Hi, parkerluck,

You can appeal your results. Please talk to your postgraduate coordinator/officer and the students union officer and legal advisor. Do this ASAP. Keep your trails of events properly. I think you have a good case of unfair/differential treatment of student. Good luck.

Hi, elaineckf,

I echo what Tudor_Queen has said. There appears to be a mismatch of expectations. You want someone hands on, they are very hands off. However, asking you to spend months alone is too much, even if they want to train you. Another thing to consider is, did they send you away "to find your own answer" because perhaps they did not know it themselves and wanted to look good? Are you the first student working on a new area of research in your group?

You stated: "maybe I could go to a different faculty and find another or other supervisors". I have worked with enough students with problems now to say "Please trust your gut feelings". These supervisors and this project just might not be the one for you. Importantly, you are still so early in your candidature and can change things. Please talk to your postgraduate coordinator or PHD department officer in confidence. They can give you advice on potential things that you could try to solve the situation. Generally, people (aka supervisors) never change, so you will have to change your behaviour and/or environment (project + group) to improve the situation. The decision is yours to make.

Besides that, I think your supervisors are potentially racist when they said you are "like Asian Student will only do what have been asked..." Why work with people like that? I will stop my comment at that.

Hi, inomchips,

You said "In response I sought advice from the Doctoral Student Life department at uni, who confirmed he was out of line in making me do his research, and that I would be advised to swap supervisors". This made my alarm bells ring.

Uni advising a student to swap supervisor is a very big deal. I am wondering if this supervisor has a bad record at supervising. Are you aware of previous students and their experiences under him? I strongly recommend that you find out.

You also said that "I am reluctant to swap as he is the best in his field - however I am only studying his field because he told me to in the beginning, I do not have a particular interest in it". It is very hard to work for X number of years on a project that you have no interest in. Have you thought about your future and what field you want to be in? Do think about it deeply. What's the point of working with the best person in Geology if you like and want to work in Neuroscience.

You also stated that "I was not going to be credited for the papers, this was made clear to me." Do you seriously want to work under someone who is unethical? If he can do this to you now, imagine what he will do if you do find something new and valuable in your research? Would he again not give you credit, owning the finding himself or giving credit to another valuable collaborator?

Finally, answering your question, changing supervisor is not a bad idea. You pointed out that your supervisor has plenty of issues. You yourself also do not like the field. Perhaps you could consider deeply what field you actually like, in line with your future plans, and change to a better project and supervisor. Talk to your Doctoral Student Life department at uni, since that is their advice anyway. Changing early is best to cut your loss and salvage your PhD. The decision however, is in your hands.

Hi, faded07,

Good to know that you still have some fight in you. If you have PASSED with minor corrections, you cannot FAIL after your corrections.

For the potential appeal (hopefully you will never have to do it), have you sorted out the documents properly? In other words, have you printed out and documented every email, conversation and actions related to your case in a systematic manner? Have you drafted a cover letter referrencing every single evidence you have? You might want to start doing that if you have not, so that you are ready whenever you need to use them. Have you also spoken to the Student Union's Education Advisor or Lawyer (Assuming you have these at your university)? You might want to show them your documents and ask if there is anything else you might need. They can also advice you on who to appeal to, processes etc.University staff generally close ranks very quickly and may not point out the best resources for your case, unlike Students Union.

Besides this, can you check the interest of your external? Is she having conflicts of interest and that is the reason for all these delays brought on by her?

However, I really hope that you need not go through appeals. Speaking from experience, an appeal against any university staff/unethical conduct requires a lot of time and effort, even if the evidences are all in your favour. But then again, your revisions will take a very long time as well with no guarantee of a positive outcome. So, honestly, you have nothing to lose. I still hope your chair will come back with favourable news.

Hi, Nesrine87,

I think it is more important to know of the person's reputation as an examiner, rather than a researcher. If the person is a first time examiner, there is a high likelihood that the person may be too harsh and critical, expecting many corrections. This is because they may be trying to proof that they are doing their work as an examiner.

On the other hand, I have also heard of people who are experienced who have had bad reputations as examiners such as extremely long time to examine thesis (~ 9 months), overly critical (demanding original figures in the entire thesis including literature review, more experiments to address a question that was already pointed out as a future direction, etc) and no communication/response (eg completely no email response despite graduate school trying to contact for many weeks).

So choose a good examiner with a good reputation as a fair person, and choose wisely because your future is in their hands. Good luck!

Hi, faded07,

Did you hear back from the chair? Were she and the senior officers able to help you?

Hi, faded07,

My thesis submission required minor corrections, and I received a report of 12 pages with very detailed comments/corrections.

Examples of the comments/corrections are:
i) grammar eg. were not are
ii) experimental design eg. Why did you use X concentration instead of Y concentration since you saw previous effects of ABC at X concentration?
iii) more information eg. Please insert a new table covering comprehensive novel therapeutics targeting Z to treat YY disease.

Hope this helps.

Hi, faded07,

I have not experienced a dispute between my external and internal examiner, but you have my sympathy.

Could you request for a third examiner to be brought on board? This is normally done when there is a dispute, which is your case. In my university, it is compulsory to list a third examiner even though the thesis would be sent out to two.

It is also very unusual that new comments/corrections be added/asked of you after your initial correction. Normally, you pass if you are able to address the comments/corrections asked by the examiners. Do you know who this external examiner is? Is it possible to remove her if she has conflicts of interest such as an opposite hypothesis to your thesis or supervising students with a similar project to yours? You can ask the third examiner to step in.

