Transfering PHD programs - Bad Advisor

[sciGEEK]

I am seriously considering transferring into another phd program. My advisor is clueless and manipulative. SO here's the deal: I am about to complete my first year in my PhD. My research is based on using our instrument in the field. I did not work with the instrument during my first term. During my second term,I was able to go into the field for a month using our instrument. I noticed some complications using the instrument and especially with the software to process the data. I emailed my advisor about it and she stated she had the same problems too. Once I returned, I noticed that she has a poor relationship with the makers of the instrument. They will not us any imperative information on our instrument or their software. I sent probably over a 100 emails and still have not been able to process the data. Hence, I sought expertise elsewhere and was advised that software shouldn't be sold for this tool, because it is dependent on application. Meanwhile, I had several discussions with my advisor: (1) The instrument had the SAME problems since she bought it (2) the previous master's student never tested it in the lab and never got any good data from the field -> no publications. So this makes me upset, because first term I wrote a research plan based on the fact it could work and she did not tell me the obstacles or limitations of the instrument. Then she tells me that the makers of the instrument is sketchy, but tells me to keep emailing the main guy.

Also, I have learned that two people have disappeared from the lab over the past 2 years and "discovered" in someone's else lab. So most of my time have been focused on emailing for guidance in trying to decipher what's wrong with the instrument. My advisor have not helped in this process and I asked her several times on how to proceed and what would I do if it can't be rectified. No direction.

She adds one of her collaborators to my committee who used the instrument and is preparing publication. So I emailed them as to how they were able to achieve quality data. They are not willing to share their methods although my advisor is a co-author. They won't share with her. My advisor asks me to pressure my collaborator's student to give up data via email. I managed to get one image. It's really crappy. I don't have faith in this instrument.

I've been emailing her opportunities to apply for funding to try to fix the instrument. We don't have funding for upgrades or anything. She replies lets not worry about that. We are only applying to one proposal opportunity. I have low confidence in the proposal. Also, its her first time applying as PI. (btw she has tenure). She wants her boyfriend from industry to build another instrument or make upgrades. This is not his expertise. I don't want to be in the middle of their relationship/work thingy. This will be the first time that they professionally worked together.

3 months later: I arranged a committee meeting to inform them of the issues. My advisor was not happy of course. She lied and told them I probably inserted the samples wrong. Also, tells them I contacted the wrong person the entire time (she repeatedly told me to badger information out of one guy) and I should contacted the "other" company guy. My committee was concerned about how long this will hold on my work. She replies we got funding to fix it this summer. This is a lie too. Now I don't trust her. She keeps asking me for science I want to do with the instrument to insert into her proposal. I have not given her a write up because I don't want to integrate into proposal. If I decide to leave, I do not want her to pursue the research that I independently came up on my own with and its not dependent on the instrument.

Stay or Leave?

[switch]

I am seriously considering transferring into another phd program. My advisor is clueless and manipulative. SO here's the deal: I am about to complete my first year in my PhD. My research is based on using our instrument in the field. I did not work with the instrument during my first term. During my second term,I was able to go into the field for a month using our instrument. I noticed some complications using the instrument and especially with the software to process the data. I emailed my advisor about it and she stated she had the same problems too. Once I returned, I noticed that she has a poor relationship with the makers of the instrument. They will not us any imperative information on our instrument or their software. I sent probably over a 100 emails and still have not been able to process the data. Hence, I sought expertise elsewhere and was advised that software shouldn't be sold for this tool, because it is dependent on application. Meanwhile, I had several discussions with my advisor: (1) The instrument had the SAME problems since she bought it (2) the previous master's student never tested it in the lab and never got any good data from the field -> no publications. So this makes me upset, because first term I wrote a research plan based on the fact it could work and she did not tell me the obstacles or limitations of the instrument. Then she tells me that the makers of the instrument is sketchy, but tells me to keep emailing the main guy.

