Choosing Advisors

[Chuck]

At this point, research fit and advisor fit are probably the most important factors that will affect my choice of school. I've heard many horror stories about adivisor-student problems, and I want to be as diligent and thorough in my selection process as possible.

Let's have a thread dedicated to advisor courtship!

Right now, I'm trying to make sense of the advising situation at one of my top-choice programs (incidentally, not a sociology department). Professor X recently got tenure. Being advised by someone at this stage of their academic career is appealing to me because I perceive that Processor X is semi-secure and semi-established, but not so much so that he's carved a predictable rut in his intellectual niche. It's important to me to have an advisor who is willing to take (reasonable) intellectual risks, and encourage the same from me. My perception is that a young (untenured) advisor may be more concerned about taking the "safe" road on his/her research, and that a more established advisor may be less interested in taking on substantively different material or being more creative in their research (a big interest of mine). Obviously, I'm talking in gross generalizations here. Other than research fit, I'm looking for someone whose personality I can get along with, who has a good reputation among students, and who actually responds to my e-mails.

What qualities are you looking for in an advisor?

[hobokennojokin]

Can someone get FertMigMort in here?

[sciencegirl]

@sociologymang.. HHAHAHAHAH - for real! @fertfigmort is amazing at sorting these things... we went through a series of PM's and I'm fairly secure now in which program I am considering the most - won't firmly decide until I have a chance to visit each one, but @fert is a wonderful resource.

[FertMigMort]

Can someone get FertMigMort in here?

@sociologymang.. HHAHAHAHAH - for real! @fertfigmort is amazing at sorting these things... we went through a series of PM's and I'm fairly secure now in which program I am considering the most - won't firmly decide until I have a chance to visit each one, but @fert is a wonderful resource.

Y'all are ridiculously nice and I am BLUSHING

Let's see... adivsors.

I'm actually not sure I have much advice here because my advisor fell into my lap. My topic is sort of esoteric in my department; only one professor works exclusively students studying that topic. Since that professor had the max number of students, I had to pick a second choice. They assigned me to my current advisor and it's been a disgustingly pleasant relationship since. My advisor has a few shortcomings, but I make up for them by seeking advice from other faculty members and making connections outside of my home institution.

I also think that advisor fit is really personal. I prefer to meet weekly and have more oversight on my work (feedback on drafts, guidance about job applications, etc.) whereas some of my friends prefer to meet only monthly and don't want as much input. Can you take harsh criticism or do you prefer the blows be dropped by degrees? I am not great at having someone say "well this just sucks". I need someone who will say "your work is weak here, here and here. Improve it by doing this, this and this".

Ask their other students what it's like to have your advisor. Use your gut; you can usually tell when people seem unhappy.

I found the chapter in Getting What You Came For (http://www.amazon.com/Getting-What-You-Came-Students/dp/0374524777) to be pretty helpful in advisor selection. I'd definitely reccommend that book. It doesn't ALL apply to social scientists, but a lot of the information is general enough to help.

A few things *I* look for in an advisor: (bolding the I, because advisor fit is personal)

• Advisor's network: Who do they know? This becomes more important when you go on the job market.
  
• Advisor's student's placements: Are they all non-academics? Are they post docs? Do they get TT jobs down the road?
  
• Do I get along with my potential advisor?
  
• Who do they colloborate with in the department? Outside of the department?
  
• Are they generous with student publications? (This one is SUPER important! I know some really great advisors who are also super stingy with pubs and my cohortmates are not very happy on the eve of their job market search.)
  
• Does my advisor give me what I need? If not, can I get what I need from others to supplement what I get from them?
  

Maybe some other students already in school can chime in? I'm certain that my perspective isn't the only one.

[FertMigMort]

Right now, I'm trying to make sense of the advising situation at one of my top-choice programs (incidentally, not a sociology department). Professor X recently got tenure. Being advised by someone at this stage of their academic career is appealing to me because I perceive that Processor X is semi-secure and semi-established, but not so much so that he's carved a predictable rut in his intellectual niche. It's important to me to have an advisor who is willing to take (reasonable) intellectual risks, and encourage the same from me. My perception is that a young (untenured) advisor may be more concerned about taking the "safe" road on his/her research, and that a more established advisor may be less interested in taking on substantively different material or being more creative in their research (a big interest of mine). Obviously, I'm talking in gross generalizations here. Other than research fit, I'm looking for someone whose personality I can get along with, who has a good reputation among students, and who actually responds to my e-mails.

