughout a PhD. The ideal supervisor will bring out the best in you without becoming prescriptive in their guidance, allowing you the freedom to develop your own working style.

Finding a PhD has never been this easy – search for a PhD by keyword, location or academic area of interest.

To sum up, the qualities you should look for in a good PhD supervisor are that they have a strong understanding of your research field, demonstrated by regular and impactful publications, have a proven track record of PhD supervision, have the time to support you, and will do so by providing mentorship rather than being a ‘boss’.

As a final point, if you’re considering a research career after you finish your PhD journey, get a sense of if there may any research opportunities to continue as a postdoc with the supervisor if you so wanted.

In this post you’ll learn what the significance of the study means, why it’s important, where and how to write one in your paper or thesis with an example.

PhD stress is real. Learn how to combat it with these 5 tips.

Is it really possible to do a PhD while working? The answer is ‘yes’, but it comes with several ‘buts’. Read our post to find out if it’s for you.

Join thousands of other students and stay up to date with the latest PhD programmes, funding opportunities and advice.

Browse PhDs Now

Find out how you can use Scrivener for PhD Thesis & Dissertation writing to streamline your workflow and make academic writing fun again!

Dr Morrow gained his MD-PhD in Neuroscience from the University of Michigan. He now splits his time between providing clinical care to patients through the University of Michigan and research relevant to addiction and several other psychiatric disorders.

Dr Patel gained his PhD in 2011 from Aston University, researching risk factors & systemic biomarkers for Type II diabetes & cardiovascular disease. He is currently a business director at a large global pharmaceutical.

Join Thousands of Students

Loading metrics

Open Access

Ten simple rules for choosing a PhD supervisor

Contributed equally to this work with: Loay Jabre, Catherine Bannon, J. Scott P. McCain, Yana Eglit

* E-mail: [email protected]

Affiliation Department of Biology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

• Loay Jabre, 
• Catherine Bannon, 
• J. Scott P. McCain, 

Published: September 30, 2021

• https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009330
• Reader Comments

Citation: Jabre L, Bannon C, McCain JSP, Eglit Y (2021) Ten simple rules for choosing a PhD supervisor. PLoS Comput Biol 17(9): e1009330. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009330

Editor: Scott Markel, Dassault Systemes BIOVIA, UNITED STATES

Copyright: © 2021 Jabre et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Funding: The authors received no specific funding for this work.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

The PhD beckons. You thought long and hard about why you want to do it, you understand the sacrifices and commitments it entails, and you have decided that it is the right thing for you. Congratulations! Undertaking a doctoral degree can be an extremely rewarding experience, greatly enhancing your personal, intellectual, and professional development. If you are still on the fence about whether or not you want to pursue a PhD, see [ 1 , 2 ] and others to help you decide.

As a PhD student in the making, you will have many important decisions to consider. Several of them will depend on your chosen discipline and research topic, the institution you want to attend, and even the country where you will undertake your degree. However, one of the earliest and most critical decisions you will need to make transcends most other decisions: choosing your PhD thesis supervisor. Your PhD supervisor will strongly influence the success and quality of your degree as well as your general well-being throughout the program. It is therefore vital to choose the right supervisor for you. A wrong choice or poor fit can be disastrous on both a personal and professional levels—something you obviously want to avoid. Unfortunately, however, most PhD students go through the process of choosing a supervisor only once and thus do not get the opportunity to learn from previous experiences. Additionally, many prospective PhD students do not have access to resources and proper guidance to rely on when making important academic decisions such as those involved in choosing a PhD supervisor.

In this short guide, we—a group of PhD students with varied backgrounds, research disciplines, and academic journeys—share our collective experiences with choosing our own PhD supervisors. We provide tips and advice to help prospective students in various disciplines, including computational biology, in their quest to find a suitable PhD supervisor. Despite procedural differences across countries, institutions, and programs, the following rules and discussions should remain helpful for guiding one’s approach to selecting their future PhD supervisor. These guidelines mostly address how to evaluate a potential PhD supervisor and do not include details on how you might find a supervisor. In brief, you can find a supervisor anywhere: seminars, a class you were taught, internet search of interesting research topics, departmental pages, etc. After reading about a group’s research and convincing yourself it seems interesting, get in touch! Make sure to craft an e-mail carefully, demonstrating you have thought about their research and what you might do in their group. After finding one or several supervisors of interest, we hope that the rules bellow will help you choose the right supervisor for you.

Rule 1: Align research interests

You need to make sure that a prospective supervisor studies, or at the very least, has an interest in what you want to study. A good starting point would be to browse their personal and research group websites (though those are often outdated), their publication profile, and their students’ theses, if possible. Keep in mind that the publication process can be slow, so recent publications may not necessarily reflect current research in that group. Pay special attention to publications where the supervisor is senior author—in life sciences, their name would typically be last. This would help you construct a mental map of where the group interests are going, in addition to where they have been.

Be proactive about pursuing your research interests, but also flexible: Your dream research topic might not currently be conducted in a particular group, but perhaps the supervisor is open to exploring new ideas and research avenues with you. Check that the group or institution of interest has the facilities and resources appropriate for your research, and/or be prepared to establish collaborations to access those resources elsewhere. Make sure you like not only the research topic, but also the “grunt work” it requires, as a topic you find interesting may not be suitable for you in terms of day-to-day work. You can look at the “Methods” sections of published papers to get a sense for what this is like—for example, if you do not like resolving cryptic error messages, programming is probably not for you, and you might want to consider a wet lab–based project. Lastly, any research can be made interesting, and interests change. Perhaps your favorite topic today is difficult to work with now, and you might cut your teeth on a different project.

Rule 2: Seek trusted sources

Discussing your plans with experienced and trustworthy people is a great way to learn more about the reputation of potential supervisors, their research group dynamics, and exciting projects in your field of interest. Your current supervisor, if you have one, could be aware of position openings that are compatible with your interests and time frame and is likely to know talented supervisors with good reputations in their fields. Professors you admire, reliable student advisors, and colleagues might also know your prospective supervisor on various professional or personal levels and could have additional insight about working with them. Listen carefully to what these trusted sources have to say, as they can provide a wealth of insider information (e.g., personality, reputation, interpersonal relationships, and supervisory styles) that might not be readily accessible to you.

Rule 3: Expectations, expectations, expectations

A considerable portion of PhD students feel that their program does not meet original expectations [ 3 ]. To avoid being part of this group, we stress the importance of aligning your expectations with the supervisor’s expectations before joining a research group or PhD program. Also, remember that one person’s dream supervisor can be another’s worst nightmare and vice versa—it is about a good fit for you. Identifying what a “good fit” looks like requires a serious self-appraisal of your goals (see Rule 1 ), working style (see Rule 5 ), and what you expect in a mentor (see Rule 4 ). One way to conduct this self-appraisal is to work in a research lab to get experiences similar to a PhD student (if this is possible).

Money!—Many people have been conditioned to avoid the subject of finances at all costs, but setting financial expectations early is crucial for maintaining your well-being inside and outside the lab. Inside the lab, funding will provide chemicals and equipment required for you to do cool research. It is also important to know if there will be sufficient funding for your potential projects to be completed. Outside the lab, you deserve to get paid a reasonable, livable stipend. What is the minimum required take-home stipend, or does that even exist at the institution you are interested in? Are there hard cutoffs for funding once your time runs out, or does the institution have support for students who take longer than anticipated? If the supervisor supplies the funding, do they end up cutting off students when funds run low, or do they have contingency plans? ( Fig 1 ).

• PPT PowerPoint slide
• PNG larger image
• TIFF original image

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009330.g001

Professional development opportunities—A key aspect of graduate school training is professional development. In some research groups, it is normal for PhD students to mentor undergraduate students or take a semester to work in industry to get more diverse experiences. Other research groups have clear links with government entities, which is helpful for going into policy or government-based research. These opportunities (and others) are critical for your career and next steps. What are the career development opportunities and expectations of a potential supervisor? Is a potential supervisor happy to send students to workshops to learn new skills? Are they supportive of public outreach activities? If you are looking at joining a newer group, these sorts of questions will have to be part of the larger set of conversations about expectations. Ask: “What sort of professional development opportunities are there at the institution?”

Publications—Some PhD programs have minimum requirements for finishing a thesis (i.e., you must publish a certain number of papers prior to defending), while other programs leave it up to the student and supervisor to decide on this. A simple and important topic to discuss is: How many publications are expected from your PhD and when will you publish them? If you are keen to publish in high-impact journals, does your prospective supervisor share that aim? (Although question why you are so keen to do so, see the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment ( www.sfdora.org ) to learn about the pitfalls of journal impact factor.)

Rule 4: It takes two to tango

Sooner or later, you will get to meet and interview with a prospective PhD supervisor. This should go both ways: Interview them just as much as they are interviewing you. Prepare questions and pay close attention to how they respond. For example, ask them about their “lab culture,” research interests (especially for the future/long term), and what they are looking for in a graduate student. Do you feel like you need to “put on an act” to go along with the supervisor (beyond just the standard interview mode)? Represent yourself, and not the person you think they are looking for. All of us will have some interviews go badly. Remember that discovering a poor fit during the interview has way fewer consequences than the incompatibility that could arise once you have committed to a position.

To come up with good questions for the prospective supervisor, first ask yourself questions. What are you looking for in a mentor? People differ in their optimal levels of supervision, and there is nothing wrong with wanting more or less than your peers. How much career guidance do you expect and does the potential supervisor respect your interests, particularly if your long-term goals do not include academia? What kind of student might not thrive in this research group?

Treat the PhD position like a partnership: What do you seek to get out of it? Keep in mind that a large portion of research is conducted by PhD students [ 4 ], so you are also an asset. Your supervisor will provide guidance, but the PhD is your work. Make sure you and your mentor are on the same page before committing to what is fundamentally a professional contract akin to an apprenticeship (see “ Rule 3 ”).