Another suggestion is to speak to your postgraduate coordinator and students union officer. You need to get the support from your postgraduate coordinator to help you out (if you have not already done that). Do meet with the students union officer to see if the university has deviated from its normal procedure or if your students rights have been abused in your case. Sometimes, university acts faster if they know you have approached the students union (or even a lawyer in other cases).

Do keep us up to date with what you do. Good luck.

Hi, ithicamae,

If you have already put in 5.5 years, you will have enough to put in your thesis. Even the failed projects could possibly be a chapter each. As long as you can write on your trials and errors, your reasoning for doing things, and your trouble shooting, these show critical thinking which should help you earn that PhD. Your PI's "body of work" possibly only looks at the things that worked, and that is not what a PhD is about.

I do not think you should walk out with a master. In your committee meeting, please outline your thesis chapters (including the failed projects) as clearly as possible. Show them that there is a flow in your story. Tell them you want to stop doing experiments and would like to submit. And convince your entire committee that you DO have enough to submit as a PhD. These days, it is possible to submit without a supervisor's approval, but we would like to avoid that if possible.

You have come so far, please do not quit. Stop doing experiments, write up and leave your toxic lab. Do keep us up to date with the outcome of your meeting, if you are comfortable sharing. Good luck.

Hi, Thezim.

I am glad that you found courage to make an important but difficult decision on your PhD. No one can decide what is best for you except yourself. Remember not to feel like a failure, because you are not. Your supervisor and the education system that was meant to monitor and help you through your study failed you, but you did not. You have tried everything you could on your own. Walk away knowing that you are worth more than this project.

You may come across people in future who without much understanding of your pain, say that you should have persevered on through a difficult PhD, because a PhD is meant to be hard. You could perhaps consider this as an answer. Even if you were to push through and be lucky enough to finish a PhD with poor relations with your supervisor and possible little or no publications due to the bad project, you may have no good reference and are unlikely to be competitive to fight for grants or fellowships. Especially since the grant success rate is already so low and academic positions so few. People with good project and supervisors can have multiple papers and combine that with good references and connections from the supervisor, can go very far. If you had a bad PhD with very poor outcome, you will be playing catchup for many years to come. Therefore, cutting your losses now, may be the best decision for you.Especially since things are getting worse. You can always start over with another PhD. And you will now know how to choose a good supervisor and project.

All the best to you in your future undertakings. Perhaps you might get a job researching in a company? Combine that work experiences with a PhD later on will get you very far. Or work as a technician in uni. Or have a short break. The decision is yours to make. Again, kudos for your very brave but difficult decision. Good luck.

Dear faded07,

You have my sympathy. I am wondering if the purpose of the delay/problems by the external examiner is because someone she knows, maybe her own student, is pursuing a thesis/paper with a similar idea or concept. If that is truly the case, then on the basis of conflict of interest you can remove her from your examination panel.

Yes, you should be allowed to seek a third examiner. All the best with this. I do not understand this "compulsory" changes that you need to address as all students reserve the right to rebut. Unless your main supervisor signed that you must submit revisions to the complete satisfaction of your examiners, I don't think you need to...

Talking to the Students Union is an excellent idea. Do talk to the both the education and the lawyers in Students Union. Not asking you to take legal actions, but understanding your rights as a students as backed by university laws is very helpful sometimes in getting the right attention and help from administrative people in uni.

Good luck.

Hi, Spore.

I am not sure if you will pass your milestone, but I think you have some serious supervisory problems. At this stage, there is nothing you can do but wait for the outcome and decide from there.

If you do pass, I think you need to consider if you want to be working with this supervisor for the next 3 years. To not be concern about your lack of project progress and outline for the past one year highlights a major failing of a supervisor. Couple that with what you claim are bad writing skills and poor time management, and you are in a rather difficult situation to complete your PhD. I suggest that while you are waiting, do something to improve your writing skills and think about how you can be more time efficient.

Hi, Thezim,

All the best for your meeting. Do keep us up to date with the outcome and your decision, if you are comfortable sharing. Take care.

Dear Thezim,

An unsupportive supervisor is extremely damaging and should not be treated as normal. Unfortunately, academia appears to "normalise" abnormal situations including completely absent supervision, bullying and obstruction of progress.

You have taken initiative to learn the methods necessary for your PhD. Great! However, if your supervisor is horrible, he may not appreciate this as you going to another group to learn suggests that he is lacking. A supervisor should not behave in this manner, you might say... Then again, he should not take on a student for a project he knows nothing about, then go on to belittle you. His actions have been consistent all throughout your PhD. He will not change.

However, YOU can change. Please go through the thought processes which I have suggested earlier. They helped me when I myself was in an extremely bad situation with my own supervisors and project. Nearly all that you have experienced, I have too and in some cases a lot worse. So, I completely understand. I will not detail my own experiences because I refuse to relive those memories. You are not alone. Ephiny has shared some of his/her own experiences. Like Ephiny, I have submitted my thesis although the outcome is still up in the air.

In conclusion, decide on what you want to do ASAP. You either improve or end your situation. Hoping for things to become better on its own NEVER works. Do not heed the advice that a PhD is hard work, and you should persevere under unhealthy and possibly career-damaging situations. Those words are probably spoken by people who had good supervision/clearly defined project but lots of experiments to complete. They will never understand the pain of an undefined project with uncertain hypothesis and aims and unavailable methods, and without any support. Trust me, I know what you are going through. Please do not break.

Take action now. I wish you lots of strength in overcoming this challenge. Decide what is best and right for you. Ignore unhelpful comments from people who have never been burned by bad supervisors.