Also, I have learned that two people have disappeared from the lab over the past 2 years and "discovered" in someone's else lab. So most of my time have been focused on emailing for guidance in trying to decipher what's wrong with the instrument. My advisor have not helped in this process and I asked her several times on how to proceed and what would I do if it can't be rectified. No direction.

She adds one of her collaborators to my committee who used the instrument and is preparing publication. So I emailed them as to how they were able to achieve quality data. They are not willing to share their methods although my advisor is a co-author. They won't share with her. My advisor asks me to pressure my collaborator's student to give up data via email. I managed to get one image. It's really crappy. I don't have faith in this instrument.

I've been emailing her opportunities to apply for funding to try to fix the instrument. We don't have funding for upgrades or anything. She replies lets not worry about that. We are only applying to one proposal opportunity. I have low confidence in the proposal. Also, its her first time applying as PI. (btw she has tenure). She wants her boyfriend from industry to build another instrument or make upgrades. This is not his expertise. I don't want to be in the middle of their relationship/work thingy. This will be the first time that they professionally worked together.

3 months later: I arranged a committee meeting to inform them of the issues. My advisor was not happy of course. She lied and told them I probably inserted the samples wrong. Also, tells them I contacted the wrong person the entire time (she repeatedly told me to badger information out of one guy) and I should contacted the "other" company guy. My committee was concerned about how long this will hold on my work. She replies we got funding to fix it this summer. This is a lie too. Now I don't trust her. She keeps asking me for science I want to do with the instrument to insert into her proposal. I have not given her a write up because I don't want to integrate into proposal. If I decide to leave, I do not want her to pursue the research that I independently came up on my own with and its not dependent on the instrument.

Stay or Leave?

Your university purchased an expensive "instrument" and the makers of the instrument won't assist you in making this instrument functional so that you can finish your research? Because they don't have a good relationship with your supervisor? That is crazy. If that is true, and it doesn't sound right, but if that is true, it doesn't sound like the problem lies with your supervisor. A company that sells an expensive instrument should provide good customer service to the purchasers of that instrument regardless of whether they are easy or difficult customers. After pocketing 100,000 or 10,000 or 1,000,000, they owe some pretty solid customer service to the purchasers of the instrument. That company sounds like a much bigger problem than your supervisor.

I thought the humanities had crazy people, but this is super-crazy.

[switch]

I am seriously considering transferring into another phd program. My advisor is clueless and manipulative. SO here's the deal: I am about to complete my first year in my PhD. My research is based on using our instrument in the field. I did not work with the instrument during my first term. During my second term,I was able to go into the field for a month using our instrument. I noticed some complications using the instrument and especially with the software to process the data. I emailed my advisor about it and she stated she had the same problems too. Once I returned, I noticed that she has a poor relationship with the makers of the instrument. They will not us any imperative information on our instrument or their software. I sent probably over a 100 emails and still have not been able to process the data. Hence, I sought expertise elsewhere and was advised that software shouldn't be sold for this tool, because it is dependent on application. Meanwhile, I had several discussions with my advisor: (1) The instrument had the SAME problems since she bought it (2) the previous master's student never tested it in the lab and never got any good data from the field -> no publications. So this makes me upset, because first term I wrote a research plan based on the fact it could work and she did not tell me the obstacles or limitations of the instrument. Then she tells me that the makers of the instrument is sketchy, but tells me to keep emailing the main guy.

Also, I have learned that two people have disappeared from the lab over the past 2 years and "discovered" in someone's else lab. So most of my time have been focused on emailing for guidance in trying to decipher what's wrong with the instrument. My advisor have not helped in this process and I asked her several times on how to proceed and what would I do if it can't be rectified. No direction.

She adds one of her collaborators to my committee who used the instrument and is preparing publication. So I emailed them as to how they were able to achieve quality data. They are not willing to share their methods although my advisor is a co-author. They won't share with her. My advisor asks me to pressure my collaborator's student to give up data via email. I managed to get one image. It's really crappy. I don't have faith in this instrument.