Rule 5: Workstyle compatibility

Sharing interests with a supervisor does not necessarily guarantee you would work well together, and just because you enjoyed a course by a certain professor does not mean they are the right PhD supervisor for you. Make sure your expectations for work and work–life approaches are compatible. Do you thrive on structure, or do you need freedom to proceed at your own pace? Do they expect you to be in the lab from 6:00 AM to midnight on a regular basis (red flag!)? Are they comfortable with you working from home when you can? Are they around the lab enough for it to work for you? Are they supportive of alternative work hours if you have other obligations (e.g., childcare, other employment, extracurriculars)? How is the group itself organized? Is there a lab manager or are the logistics shared (fairly?) between the group members? Discuss this before you commit!

Two key attributes of a research group are the supervisor’s career stage and number of people in the group. A supervisor in a later career stage may have more established research connections and protocols. An earlier career stage supervisor comes with more opportunities to shape the research direction of the lab, but less access to academic political power and less certainty in what their supervision style will be (even to themselves). Joining new research groups provides a great opportunity to learn how to build a lab if you are considering that career path but may take away time and energy from your thesis project. Similarly, be aware of pros and cons of different lab sizes. While big labs provide more opportunity for collaborations and learning from fellow lab members, their supervisors generally have less time available for each trainee. Smaller labs tend to have better access to the supervisor but may be more isolating [ 5 , 6 ]. Also note that large research groups tend to be better for developing extant research topics further, while small groups can conduct more disruptive research [ 7 ].

Rule 6: Be sure to meet current students

Meeting with current students is one of the most important steps prior to joining a lab. Current students will give you the most direct and complete sense of what working with a certain supervisor is actually like. They can also give you a valuable sense of departmental culture and nonacademic life. You could also ask to meet with other students in the department to get a broader sense of the latter. However, if current students are not happy with their current supervisor, they are unlikely to tell you directly. Try to ask specific questions: “How often do you meet with your supervisor?”, “What are the typical turnaround times for a paper draft?”, “How would you describe the lab culture?”, “How does your supervisor react to mistakes or unexpected results?”, “How does your supervisor react to interruptions to research from, e.g., personal life?”, and yes, even “What would you say is the biggest weakness of your supervisor?”

Rule 7: But also try to meet past students

While not always possible, meeting with past students can be very informative. Past students give you information on career outcomes (i.e., what are they doing now?) and can provide insight into what the lab was like when they were in it. Previous students will provide a unique perspective because they have gone through the entire process, from start to finish—and, in some cases, no longer feel obligated to speak well of their now former supervisor. It can also be helpful to look at previous students’ experiences by reading the acknowledgement section in their theses.

Rule 8: Consider the entire experience

Your PhD supervisor is only one—albeit large—piece of your PhD puzzle. It is therefore essential to consider your PhD experience as whole when deciding on a supervisor. One important aspect to contemplate is your mental health. Graduate students have disproportionately higher rates of depression and anxiety compared to the general population [ 8 ], so your mental health will be tested greatly throughout your PhD experience. We suggest taking the time to reflect on what factors would enable you to do your best work while maintaining a healthy work–life balance. Does your happiness depend on surfing regularly? Check out coastal areas. Do you despise being cold? Consider being closer to the equator. Do you have a deep-rooted phobia of koalas? Maybe avoid Australia. Consider these potentially even more important questions like: Do you want to be close to your friends and family? Will there be adequate childcare support? Are you comfortable with studying abroad? How does the potential university treat international or underrepresented students? When thinking about your next steps, keep in mind that although obtaining your PhD will come with many challenges, you will be at your most productive when you are well rested, financially stable, nourished, and enjoying your experience.

Rule 9: Trust your gut

You have made it to our most “hand-wavy” rule! As academics, we understand the desire for quantifiable data and some sort of statistic to make logical decisions. If this is more your style, consider every interaction with a prospective supervisor, from the first e-mail onwards, as a piece of data.

However, there is considerable value in trusting gut instincts. One way to trust your gut is to listen to your internal dialogue while making your decision on a PhD supervisor. For example, if your internal dialogue includes such phrases as “it will be different for me,” “I’ll just put my head down and work hard,” or “maybe their students were exaggerating,” you might want to proceed with caution. If you are saying “Wow! How are they so kind and intelligent?” or “I cannot wait to start!”, then you might have found a winner ( Fig 2 ).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009330.g002

Rule 10: Wash, rinse, repeat

The last piece of advice we give you is to do this lengthy process all over again. Comparing your options is a key step during the search for a PhD supervisor. By screening multiple different groups, you ultimately learn more about what red flags to look for, compatible work styles, your personal expectations, and group atmospheres. Repeat this entire process with another supervisor, another university, or even another country. We suggest you reject the notion that you would be “wasting someone’s time.” You deserve to take your time and inform yourself to choose a PhD supervisor wisely. The time and energy invested in a “failed” supervisor search would still be far less than what is consumed by a bad PhD experience ( Fig 3 ).

The more supervisors your interview and the more advice you get from peers, the more apparent these red flags will become.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009330.g003

Conclusions

Pursuing a PhD can be an extremely rewarding endeavor and a time of immense personal growth. The relationship you have with your PhD supervisor can make or break an entire experience, so make this choice carefully. Above, we have outlined some key points to think about while making this decision. Clarifying your own expectations is a particularly important step, as conflicts can arise when there are expectation mismatches. In outlining these topics, we hope to share pieces of advice that sometimes require “insider” knowledge and experience.

After thoroughly evaluating your options, go ahead and tackle the PhD! In our own experiences, carefully choosing a supervisor has led to relationships that morph from mentor to mentee into a collaborative partnership where we can pose new questions and construct novel approaches to answer them. Science is hard enough by itself. If you choose your supervisor well and end up developing a positive relationship with them and their group, you will be better suited for sound and enjoyable science.

• View Article
• Google Scholar
• PubMed/NCBI
• 5. Smith D. The big benefits of working in a small lab. University Affairs. 2013. Available from: https://www.universityaffairs.ca/career-advice/career-advice-article/the-big-benefits-of-working-in-a-small-lab/

• Choosing a PhD Supervisor

Written by Ben Taylor

Your PhD supervisor will play a vital part in your PhD, providing you with the mentorship, feedback and support you need to succeed. That’s why it’s so important to spend time finding a supervisor for your PhD who will be a great fit for you and your project.

The role of a PhD supervisor is to use their own experience and expertise to support you throughout your project. A good supervisor will show interest in your project and provide regular feedback on your work.

Each person’s supervision experience depends on their university, department and personal preferences. While it’s expected you’ll meet with your supervisor regularly, this might mean weekly for some, and monthly for others. It’s important to make sure both you and your supervisor’s expectations match so that you can receive the best possible support.

This page covers how to find and choose a PhD supervisor. We’ve also explained the qualities of a good PhD supervisor.

On this page

How to find a phd supervisor.

How you'll find your PhD supervisor depends on whether you’re applying for an advertised project or putting forward your own research proposal .

If you’re applying for an advertised project , the process of finding a supervisor is simple. Usually they’ll be the academic who has devised the project in question, and the person you’ll be making your application to.

It’s still important to do your homework. Make sure you’re clued up on their research and able to ask sensible, specific questions about the project in your initial contact . Advertised projects – often with funding already attached – are much more common in STEM subjects , although you may still come across them in the Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences too.

If you’re proposing your own PhD project , you’ll need to do some investigation to find an academic whose research interests align with your own. The rest of this section will give you several pointers how you can do this.

Finding an expert in your field

First of all, you’ll want to have at least a rough idea of what you want your PhD topic to be. This is so that you can begin to narrow down prospective supervisors by research interests and focus on those that have expertise in your area.

This doesn’t necessarily have to mean finishing the final draft of your research proposal (that comes a little later), but you’ll need to have a decent plan of what you want to achieve with your PhD research so that you know you’re getting in touch with the right people (and not wasting your time – or theirs!).

There are several ways to do this:

• Browsing the academic staff section of a university department website – This is where lecturers and professors will list their research interests, publications and the areas in which they’re keen to supervise PhD students. Some websites allow you to filter and search by interest. In other cases you’ll need to check these profiles individually – time-consuming but worth it.
• Speaking to the academics at your current (or previous) university – These people will likely know exactly who the experts in your field are. They’ll probably even be experts themselves! If you already have a friendly relationship with a personal tutor or Masters dissertation supervisor, it’ll be good to have an informal chat about who they think could be a good fit for your work.
• Checking who has been prolific in your research area – There are probably a few names that have come up repeatedly in your previous work at postgraduate level. It’s worth scouring bibliographies and chapters to learn more about the academics behind them. Read up on their current work and find out whether they’re accepting supervisees.
• Scientific databases – If you’re a STEM student, scientific databases will give you lots of data with which to refine your search. This allows you to look for the most cited articles and thus find out who the leading researchers are.

Once you’ve done your research and have a good idea of the academic landscape around your proposed PhD topic, you should make a shortlist of around three potential supervisors to contact. Now is the time to make sure you’re really clued up on their academic background and current projects, so that you can make an excellent first impression when you get in touch with them.

Who can supervise a PhD student?

An academic doesn’t necessarily need to hold a senior role in order to supervise a PhD student. Junior research fellows and assistant professors often act as supervisors when their work is particularly relevant, as well as more senior professors and lecturers.

However, universities will have different policies on who exactly can supervise (and in what circumstances). It’s best to do your research if you think you’ve found the perfect supervisor candidate but they aren’t a lecturer.

Contacting a PhD supervisor

Our guide to contacting a PhD supervisor has everything you need to know about first contact, with tips on preparation, email etiquette, making a good impression and questions to ask.

How to choose a PhD supervisor

If you’re in a lucky enough position that you have two or more prospective supervisors that are happy to oversee your PhD project, there are several factors that you might consider when making your final decision:

• What career stage your potential supervisor is at – An academic at the beginning of their career might have fewer professional commitments and therefore more time to supervise you. A senior lecturer or professor, meanwhile, may have an extremely busy professional life – but this could be counterbalanced by their expertise and experience.
• Other supervisees – Find out what kind of work the supervisor has previously been (or is currently) involved in. You can normally see a list of current research students on a department website, for example. Are they engaged in similar work to you? See if you can find out what path previous supervisees took after finishing their PhD. Maybe stayed in the department or took up postdoc positions.
• University facilities – If your choices of supervisor are at different universities, weigh up the benefits that might come with the specialist facilities and resources available at each institution.
• University department – Depending on your preferences, you may want to work within a small, specialised department or a larger team that allows more scope for cross-disciplinary collaboration.

If you’re able to meet your potential supervisor – either in-person or via video call – that can also be a great way of gauging their personality and your chemistry. You’re going to be working with them for a minimum of three years, so you want to make sure you’re going to get on with them!

What are the qualities of a good PhD supervisor?

Now that you know how to find a supervisor for your project, you might be wondering about how to choose a good PhD supervisor. You’ll be spending a lot of time with them during your PhD, so it pays to understand what to look out for in terms of personality traits, expertise and experience.

#1 Substantial research expertise

The ideal PhD supervisor will be an expert in their academic field, with a wealth of publications, articles, chapters and books. They’ll also have a background in organising and presenting at conference events.

It’s also important that their expertise is up-to-date. You should look for evidence that they’re currently active in your research area, with recent publications and conference attendance. The quality of these publications is also important – prominent, peer-reviewed journals are ideal. If your prospective supervisor has lots of citations, that’s also a great sign.

#2 Clear about their career plans

After you’ve made initial contact with a supervisor, it’s good to get an idea of where they see their own future. If they’re planning to retire, go on sabbatical or change institution, that could cause problems for your PhD later down the line. It goes without saying that you want a supervisor who is going to stick around for the duration of your PhD.

#3 Previous experience as a PhD supervisor

Ideally, a supervisor should have a long track record of supervising PhD candidates, with plenty of experience helping them through the ups and downs that come with research. It’s well worth investigating how previous supervisees have done under the tutelage of your prospective supervisor – university websites, ResearchGate and LinkedIn are the best places to do this.

If you’re able to visit the department in person, speak to current PhD students to get an idea of how they’re getting on.

#4 Personality

It can be difficult to judge someone’s personality on the basis of emails, a video call or a chat over coffee, but try to decide if your potential supervisor is a good match for you on a personal level.

Do they seem enthusiastic about your work and inspiring about their own interests? Will they make a good mentor when it comes down to the hard work of completing your PhD? Are they more of a hands-on or hands-off supervisor?

#5 Organisational skills

Excellent organisational skills – both on your part and your supervisor’s part – are key to succeeding at a PhD. You’ll want a supervisor that is clear with their expectations, giving you deadlines where necessary but also having some flexibility that takes your personal situation into account.

You also want a supervisor who is easy to get hold of for feedback and advice, with regular office hours. Many academics are extremely busy, but you should expect your supervisor to find time for you where necessary.

Can I change my PhD supervisor?

There are a variety of reasons why someone may want or need to change their PhD supervisor. Issues with the working relationship or other circumstances could make a supervisor unable to provide proper support . Unfortunately these things happen, but universities are well equipped to help PhD students in these instances.

Usually PhD students wishing to change supervisors should contact their departmental head of postgraduate study to discuss the situation. They will then advise on the best course of action to take. If there is an available academic in the department with the right expertise for your project, then they will be assigned as your new supervisor. Otherwise, you may have to consider transferring to another university.

PhD supervisor guide

If you want to find out more about what it's like to work with a PhD supervisor, we've written a guide on what to expect from your PhD supervisor . Then, head over to our course listings where you can find information on interesting courses and their academic supervisors.

Our postgrad newsletter shares courses, funding news, stories and advice

You may also like....

We've answered some of the most frequently asked questions about PhDs, covering course types, applications, funding and the benefits of further study.

Getting ready to apply for a PhD? Our guides explain research proposals, references and entry tests for doctoral programmes.

Understand what a successful PhD research proposal needs to include and how to go about writing one for your project application.

Our guide explains how to contact a potential PhD supervisor to discuss your proposal or ideas with them before applying.

A checklist of the things you'll need to do when making an international PhD application, from meeting the entry requirements to sorting out your visa.

What documents you need for a complete study abroad application, what they are and what they should and should not include.

FindAPhD. Copyright 2005-2024 All rights reserved.

Unknown    ( change )

Have you got time to answer some quick questions about PhD study?

Select your nearest city

You haven’t completed your profile yet. To get the most out of FindAPhD, finish your profile and receive these benefits:

• Monthly chance to win one of ten £10 Amazon vouchers ; winners will be notified every month.*
• The latest PhD projects delivered straight to your inbox
• Access to our £6,000 scholarship competition
• Weekly newsletter with funding opportunities, research proposal tips and much more
• Early access to our physical and virtual postgraduate study fairs

Or begin browsing FindAPhD.com

or begin browsing FindAPhD.com

*Offer only available for the duration of your active subscription, and subject to change. You MUST claim your prize within 72 hours, if not we will redraw.

Do you want hassle-free information and advice?

Create your FindAPhD account and sign up to our newsletter:

• Find out about funding opportunities and application tips
• Receive weekly advice, student stories and the latest PhD news
• Hear about our upcoming study fairs
• Save your favourite projects, track enquiries and get personalised subject updates

Create your account

Looking to list your PhD opportunities? Log in here .

Get the Reddit app

A subreddit dedicated to PhDs.

PhD: my supervisors (negative) feedback seems to harsh and is hampering my productivity

So I'm in my last year as a PhD student. Things have always been a little rocky from the beginning in terms of feedback, but we've managed to make it work.

Usually, I have several difficulties in making sure everything is 100% perfect (e.g., formatting details in titles/tables/figures). This was the main critique in the beginning, and I tried to improve it. But this always came with a note: "These small mistakes are making us waste time we don't have."

This, in pair with all my papers being severally revised, has made me feel completely incompetent. Specially because there are always "remarks about wasting time". Over time, this kind of feedback has made me anxious about 1) having meetings (where sometimes I was reminded that things should be moving faster) and 2) sending out my work to my supervisors to get feedback (I pretty much just expect to have negative feedback, at this point).

The problem, at this stage, is that this anxiety has been making me overly alert and anxious as I work: I'm constantly worried if I will miss something; I notice a lot of details but, as anxiety kicks in, I forget others. At this point, I can only think about the negative feedback and feel like I'm completely worthless because it seems all my "success" is only due to my supervisors revising everything.

They are right most times. But the way they deliver feedback, the way they emphasize that I "should know this or that" just makes this whole process a nightmare (I am also afraid to ask "stupid questions"; and there have also been corrections in content that are just stylistic - e.g., one of my supervisors recently told me I should be better at reporting specific results/statistics as I was doing it wrongly, even though I wasn't, I even confirmed this with other colleagues and manuals).

But more often than not, I know they are right, and that's what drives me insane. Yesterday I received feedback from one of my supervisors (who was pissed because I wasted his time with small mistakes - titles without capitalization, incomplete abstract, though this was due to the paper not being finished so I left some of those to the end). Along with that feedback, came some comments that I felt were very harsh, even with statements like "this means nothing!" and stuff of the kind. I think this was the first time I cried in a work setting, and I've worked in different contexts and fields over the years (I've found working as a cashier at a huge store much easier to manage stress, ngl).

So yeah, I just wanted to vent a little. I don't think they are wrong, but it just feels very harsh, and I'm now at a state of alert that has led me to recently have my first, ever, panic attack as I was driving. Insomnia. I have even done medical exams to test my blood pressure and whatnot because this is driving me insane. I don't want to quit, as I'm fairly close to the end. But I really want this to end asap.

Thanks for reading me. Please, don't give feedback on my writing.

EDIT: Thanks a lot for all the input and comments. I have actually sent some messages to my Supervisor related to work, but that probably reflected my state of mind. She called me, and started straight away by saying that she actually expected my state of mind to be related to the way my other supervisor commented my work and talked to me (which I wasn't gonna address directly, but since she did, we touched on that. She even said she actually told him to refrain a little). Anyway, we had a talk and it was nice. Helped a lot. Gonna take most of your comments to better my work, and try to avoid mistakes that I shouldn't be making (by getting my anxiety under control). Cheers everyone. I also have an appointment with my therapist Monday morning.

By continuing, you agree to our User Agreement and acknowledge that you understand the Privacy Policy .

Enter the 6-digit code from your authenticator app

You’ve set up two-factor authentication for this account.

Enter a 6-digit backup code

Create your username and password.

Reddit is anonymous, so your username is what you’ll go by here. Choose wisely—because once you get a name, you can’t change it.

Reset your password

Enter your email address or username and we’ll send you a link to reset your password

Check your inbox

An email with a link to reset your password was sent to the email address associated with your account

Choose a Reddit account to continue

Supervisor Quickie: the Post-It Feedback Method

Have you ever spent hours providing feedback over a colleague’s (or a student’s) paper? And have you ever found afterwards that many of your carefully-crafted, thoughtful comments had been ignored? In this “quickie” post for supervisors (or for anyone giving internal feedback), I share a small trick that I use lately to avoid these situations… and get better outcomes for everyone involved.

Dripping with red ink

I remember the first time I read this PhD comics strip. I had just received one of my early paper drafts back from my supervisors. When I’d sent it to them, I thought it was almost ready for submission. Yet, there they were, several dozen comments in red ink over the paper printout.