I've been emailing her opportunities to apply for funding to try to fix the instrument. We don't have funding for upgrades or anything. She replies lets not worry about that. We are only applying to one proposal opportunity. I have low confidence in the proposal. Also, its her first time applying as PI. (btw she has tenure). She wants her boyfriend from industry to build another instrument or make upgrades. This is not his expertise. I don't want to be in the middle of their relationship/work thingy. This will be the first time that they professionally worked together.

3 months later: I arranged a committee meeting to inform them of the issues. My advisor was not happy of course. She lied and told them I probably inserted the samples wrong. Also, tells them I contacted the wrong person the entire time (she repeatedly told me to badger information out of one guy) and I should contacted the "other" company guy. My committee was concerned about how long this will hold on my work. She replies we got funding to fix it this summer. This is a lie too. Now I don't trust her. She keeps asking me for science I want to do with the instrument to insert into her proposal. I have not given her a write up because I don't want to integrate into proposal. If I decide to leave, I do not want her to pursue the research that I independently came up on my own with and its not dependent on the instrument.

Stay or Leave?

From her point of view, you don't sound very mature, hardworking, or helpful. She gave you a couple projects, and you sound like you are intentionally failing because you are very judgmental of your supervisor. Why should she trust you? She told you to contact the customer services guy at the corporation that sold the instrument, and you didn't do that. Why not? It sounds like a no-brainer. Just contact them. They owe you.

So what if she's hiring her boyfriend? Big deal? You're caught in the middle of what? Just get your work done. Get your own girlfriend so you aren't judging people who have social lives.

You sound like you are intentionally failing, being immature and judgmental about things unrelated to the project, and running to save your career at the expense of showing loyalty to someone who gave you a chance. I wouldn't want to work with you.

[rising_star]

Is it really as black and white as staying or leaving? Would it be possible for you to find another advisor?

I urge you to consult with your department (Director of Graduate Studies, Department Chair) before making any kind of decision about this.

[prolixity]

If I had quit every time my main instrument broke.. I'd have left grad school about twenty times in the last year alone.

Learn how to fix things/program. That's what you're in grad school for, no?

[Eigen]

If I had quit every time my main instrument broke.. I'd have left grad school about twenty times in the last year alone.

Learn how to fix things/program. That's what you're in grad school for, no?

This. It's not uncommon for a large portion of our instruments to be at least partially self made/designed. At the research level, you're expected to be able to fix/rebuild large sections of your instruments, as well as work on the data interface- especially if you're in an instrument heavy field.

Heck, half of my department builds their instruments nearly from the ground up just to ensure that it does exactly what they need, and works correctly.

I think you're relying on your advisor a bit too much, but then we're only getting fragments of the story, so...

[UnlikelyGrad]

If I had quit every time my main instrument broke.. I'd have left grad school about twenty times in the last year alone.

For me, twenty times just last summer!!!

I am now pretty darn good at fixing my analytical equipment...

[ogopo]

The things that worry me about this post are not the issues with the instrument. The red flags for me are the behavior of the professor. The fact that she would suddenly attack and lie about the student in the committee meeting is not good. And the fact that a coauthor is not wiling to share information with her or her student?? Also not good. Besides, if she is a coauthor, shouldn't she already have the information? Perhaps she didn't even earn that co-authorship.

I don't think it is the supervisor's responsibility to hold the student's hand in trying to sort out issues with the instrument but the student and the supervisor should be on the same team.

This prof sounds a lot like by boyfriend's crazy evil incompetent supervisor. Finally in his sixth year of PhD after obtaining all of his own funding, supervising a masters student in his lab, representing our school at an international meeting and receiving multiple leadership awards, he left her. Now due to politics he will only be able to get a masters out of all of this. Thank goodness he was able to make a name for himself and earn the respect of others in his faculty. If it were up to his crazy supervisor he would have been ruined.

With these red flags that you've presented, I would definitely talk to the administration in your department or the people in grad studies. I would suggest trying to switch to a new lab. You are still early in your studies. Better now than a few years down the line.

Professors get away with way too much. They need to be held accountable for poor advising.