At the time, I had felt down and discouraged, but at least the comic strip helped me understand that I was not alone. What happened next? I don’t really remember, but here’s my best guess: I went through most of the comments (especially, the easy ones), and tried to solve them in the quickest way possible. It was just too much emotional and cognitive pain to redo the text that I had so effortfully crafted. Some of the comments, I’m sure, I never addressed (maybe consciously, more probably semi-unconsciously). Yet, there is one question that I did not pose myself until years later:

How had my supervisors felt when they saw that the next draft still contained some of the same errors?

More than 10 years have passed since then. I am now the supervisor of five PhD students (and I have provided feedback to many, many more). From the other side of the fence, now I have the answer: at times, I feel ignored and frustrated. (At other times, let’s be honest, I don’t even remember what comments I’d made).

Recently, I came across a paper showing that this sort of feedback overflow (and ignoring) is quite common 1 . As supervisors, we too often try to make students’ papers exactly like we would write them. Or we secretly fear what others will think of us if a less-than-perfect paper goes out into the world with our name attached to it. As students, the deluge of critical feedback is emotionally difficult (or plain confusing). Glossing over some comments is thus one of the subtle mechanisms that our minds have to protect our (already fragile and impostor-syndromey) egos.

Is there a way to escape this situation in which we give too much feedback that then gets ignored? Can we at the same time avoid breaking doctoral students’ already “fragile shell of success”? 1 Here’s the trick I use lately to counter this situation in my own research and supervision…

An alternative way to give feedback to your PhD students (or peers)

• Take a post-it (the normal-sized ones, not the big ones) and a pen. Yes, even if the document is on Google Docs or some other digital platform.
• As you read, control the impulse of quick-reaction commenting on small details, vocabulary or clumsy figures of speech (tools like Google Docs make this exceedingly easy and tempting). Look for the broad, structural, fundamental problems that break the paper. Or recurrent issues that repeat throughout the text.
• When you detect such an important issue, write a quick note down in the post-it (not a full sentence, just a bullet-point memory aid)
• You are not allowed to exceed the space of the post-it (on both sides, if it comes to that). This limits your notes to no more than ten-ish feedback items.
• Be clear and specific (”????” is not a useful comment).
• Be constructive. Don’t just point out problems (feedback); spend more effort suggesting alternatives, next steps or new ways to think about the text (feedforward) 1 , 2 .
• Never make personal attributions (“you are a bad writer”).
• Paint errors as a common and natural part of the learning process (not something to fear) 3 .
• Consider the person’s current and self-perceived ability. Novices will need more encouragement and feedforward. More advanced writers can probably withstand more direct feedback 4
• Et cetera. Think what your comment will bring as an outcome, both in making this paper better and making future papers by this person better. How can we help them think and write clearly? If you (like me) never had a proper feedback education, go back and read education classics like Hattie’s work 3 , 4 .

A real example of post-it feedback, from a few weeks ago

Doing feedback this way helps me revise papers faster, and focuses my energy on the important stuff. What’s important? the ideas in the paper and the evidence behind them… and making my feedback an effective tool to help others learn.

At least, I have found this method better than the old giving up, frustrated, after 50 small comments on the first page of a document.

Cautions, caveats and other qualms

Using this method requires a change, both in our practice and other people’s expectations. It will be hard at the beginning. Also, pay attention when not to use it:

• When giving your feedback, highlight that it isn’t all possible comments, just the most important ones. Avoid the false expectation that, once those are solved, the paper is perfect. You could even say explicitly how many iteration rounds you think are left (or use a 1-10 readiness scale).
• This post-it feedback method works best with internal research reports, or in iterative paper writing processes (like the one I have recommended before in this blog ).
• Do not hold up on feedback about the truly important things, like methodological rigor and other scientific must-haves. If you plan to sign as a co-author, you accept responsibility for what is said in the paper !
• In summary, use your judgement when deciding if this method is appropriate. It may not be useful in the last revision round of a dissertation (when polishing many tiny details is actually the point).

Happy revising!

Do you have any other tips or tricks when giving feedback to your PhD students or your peers? Tell us in the comment section below!

Header image via Pixy .

Carter, S., & Kumar, V. (2017). ‘Ignoring me is part of learning’: Supervisory feedback on doctoral writing. Innovations in Education and Teaching International , 54 (1), 68–75. ↩︎

Budworth, M.-H., Latham, G. P., & Manroop, L. (2015). Looking forward to performance improvement: A field test of the feedforward interview for performance management. Human Resource Management , 54 (1), 45–54. ↩︎

Hattie, J. A., & Yates, G. C. (2014). Using feedback to promote learning. In Applying Science of Learning in Education (pp. 45–58). http://teachpsych.org/resources/documents/ebooks/asle2014.pdf#page=51 ↩︎

Brooks, C., Carroll, A., Gillies, R. M., & Hattie, J. (2019). A matrix of feedback for learning. Australian Journal of Teacher Education , 44 (4), 2. ↩︎

• Supervision
• Feedforward

Luis P. Prieto

Luis P. is a Ramón y Cajal research fellow at the University of Valladolid (Spain), investigating learning technologies, especially learning analytics. He is also an avid learner about doctoral education and supervision, and he's the main author at the A Happy PhD blog.

Google Scholar profile

Questions to Ask a Potential PhD Advisor: Step 1 in Applying to Fully Funded PhD Programs

By ProFellow Founder, Dr. Vicki Johnson

One of the big “unspoken” steps in applying successfully to PhD programs is conducting faculty outreach before applying. This step is necessary to find research alignment with a faculty member or members who might serve as your PhD advisor if you are accepted to the program, and necessary to ensure you’ll receive adequate support! PhD advisors are faculty members who will serve on your dissertation committee and will be officially responsible for advising you throughout your graduate school career. You want to identify potential faculty mentors before applying because your relationship with them will be pivotal to your success as a graduate student. They will meet with you regularly to give you feedback, guidance, and support on your research dissertation, and so it’s important that your PhD advisor has similar academic research interests.

I advise PhD applicants in my Fully Funded Course and Mentorship Program to speak with potential advisors as soon as possible in the graduate school application process. Outreach is step 1. But once you have a meeting set with a potential PhD advisor, you might be thinking – what now?!

Knowing where you start with contacting potential advisors can be daunting and intimidating–especially if you don’t know the questions to ask! Here is a step-by-step guide to get started.

How to Find Potential PhD Advisors

It’s not always obvious which faculty members will be available to serve as your PhD advisor. I provide some tips in this article on how to find your ideal PhD advisor using Google Scholar . But before sending off cold emails to faculty it can be prudent to first ask the Admissions contact (typically the Department Chair) for some guidance. Here are two questions to ask:

• Which faculty members will be advising incoming PhD students?
• Would it be ok if I reached out to faculty in the Department directly to discuss my proposed dissertation topic? 

Next you might be wondering, if I set up these meetings, what questions should I ask potential PhD advisors? Let’s discuss the goals of these meetings and specific questions you can ask.

Goals of Your Meeting with a Potential PhD Advisor

Here are the goals you should have set for your meetings with potential PhD advisors.

#1 Identify dissertation topics of interest to the faculty

You may have many ideas, or one specific idea, for the subject of your future PhD dissertation research. But it’s important that you identify faculty members at PhD programs who would be enthusiastic about supporting your proposed research. You can share your broad ideas for research topics that interest you, but it is in your best interest to ask these scholarly experts what innovative topics interest them. They will know the current research landscape and what topics will be of interest to the discipline and to funding bodies. So first, you’ll want to use this opportunity to learn more about their research interests and recent publications.

#2 Identify sources of funding

Often, faculty are pursuing research in response to funding opportunities from external sources like government, corporate and non-profit grants. Often, faculty will use large grant funding sources to provide full funding packages to their selected PhD students. Therefore, it’s important for you to know what research topics are of interest to funding bodies, so that you can achieve funding from the university as a graduate student! Many PhD programs offer full funding , which provides a stipend and a tuition waiver in exchange for taking on some teaching or research duties. Full funding offered by the university is THE way to fully fund your PhD, as there are very limited sources of external funding that you can apply for to cover your tuition and living expenses.

# 3 Build rapport

These meetings will also help you determine if the faculty member is a good fit for you and will be supportive and inspiring to work with. In addition, they may advocate for your acceptance if you build goodwill and rapport with them.

How to Prepare for a Meeting with a Potential PhD Advisor

Before your meeting, be sure to review their university profile and recent research publications. You can check out the faculty’s university profile as well as their profile on Google Scholar, if they have one. Also r eview which students they currently supervise and their dissertation topics, if possible. Often current PhD students are featured on the university’s website with name of their faculty supevisor. You might also want to investigate the university’s website for any news about major research grants awarded in the last 3 years, which might give you some clues about funding sources for the PhD students there. 

Questions to Ask a Potential PhD Advisor

• What areas of research can I get involved in as a graduate student within this program? OR Does my proposed research subject align with the interest areas of you and other faculty in the program?
• Are there any research topics that I should consider for my dissertation proposal? What research topics would meet an urgent need or would address a timely issue in the discipline?
• What type of methods are your PhD students using in their research? Do any of the current students have a particularly interesting approach to the research that they’re doing?
• Is there anything you recommend I do to ensure I would be eligible to receive funding if am I accepted to the program?
• Are there any students that you recommend that I speak to for insights on the PhD program? 

What if Faculty Don’t Respond to Meeting Requests?

Sometimes faculty to do not respond to initial outreach emails. There are numerous potential reasons for this – including that they are extremely busy with current students, or you did not provide enough information about yourself or did not ask a specific question, or the Department has a blanket policy on communicating with aspiring applicants, or they simply didn’t see your email or forgot to respond. A non-response from any graduate school contact does not equate to rejection. Let me repeat. Non-response does NOT mean rejection!

For those not hearing back , I can tell you with certainty that the lack of a response is NOT the result of someone who doesn’t appreciate your email. Consider with empathy that your email message may be a low priority among a huge list of demands. Politely follow-up in one week’s time, but don’t take it personally if you don’t hear back! Instead, contact the Admissions or Department Chair to find out the best way to connect with faculty in the Department for the next steps, and also be sure to attend program information sessions that may be offer.

Best of luck! The ProFellow community is rooting for you!

Applying to graduate school and seeking full funding opportunities? Get our FREE 73-page Directory of Fully Funded Graduate Programs and Full Funding Awards listing 1,000+ programs here!

Dr. Vicki Johnson is Founder and CEO of ProFellow, the world’s leading online resource for professional and academic fellowships. She is a four-time fellow, top Ph.D. scholar, Fulbright recipient and an award-winning social entrepreneur. She is the Creator and Director of  Fully Funded , an award-winning online course and mentorship program for graduate school applicants seeking to find and win full funding. 

© Victoria Johnson / ProFellow, LLC 2021, all rights reserved.

Related Posts:

• How To Contact a Potential PhD Advisor
• Questions to Ask Admissions When Applying to Master's and PhD Programs
• How to Find Your Ideal PhD Supervisor Using Google Scholar
• Will I Face Age Discrimination When I Apply to Graduate School?
• 5 Ways Undergrads Can Prepare for Competitive Fellowships

Dr. Vicki Johnson , Fully Funded , Graduate School Application Tips , PhD Application Tips

Fully Funded Master’s Programs in Criminal Justice

Fully funded master’s programs in economics, find and win paid, competitive fellowships.

Be alerted about new fellowship calls for applications, get insider application tips, and learn about fully funded PhD and graduate programs

Fellowship Resources

• Calls for Applications
• Upcoming Fellowship Deadlines
• Fellowships Database
• Interviews with Fellows
• International Fellows Network
• Graduate Funding Directory

Fellowship Tips

• What is a Fellowship?
• Fully Funded Course
• Graduate School Funding
• Fellowship Application Tips
• Fulbright Application Tips
• Fellowship Application Guide
• Our Mission, History & Values
• ProFellow Winner Testimonials
• Fully Funded Course Testimonials
• Fellowship Industry Report
• Advertise With Us
• Terms & Privacy

ProFellow is the go-to source for information on professional and academic fellowships, created by fellows for aspiring fellows.

©2011-2024 ProFellow, LLC. All rights reserved.

Kshitij Tiwari Ph.D.

10 Questions to ask your PhD advisor

When applying for a Doctoral aka PhD program, you not only need to ensure that PhD is the right choice for you , but also, that you have synergies with your potential PhD advisor. You both will be working together for the years to come should you choose to accept the PhD offer, if one were to be extended to you so it is crucial to know that you will get along. This article will guide you through 10 questions to ask your PhD advisor towards the end of your PhD interview.

Please note that these prompts do not form an exhaustive list, are in no particular order and nor do they guarantee that you would gauge synergies 100% accurately, if any. They would likely give you a good idea of what to expect from your life in the group if you were there pursuing your PhD even before you actually apply for the PhD with the group. If you still don’t find synergies, you can always gracefully decline the PhD offer .

Table of Contents

What have previous lab members done after getting their PhD?

• What is the lab structure?

What does the lab culture look like?

What is the publication culture like, where does the funding primarily come from, does the advisor consider themselves a ‘hands-on’ or ‘hands-off’ advisor, how does the advisor give feedback on manuscripts in preparation, how often does the advisor meet with their students, will there be opportunities to write external research grant proposals, how would the scope of work change if you were to transition to industry, key takeaways.

If you know about the harsh realities of PhD , you would know that not every PhD graduate manages to find a position in academia and some venture out to industry in search of better and more stable job prospects. As a PhD candidate, one day you would graduate too and will be in the market for a job- academic or industrial so it helps to understand what have the previous lab members done after successfully defending their PhDs. This would give you a lay of the land and what kind of job prospects you are most likely to find upon graduation with a PhD in hand. Also, take this opportunity to learn more about some of the most successful (and unsuccessful) PhD candidates from the group.

What is the PhD advisor's lab structure?

A lab or a research group typically would comprise of your potential PhD supervisor among other members. These members could include fellow PhD candidates, Bachelors and Masters students and some temporary students such as interns. Additionally, there might be other senior members in the groups such as Postdoctoral Associates and some junior faculty members who work in tandem with your potential advisor. It helps to know what the lab structure is like and how many members are in each category. Eventually, you might end up working with some of these members in varying capacities and some of the seniors might even serve as your co-advisors. Additionally, you might also want to understand the demographics for the lab members to see where do these members come from and you might find some comfort knowing people from your own country of origin. On a similar note, you could ask for permission to connect with some of the existing members to learn more about the lab structure and a typical day in their life. 

Some professors have multiple labs (including satellite labs), and this opens up good travel opportunities when they fly you around.

 Knowing that there might be other seniors present even when your primary PhD advisor is away might give you some solace in their absence. Also, be sure to check your PhD advisors plans in the near future- 

are they coming up for tenure / promotion / retirement as this might affect their availability and/or lab resources?

As a PhD candidate, one of the many ways for you to gain visibility in your field and grow your network will be to attend conferences. You should try and understand what are some top tier conferences in your domain and how often do the lab members get to attend such conferences. For the case of robotics, these would be IEEE IROS, ICRA, RSS, CASE among a few others. Also on a related note, you could inquire about any preset requirements for number of conference and journal submissions that are mandatory for graduation so you can understand how many conferences would you have to target per year to maximize your chances of meeting the threshold of publications.

Inquire about the external responsibilities of your PhD advisor to understand their prior commitments. Are they doing a partial secondment at an industry? Would you be able to do an industrial internship? How about research visits overseas? Typically, PhD students try to maximize their exposure with a mix of industrial work and some overseas research visits thereby growing their network and also credentials.

On a more academic side of the lab culture you should inquire about the paper publication frequency. Generally speaking, in the early days of your PhD journey you would have slightly more free time as opposed to the end when you are working hard to write your dissertation, getting feedback and iteratively revising it. Try and inquire what the publication culture is like- do papers get published during the PhD thesis, or towards the end or after defending? This will help you get some sense of the expected work load and how it would grow as time passes assuming no dynamic requirements are suddenly imposed by your funding source . Be vary of the publish or perish culture in academia because if you cannot maintain a healthy work-like balance , you will likely burnout.

One of the external aspects that might affect the topic you will work on, the scope of work and planned deliverables is the funding source. As mentioned earlier, if your PhD advisor has already secured some funding to sponsor your PhD, there might be implications stemming from the funding source. Some funding sources might require additional responsibilities like prepare progress reports, traveling for administrative meetings, preparing presentations or have citizenship restrictions in case of defense funding. So, be sure to clearly understand where the funding is coming from and what is covered in the funding- tuition, living allowances, stiped, travel allowance, publication allowance, etc.

It is also at this time you should prepare for the tougher days- not necessarily worst case scenario but in case you need to extend your PhD timeline but your funding will run out after a fixed term, are there possibilities for additional funding? Will your PhD advisor support you in this process? If not, what options would you have if the situation arises?

Some PhD candidates are also interested in serving as Teaching or Research Assistants also known as TA or RA, respectively. Sometimes there might be a possibility of earning some extra financial support for such services or at other times there might be some intangible gains such as the chance to work with other faculty members, learning to interact with students, problem solving etc. So, try and understand if you are required to be a TA/RA by the funding source, is it optional, and how does it work if you were to opt for it.

As every human is different and have their own working styles, so would your potential PhD advisor. So, you should try to understand if the advisor considers themselves as a more “hands-on” or “hands-off” advisor. This working style should ideally be complementing your own approach. For instance, if you are someone who would be looking for some hand holding and you end up with an advisor who is completely “hands-on” you are likely going to struggle a lot especially in the early days. So, try and understand if the advisor tends to assign projects and tentative topics to the PhD candidates or do they instead have the students select their own. On a similar note, you could also ask them if they already have a particular topic in mind for you or are you going to start with a blank canvas and write your own PhD research proposal . In case of the former, you could also ask about the level of flexibility with respect to the direction/scope of the project. Sometimes, the project scope and deliverables are already set carefully while at other times, there might be ample room for adjustment and refinement within a vague scope.

Another crucial aspect to keep in mind is that, for a PhD, there is no preset syllabus or a list of milestones. So, measuring the performance could be tricky and either you or your PhD advisor would need to set some sort of milestones. So, you could try ask them about some key milestones that they expect the PhD candidates to achieve. 

Feedback is the breakfast of the champions

As an early stage researcher with little to no experience with writing scientific and technical manuscripts in your niche, you will likely need help. This could come not only in the form of support while conducting the research but also in the form of feedback when a manuscript is being prepared for potential submission. The more reputable the submission venue, the higher would be their quality standards so you would benefit if the manuscript undergoes revisions to match their expectations. Again depending on whether the PhD advisor is hands-on or hands-off the level of detail of their feedback will vary.

On the topic of feedback and progress review , different research groups have different internal policies and agenda for group meetings. For instance, some PhD advisors do a round robin presentation with each candidate getting a slot to present their current findings, challenges and results. This helps everyone to stay abreast with what the others in the group are working on, explore synergies and get comfortable with presenting their ideas to a crowd. Additionally, some groups may even have a policy for dedicated 1-on-1 check-ins with advisor for personalized feedback while others might keep this flexible in the sense that the PhD candidate needs to take the initiative to book such 1-on-1 meetings as and when needed. During the pandemic most of such meetings went online via tools like Microsoft Teams, Zoom etc. so if you wish, you could inquire how are such meetings being conducted at the time of your application- face-to-face, remote or hybrid. 

While not every PhD student may be required to write external grant proposals, but for your future career, such experience can come in really handy. Winning a grant, that too a prestigious grant will help you get a taste of what life is like being a Principal Investigator (PI), leading your own research work and supporting yourself. This experience will go a long way for your career ahead as eventually you would need to win grants to support yourself and your group in the years to come. During your PhD, you may not be able to independently write such research grant proposals but you might be given opportunities to help out other senior members writing grants or contribute to some sections of a grant that your PhD advisor is working on. So, it pays to know about such opportunities ahead of time.

Never shut a door of opportunity on yourself for you never know when the next door will open

There is a difference between stepping on two boats (industry and academia) simultaneously versus not covering all your basis for securing your future. By this I mean looking at all possible options and keeping the doors open. Say somewhere along your PhD, either owing to life’s circumstances or your interaction with peers you decide to move to industry upon completion of your PhD. In such a case, how would the scope of your PhD and the work you do change, if at all? It helps to know the cost of such a transition to evaluate if it is even a feasible option or should you prepare an alternative Plan B instead.

So, when it comes to applying for PhD positions, remember that as much as the PhD advisor is screening you for a potential fit, you also need to screen them to explore synergies. There is no harm in asking polite questions that might help you understand them better as a person, as an advisor and as a potential mentor to help you learn and grow in your career ahead. After all, you are going to dedicate the coming years towards your PhD should you choose to go forward with it so it is imperative that your environment, the people, the topic and everything else that comes with up are synergistically working with you and not against you.

Related resources

• I consent to the having this website store my submitted information as per the privacy policy so they can respond to my inquiry.

How to Cope with a Problematic PhD Supervisor

• by James Hayton, PhD
• January 17th, 2022

Need help? Book a free introductory session

Why you (probably) shouldn’t do a phd, “i can’t contact my phd supervisor until i have something to show”.

“Is there any system that protects PhD candidates from having a problematic supervisor? For example, any ways to make complaints? Or would complaints not help but make the relationship worse?”

The simple answer is yes, usually there are ways to make formal complaints.

My view is that universities and supervisors have a responsibility to provide support, feedback and guidance to PhD students. There’s a trust that you place in them when you invest years of your life and possibly quite a lot of money in tuition fees, and they have a duty to provide adequate support in return.

If you’re not receiving that support, you’ve got to be assertive . You’ve got to speak up, and you’ve got to speak up early while there’s still time to find a potential solution rather than waiting until the last few months of your PhD when it might be too late.

If you don’t say anything because you’re afraid of their reaction, there will probably be much worse consequences later.

However, as you rightly point out, making a formal complaint to the university or to your department is likely to affect your relationship with your supervisor.

I think that it’s always best to try to resolve any issues directly with your supervisor, and formal complaints should really only be used as a last resort if you’ve made every reasonable attempt to sort things out, but the working relationship has completely broken down. At that point, it doesn’t really matter how they react because the relationship is already dead.

So how should you try to address problems in your relationship with your PhD supervisor?

The original question doesn’t specify what the problem is, so I’ll go through a few common issues and how you might be able to approach them.

Problem 1: A lack of contact

The first common problem is simply a lack of contact. This is especially common if you’re doing a PhD remotely and you’re entirely dependent on email for communication.

Sometimes this isn’t entirely the supervisor’s fault. Often I speak to students who say they emailed the supervisor three months ago but didn’t get a reply. They can then get stuck in a cycle of worry about whether the supervisor cares about the project or whether the work they sent was good enough.

But then when I ask if they’ve tried to follow up, often they say they’re afraid of appearing rude, or they don’t want to disturb their supervisor because they’re so busy and important.

But remember that academics struggle too. The day your email arrived, maybe they had 100 other emails in their inbox. Maybe they had a grant application deadline. Maybe they were about to reply and someone knocked on their door. And maybe they fully intended to get back to you and because they wanted to give you a considered reply they didn’t do it in the moment and then it slid further down their inbox.

Personally, I try to stay on top of my email, but sometimes things slip. It doesn’t mean anything that I haven’t replied, and It’s helpful to me if you follow up on a message I haven’t replied to.

So try not to project your fears onto your supervisor. Assume good intentions and just send a polite follow up.

If they consistently don’t reply, then yes, that’s a problem. What I would do is say that you would really value their input and whether it would be possible to have more frequent contact, whether there’s something you can do to make that easier… and if there’s still no response or if they say no or if they get angry, this is when you might consider trying to change supervisor.

Problem 2: Multiple supervisors & contradictory advice

You might have more than one supervisor. Maybe they aren’t communicating with each other or maybe they are giving you contradictory advice.

In this case it’s your responsibility to manage the communication, making sure that they are both copied into emails, and they each know what the other has said.

It’s also worth noting that, often, supervisors are giving you suggestions and it’s up to you to decide what to do with them. They will want you to have counter-suggestions, they will want you to have your own ideas and they will want you to make decisions.

So instead of seeing it as contradictory advice, maybe try to see it as a range of options that you can try, or even modify to come up with another option of your own

Then in your communication with both supervisors, you can say what you’re going to try first.

Problem 3: Harsh feedback

What if your supervisor keeps giving you overly harsh feedback ?

This can be difficult to take, especially if you’ve put a lot of work in and if you’re feeling a bit stressed. So there’s an emotional component that can sometimes affect the way you interpret feedback and it can make you feel demotivated and disengaged.

When you were an undergraduate and you submitted an essay you probably just received a grade and moved on. You weren’t expected to make any changes. But at PhD level, you’re learning to be a professional academic. And when professional academics submit a paper—unless they submit to a low quality journal that accepts anything—there will almost always be things they have to change in response to the reviewers comments.

That’s actually a good result, because a lot of the best journals completely reject the majority of submissions. So I can guarantee that your supervisor, no matter how good their publication record, will have had work rejected and they will have had harsh feedback. It’s not a personal judgement, It’s just part of the job and it’s necessary to improve your work and your writing.

What I’d suggest is really engaging with the feedback, possibly just one section at a time to make it a little bit easier, and making sure you really understand the points they’re making and asking them questions to clarify if necessary.

One of the biggest frustrations I hear from PhD supervisors is students not saying anything. Most supervisors would want you to ask questions, they would want you to tell them if there’s something you don’t understand and they would want you to discuss a point you disagree with.

So try to become an active participant in your feedback, rather than a passive recipient.

For more on this point, check out my video on dealing with harsh feedback .

What makes a good PhD supervisor?

Stay up to date

I offer one to one coaching in academic writing. Click below to learn more and book your introductory session.

share this with someone who needs it:

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Current ye@r *

Leave this field empty

PhD: An uncommon guide to research, writing & PhD life

By james hayton (2015).

PhD: an uncommon guide to research, writing & PhD life is your essential guide to the basic principles every PhD student needs to know.

Applicable to virtually any field of study, it covers everything from finding a research topic, getting to grips with the literature, planning and executing research and coping with the inevitable problems that arise, through to writing, submitting and successfully defending your thesis.

Useful links

About james hayton, phd, latest phd tips, academic writing coaching.

AI-free zone

All the text on this site (and every word of every video script) is written by me, personally, because I enjoy writing. I enjoy the challenges of thinking deeply and finding the right words to express my ideas. I do not advocate for the use of AI in academic research and writing, except for very limited use cases.

Why you shouldn't rely on AI for PhD research and writing

The false promise of AI for PhD research

Stack Exchange Network

Stack Exchange network consists of 183 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow , the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.

Q&A for work

Connect and share knowledge within a single location that is structured and easy to search.

What should a PhD student do when he receives no feedback on his work except some reviews on his papers?

I am consistently facing this issue: NO one ( except some reviewers when I submit a manuscript ) provides me with a detailed/core criticism of my PhD work.

My supervisor usually gives me general advice; sometimes he tries his best to understand and propose some trial-and-error approaches for the problem (most often I have tried these approaches before he proposes them). I simply cannot find someone who will smack me on the face and tell me the truth about my research.

After chatting with another PhD student, I found he has the same issue. However, he told me it is because PhD students have very specialised knowledge on a particular topic that makes it very hard – even for supervisors – to comment on it in a detailed manner. Well I still can't believe that's true in general.

What should you do when you can't find smack-on-the.face feedback?

• research-process

• 2 It's not clear exactly what you mean by "smack on the face". Are you saying your advisor cannot give detailed criticism because he doesn't have a sufficient grasp of the details of what you're doing, or just because he's too tactful to tell you what he really thinks? –  BrenBarn Commented Jan 14, 2014 at 8:47
• 10 +1: I am on the same boat (see my prev questions). It's infuriating when you feel like you are making little to no progress, and you get 0 feedback on what you are doing right and what you are doing wrong. –  posdef Commented Jan 14, 2014 at 10:41
• 10 It's all wrong! *Smack* Try harder! –  Trylks Commented Jan 14, 2014 at 12:10
• 6 Do not listen to the Impostor Syndrome. Maybe your research is actually really good. What's troubling here is not the lack of negative feedback, but the lack of detailed feedback. –  JeffE Commented Jan 14, 2014 at 21:16
• 1 You've already got some good answers. I often feel the same way as do other students in my program. So, I go over to phdcomics.com and realize that this is eternal recurrence, like the serpant that eats its own tail. :) –  Twitch Commented Jan 15, 2014 at 9:26

5 Answers 5

My first reaction is: why do you need a smack in the face? Research education aims to educate PhD students to become independent researchers able to perform research, publish it, write applications for new research supervise new PhD students etc. Once you pass the PhD defence the only smack in the face you get is when your papers are rejected, your funding application is rejected etc. Towards the end of a PhD it is normal that your knowledge in your topic stretches farther than that of your advisor. From this perspective, a smack in the face is not the most obvious test of your progress.

I can understand if you feel you do not receive feedback on your work. In an ideal situation you should be able to discuss your science and use such feedback to improve. Your advisor should be able to read your manuscripts and provide feedback and suggestions on how to improve it before publication (or if your write a monograph, before you defend). Now all advisor-students relationships are different since we deal with personalities. To some extent one need to adapt and find ones own way in that relationship, I know this from my own experience.

So although your situation is perhaps not ideal, it does not sound as it is truly problematic. It sounds like you get more feedback than you can expect after your PhD. If you need specific feedback on any part of the research process, you should look around to see if any other persons can provide such. For PhD students getting papers past peer review is the hardest hurdle to cross and as such the sign of the worth of your research. Most advisors try to help students reach this level so the worst smack in the face they consider is the dreaded rejection. If you get your material past peer review, you are really doing (perhaps more than) fine.

• 14 It might be a perspective thing but I would have to disagree to a certain level. People do need both positive and negative feedback (which I believe is what the OP is about). Hearing "you're doing fine, just get that stuff done" over and over again, is really irritating to say the least. Maybe it's a thing about the generation Y, but having continuous and instant feedback is a great way of measuring your own progress and I think it's important for me, maybe the OP feels the same way. –  posdef Commented Jan 14, 2014 at 10:45
• I agree with you and acknowledge that there are many solutions to the problem. Being responsible for the research education in my dept and having my own students, I have experienced many varieties of student-advisor relationships and problems; not one of the latter with a standard solution. But a "smack in the face" is not a substitute for discussion and also this case has two sides of which we see only one. –  Peter Jansson Commented Jan 14, 2014 at 11:42
• Yeah, that's also true.. I was just trying to point out that different people might need different levels of feedback based on age (i.e. PhD students then vs PhD students now ), culture or background. –  posdef Commented Jan 14, 2014 at 14:57

In the real world (after graduation), the only time you are likely to get feedback like that is from a friend or (if you're really lucky) a mentor. I suggest asking yourself: "of all the people I know, who would be the most likely to understand this after I explain it to him/her?"

Then, invite that person over (or out) to share beer and pizza, or whatever people sit and talk over where you are. ( coffee and cake? ) Sit and talk. Ask what (s)he's doing, be genuinely interested and express your appreciation. Then tell what you're doing. If they say "that sounds interesting," ask if they'd be willing to read and tell you what they really think about it. If not, ask yourself the question in the previous paragraph again, and repeat.

Don't be afraid to say "the reason I asked you over is because I thought you'd be able to understand what I'm doing, and I just wanted to talk about it with you." It's true, and almost anyone would be pleased to hear that.

However, he told me it is because PhD students have very specialised knowledge in a particular topic that makes it very hard -even for supervisors- to comment on it in a detailed manner. Well I still can't believe that's true in general.

Well if the implication is that your work as a PhD so specialised that nobody can give you useful feedback, I don't believe it either. If you cannot communicate your work in a manner that someone knowledgeable in the general area can understand and provide feedback, then your research should be doomed to fail since you won't be able to publish.

What is more likely is that your supervisor is insufficiently "incentivised" to put the effort required into understanding your work to give you useful feedback. There are many shades of grey here too. Different supervisors approach supervision at different levels of abstraction. Some are hands-off details. Some are hands-on details. Some need little incentive. Some need lots.

(Similarly, if you cannot interest someone enough in your research for long to engage them for feedback, I think your research is, in the longer term, also in deep water since you'll need these communication skills when applying for funding grants, to gain citations for your papers, etc.)

In any case, if you're looking for feedback other than your supervisor or colleagues ...

I'm not sure about in your area, but in Computer Science, there are ample ways of getting feedback on your work at conferences and other such venues.

Typically these conferences hold events specifically for mentoring students called a " Doctoral Symposium ", " Doctoral Consortium ", " Mentoring Lunches ", etc. The format is different for each conference, but typically students submit a paper outlining their topic; the paper is peer-reviewed under special criteria. If accepted, the student is paired with one or two "mentors" (senior researchers who know something about the topic) at the event. The student presents their work to the broader symposium and afterwards gets some alone time with their mentor(s) who are typically instructed to be friendly to the student, but also to give some tough love if needed. As a bonus, many conferences publish the papers from these events in their proceedings, giving you a publication.

Another excellent opportunity for feedback is to attend a relevant summer school. At least in some of the schools I've lectured at, in between talks, the mentors have provided ample time to talk with students about their topics and plans, where at the end of the week, each student goes away with the perspectives of three or four mentors as well as a multitude of their peers. (More interactive schools tend to be in remote locations; everyone hangs around afterwards. Less interactive schools tend to be in universities; everyone goes home afterwards.)

Also, think about getting your PhD topic accepted for a poster session somewhere. PhD posters can be a good way to get casual feedback from a wide range of folks.

If you don't want to go so far away, organise a talk in your school and invite people. Put a lot of effort into making the talk engaging. Try to invite as broad a range of folks as possible and try to get feedback from your supervisor on the talk itself beforehand. Present and take questions.

The simple catch with all these methods of feedback is to think: how can I make people want to give me feedback, how can I make people comfortable to give me negative feedback, etc. @Jeffiekins suggestion of beer and pizza is a good one. Generally you should never expect feedback; you should earn feedback.

Like in a poster session, if your poster looks unappealing and you look disinterested standing in front of it, and instead of engaging with the person, if you simply read through the text-heavy poster while they wait, then giving you feedback certainly won't be their first priority.

Similar principles apply for your advisor (and elsewhere).

One thing I've found extremely helpful during my PhD and postdoc was searching out and working on collaborative research projects. The ease of doing so may be dependant on your particular field however.

With a project partner, even if they are only focused on a smaller subset of the work, you have an already informed person you can bounce further ideas off of, who can serve as an immediate sanity check, and can help you develop your future steps. These are your co-authors or secondary authors on your publications.

Do you have committee members yet? It sounds like you are a decent portion of the way through the PhD process, and if you are a year or two from the end you might want to start sounding people out. They don't just have to be faculty judging your work - they can be a valuable resources in determining where you are going, what you still need to accomplish, and what is lacking in order to make a complete PhD thesis.

Take a look at the other faculty at your university as well. You may have already had a class with them - if you have, you should be able to pretty easily schedule a talk to them. You'll need to have a pretty well defined problem to bring to them though for this type of chat.

You can ask your advisor for introductions/help with contact in general as well - they will have likely met a good number of people in their career and may have some ideas of where you could start a discussion. Even if the other professors may not help you out directly, they may have students that are interested in chatting or collaborating on something.

Ask for it. Chances are that you will indeed get it. You may say something like,

Now that I had completed so and so work, I request you to provide me your kind feedback on the work in particular and me as a candidate of science in general.

P.S. I wish to work on my weakness, if you think any, I am ready to face the harshest of your opinions with a positive attitude.

May be a bit of exaggeration, but IMO, this may be a possible option.

Side note . I actually asked my supervisor to have no mercy on me before joining the PhD. I used to get both positive and negative feedback but I cannot say for sure that it is because of my initial request.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for browse other questions tagged phd research-process advisor feedback ..

• Featured on Meta
• Bringing clarity to status tag usage on meta sites
• Announcing a change to the data-dump process

Hot Network Questions

• Confusion about time dilation
• Default umask for NFS user nobody
• Replacing jockey wheels on Shimano Deore rear derailleur
• What does "Two rolls" quote really mean?
• Did the Turkish defense industry ever receive any significant foreign investment from any other OECD country?
• Fusion September 2024: Where are we with respect to "engineering break even"?
• Sum[] function not computing the sum
• Sylvester primes
• Is the 2024 Ukrainian invasion of the Kursk region the first time since WW2 Russia was invaded?
• Why would op-amp shoot up to positive rail during power on?
• Is it possible to recover from a graveyard spiral?
• What should I consider when hiring a graphic designer to digitize my scientific plots?
• What was the typical amount of disk storage for a mainframe installation in the 1980s?
• Why is it spelled "dummy" and not "dumby?"
• What's the radius of Mars over Mount Olympus?
• What's the benefit or drawback of being Small?
• Conjugate elements in an extension
• Can I use Cat 6A to create a USB B 3.0 Superspeed?
• A seven letter *
• How is carousing different from drunkenness in Luke 21:34-36? How should they be interpreted literally and spiritually?
• Can you equip or unequip a weapon before or after a Bonus Action?
• How to Interpret Statistically Non-Significant Estimates and Rule Out Large Effects?
• Pull up resistor question
• Does a party have to wait 1d4 hours to start a Short Rest if no healing is available and an ally is only stabilized?

How to deal with unexpected PhD supervisor feedback

Sep 28, 2020

Have you checked out the rest of  The PhD Knowledge Base ? It’s home to hundreds more free resources and guides, written especially for PhD students. 

Author: Paula Beesley 

Paula Beesley is a Senior Lecturer in social work at Leeds Beckett University and is undertaking a PhD into collaborative social work student supervision. She is lead author of Developing your communication skills in social work and author of Making the most of your social work placement.

We all struggle at times when there is a deadline looming and we have writers block or lack of time and feel under pressure to hand-in despite knowing that it is not what we wanted it to be.

At those times we brace ourselves for our supervisor’s feedback and open the email or go to supervision with trepidation or anxiety. We are open, if not eager, to hear how we can improve the chapter, looking for tips on what to do next, happy to receive advice that will change the writing from bad to good enough.

Hello, Doctor…

Sounds good, doesn’t it?  Be able to call yourself Doctor sooner with our five-star rated How to Write A PhD email-course. Learn everything your supervisor should have taught you about planning and completing a PhD.

Now half price. Join hundreds of other students and become a better thesis writer, or your money back. 

We listen attentively, write notes that we will return to with relief, explore ideas with the supervisor and develop a sense of what needs doing next. This can be a real joy and an important step in developing the final iteration of the PhD thesis.

However, there are times when we feel that we have made progress and are happy when we submit a chapter. So when we attend the supervision or open the email without anxiety, but are hit with a “we need to talk” response, that can really hurt.

This is the time when we need to listen the most and engage with the constructive feedback but we can often be unable to do so.

The first thing we need to do is acknowledge to ourselves, and then the supervisor, our feelings of shock, disappointment, anger, disagreement or sadness.

The reality is that this can be a body blow if it is unexpected; it can dent our confidence, leave us feeling incapable and cause us to question if we should be doing a PhD at all. It may even leave us defensive.

It is ok to feel the response we are feeling. The important thing is to feel those feelings, acknowledge them, and work through them. Part of this is about knowing yourself: do you need to immediately talk to your supervisor and reflect on the issues with them or do you need to take time quietly to reflect on the issues and resume talking to your supervisor at a later date? Remember that your supervisor is there to support you and should provide the support you need. But also remember that they can only do that if you let them know what you need.

Your PhD thesis. All on one page.

Use our free PhD structure template to quickly visualise every element of your thesis. 

The second thing then is to pick yourself back up again. This is where you need to be both kind and firm with yourself. Take time to look after yourself. If you aren’t happy, you won’t be able to sort this out. But at the same time, you should not wallow in feeling bad.

Once you have looked after yourself, come back to the thesis. Be proactive and don’t give up on yourself or your PhD. Take time to reflect on the constructive feedback.

No-one is suggesting that you must accept every piece of advice, but taking most of it will help you. Re-read written feedback and meet with your supervisor to discuss it with them. Ask them for advice and seek out resources from the library or online – including our PhD Knowledge Base – so that you understand what is expected of you. Set small goals with your supervisor so that you know what to do next, but make sure   they are realistic.

Remember that the PhD is a learning process. You don’t have to get it all right first time.

When this happened to me recently, I rang my supervisor and cried for half an hour. It wasn’t fair, I said. I had worked so hard and was feeling great that I had got a chapter so developed, but it was all wrong. ‘Great writing, but wrong focus’, was the feedback.

But I wasn’t open to feedback that evening. I had to just let the pain and frustration wash over me. But as the week went on, I was better able to absorb the feedback in a more constructive way. I recognised that what my supervisors were saying was right, and that by implementing their advice my thesis would be significantly better.

With the support of my supervisors, I was able to construct a plan and identify what did work in the chapter, what needed to change, and the new direction it needed to go in. To regain my confidence, I set myself new tasks and made sure that they were achievable. But I also took the weekend off to look after myself.

To summarise, when you receive unexpected constructive feedback it is going to be difficult to hear. It’s important to look after yourself, take time to feel your response and only then start to engage with the feedback and your supervisor to develop a new plan of action. Most importantly, be open to listening to the feedback: it is for your own benefit, I promise.

Interested in group workshops, cohort-courses and a free PhD learning & support community? 

The team behind The PhD Proofreaders have launched The PhD People, a free learning and community platform for PhD students. Connect, share and learn with other students, and boost your skills with cohort-based workshops and courses.

Share this:, submit a comment cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search The PhD Knowledge Base

Most popular articles from the phd knowlege base.

The PhD Knowledge Base Categories

• Your PhD and Covid
• Mastering your theory and literature review chapters
• How to structure and write every chapter of the PhD
• How to stay motivated and productive
• Techniques to improve your writing and fluency
• Advice on maintaining good mental health
• Resources designed for non-native English speakers
• PhD Writing Template
• Explore our back-catalogue of motivational advice

A First-Gen's Guide to Grad School: How to Get in, Survive, and Thrive

Helping first-gen students along their PhD journey!

PhD Admissions: Emailing Potential Advisors

A great way to initiate contact with a potential advisor is by introducing yourself through email! If you are applying to programs where you don’t need an advisor lined up, then you don’t necessarily have to do this step. However, if you are applying to programs where you are expected to have an advisor before you start, this step is especially important. Here are some of my tips for emailing potential advisors as well as the email templates I used:

PRO TIP #1: Make sure there are at least TWO professors whose research aligns with yours at each program you apply to! Only having one is risky because you never know what could happen (e.g., they could get a new position at another university and you don’t want to move with them).

PRO TIP #2: DON’T FORGET TO ATTACH YOUR CV!

PRO TIP #3: Read at least one recent article by your POI (professor of interest) so that you can mention their work in your email (e.g., one that was published in 2018 or later).

PRO TIP #4: Check the lab/program website BEFORE emailing POIs to make sure it doesn’t already say whether they are accepting students. Also check a professor’s personal website (if they have one).

PRO TIP #5: I sent out emails mid-late October, which I think is a good time to do so. By this time, professors will probably have a sense of whether they will be able to accept a student into their lab. However, if you want to email earlier, that’s also fine.

PRO TIP #6: Don’t be afraid to send follow-up emails if your POIs don’t respond the first time! I sent a few follow-up emails after 2 weeks and received responses from everyone. Also be sure to send the follow-up email in the same thread that you sent your initial email so your POIs can see your previous attempt to reach out. I had a 17/18 (94.4%) success rate with the following email templates, so I hope they work as well for you all!

Share this:

• PhD admissions

Published by enricab7

Fifth-year Communication and Media, and Developmental Psychology PhD candidate at the University of Michigan. Future media/developmental psychologist. Interested in the ways that media help us form our identities. My blog aims to help other first-gen students on their PhD journey! View all posts by enricab7

36 thoughts on “ PhD Admissions: Emailing Potential Advisors ”

Good tips! Especially #3.

Thank you SO MUCH for this. I have not seen a better example.

No problem! I’m glad it’s helpful 🙂

Thank you so much! I hope you know how much this means to me as a first-gen/Latinx student!

No problem! I’m glad I can be of help 🙂

A motivating discussion is worth comment. I do believe that you should publish more about this subject, it may not be a taboo matter but usually people do not speak about such topics. To the next! Kind regards!!

Thank you so much for your help. Your tips are really amazing! I hope you can publish more soon. I have just written my CV and need someone to provide me some valuable feedback on that. Would you please help me with this matter and, if possible, send me your email address? I would be greatly appreciative of your valuable help.

Sure! You can email me here: [email protected] .

Excellent post. I used to be checking constantly this weblog and I am impressed! Very useful information specially the closing section 🙂 I deal with such info much. I used to be looking for this particular info for a very lengthy time. Thanks and good luck.

Hi! This is my first comment here so I just wanted to give a quick shout out and say I genuinely enjoy reading your posts. Can you recommend any other blogs/websites/forums that deal with the same topics? Thanks a ton!

Thank you so much! If you want to read more posts about being first-gen or just about grad school life in general, I would definitely recommend Academic Twitter posts (this page would be a good place to start: https://twitter.com/academicchatter ). Also feel free to check out #AcademicTwitter and #firstgen posts!

Thank you for your information! I am an international student and have a question. Is the last sentence of the follow-up email template grammatically correct? I do not see conjunction before “will you?” I would appreciate it if you could help me with English.

Hi! There is a comma before “will you” in the template, which I *believe* is grammatically correct.

Thank you so much for the awesome tip!!

No problem!

Thank you so much for this guide. Sir can you review my statement of purpose

no problem! If you send it to me at [email protected] , I can maybe take a look at it (I may not be the best person to review it if you’re applying for programs outside of the social sciences, but I can try!).

Your tips has risen great confidence in me. I hope to share my success story with you. Thanks

I’m glad my tips have been helpful!

Hello, thank you for this post! I am new to all this. I applied to a Master’s program in January. I thought for my particular program that it was not a requirement to secure a supervisor prior to applying. So I didn’t email any professors. Now people are hearing back and one successful applicant shared that I should’ve talked to a potential supervisor. Is it now too late to do that? or since I didn’t get rejection yet, I should go ahead and try emailing some professors? what would you advise? 🙂 Thank you in advance!

Hi! I don’t think it would hurt to email professors. The worst that could happen is that they don’t respond (which could be the case for several reasons, so I wouldn’t take it personally). Go for it!

You are at a really nice university. Good job! 👍 Who taught you to advocate for yourself? Did you have a mentor?

Thanks! I’ve had several mentors over the years that have believed in me and my abilities even when I didn’t (and still have a hard time doing so now). Their encouragement is why I have been able to slowly but surely advocate for myself and help others do the same!

Hi! Thank you for this post. Regarding pro tip #4, I’m wondering if it would still be a good idea to email potential advisors if they did list whether they are taking students in this application cycle. Should I confirm with them if they are taking students, or would that be redundant? Would it be a good idea to just introduce myself or ask another question? What are some other questions that may be good to ask?

Hi Lisa! If a potential advisor lists that they are taking students for this application cycle, I don’t think it’s necessary to email them (unless it is not clear that they are accepting students for the 2023-2024 school year, then you can maybe email to clarify as this info may be from last year).

However, if you are wondering whether, for example, they are still planning on taking their research in a direction that relates to your interests in the near future, you can maybe ask that? Otherwise, I would say to maybe not send an email. Some professors also say that they don’t chat with students before interview/recruitment weekend so that’s also something to keep in mind. Hope this helps!

Thank you so much for the advice! It is really helpful! I did notice one professor wrote on her faculty page that it is not necessary to contact her ahead of time. Others encourage students to reach out ahead of time. So it sounds like it varies widely.

No problem! Yes, I would definitely say it varies widely.

Thank you!! This was extremely helpful!! I’ve been overthinking these emails for weeks. This helped clarify something’s for me.

this is awesome! will definitely use this

glad it’s helpful!

Leave a comment Cancel reply

• Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
• Subscribe Subscribed
• Copy shortlink
• Report this content
• View post in Reader
• Manage subscriptions
• Collapse this bar