Here is my experience with TT vs. tenured professors as advisors, mentors, committee members, etc:

TT faculty seem to be under a lot more pressure because of the amount of pubs they are expected to have before they can get tenure here. On the plus side, that means they are publishing like crazy and are super productive. On the other, that makes them a risk. If they don't get tenure and you've invested all of this time in them, it can really hurt your future career if they don't get another job right away. They are also untested. I was the first person to put a certain TT person on my dissertation and comps committee. It kind of bit me in the ass, because that person's questions were AWFUL. Comps is stressful enough without getting incomprehensible questions on top of the stress! TT just didn't have enough institutional memory to write good questions. Luckily, I had balanced my committee with older more established professors I knew TT wanted to impress and it all turned out alright.

The two full professors that I work with are both exceptionally productive even late in their careers and are producing some stuff that's cutting edge because they aren't worried about tenure. So I would agree with your generalization there. I also know full professors who are super lazy now that they have tenure and barely publish at all. Those people are easy enough to weed out, just ask to look at their CV.

[jenjenjen]

Soooo this might be a dumb question, but how do you know when/if a prof is tenured? Is it just the difference between an assistant vs associate prof, something in their CV? Sigh..

[FertMigMort]

Soooo this might be a dumb question, but how do you know when/if a prof is tenured? Is it just the difference between an assistant vs associate prof, something in their CV? Sigh..

Not a dumb question. I think the general terminology is assistant prof = non-tenured (usually TT though); associate prof = tenured, but not full; professor = full tenured professor.

Check the school's website and the professor's CV. Those are usually the best sources of information. When in doubt, call the office and ask the secretary/admin assistant. They will know a lot of times. ETA: You don't have to reveal who you are. Just say something like "hi, I'm trying to contact Professor X. Do you know if they are tenured?" It's kind of a weird question, but they shuold know the answer. I used this trick when I was trying to determine if someone I met on my visit who was up for tenure got tenure. No one was straight with me on visit weekend, so I called the department's office and a lovely admin assistant told me that Prof X was leaving the program.

Oh and future students, be VERY nice to the administrative assistants. They can make your life so much easier.

Edited March 1, 2012 by FertMigMort

[sciencegirl]

The Associate professor thing is a bit weird for some top tier schools - Harvard for instance has been infamous for having the "Associate" position as a non-tenured position, whereas it appears that "Associate" at Stanford is a tenured position. In the UC's, across the board, "Associate" is tenured I believe. Generally, the grad students will already know their school's policy so I figure I'd just ask them when visiting.

[FertMigMort]

The Associate professor thing is a bit weird for some top tier schools - Harvard for instance has been infamous for having the "Associate" position as a non-tenured position, whereas it appears that "Associate" at Stanford is a tenured position. In the UC's, across the board, "Associate" is tenured I believe. Generally, the grad students will already know their school's policy so I figure I'd just ask them when visiting.

Excellent advice. Associate is tenured at my school as well, although some people never move beyond associate.

[jacib]

I've seen on CV's things like "1996-97 Associate Professor without tenure, 97-2003, Tenured Associate Professor," but that's rare It's a safe bet to say an Associate Professor is tenured, especially if they've been associate for more than a year or two (most universities kick people on down the road when it's clear they're not going to get tenure any time soon).

[jacib]

Also, in my department, a fair number of people have switched advisers, probably like half don't have their original adviser as chair. Sometimes people have switched topics, some people have discovered a different take on the same topic, sometime it's a strategic thing--one of my colleagues got the advice from his first adviser, "Make her your chair. You know I'll always be on your side, but she's a big shot and probably won't look at work unless she's the chair." Probably two out of the four people on my committee will be people I didn't even know about before. This is one of the reasons you should look at both people you want to work with and the department holistically. This is also why, when you visit, you should find out who doesn't like working with whom. Graduate students are the people to ask about this, and 50% of the time they will say, "We have nothing like that at our school" even when it's not true. Ask them again, a little later, in a different way, preferably after a few drinks. You can ask broadly, "So who doesn't like whom?" first and then later, ask "Who are reluctant to serve on committees together?" Ask who won't do much work if they're not the chair. Just get the dirt in general when you visit. That's really your only chance to find out. Try to talk with your potential adviser's current students if at all possible.

My adviser is well known within her subfield, well connected within the topics I'm working on, but probably less well known in the general world of sociology; hopefully, there will be well known people on my committee whose names faculty search committees will instantly recognize and respect, but that's not my adviser. Still, I think she's probably the best person for me in the country because 1) she's interested in the same debates I'm interested in and knows about them 1.5) she's knowledgeable about the geographic regions I need 2) she can really rip my work apart 3) she rips my work apart in ways I'm comfortable with--we get along, that is. She is the right mix of critical and supportive for me. 4) she's well connected within the department and in the university. A professor from another department who I came her wanting to work with is her academic BFF. Her name is enough to always open the door to his office, and he definitely remembers me because of her. 5) she's willing to support a variety of methods and styles as long as it's good sociology. I just got a tentative green light for a project that's ambitious, possibly too ambitious, but she's willing to let me try even though it's entirely different methodologically from what she does in her work. Some people definitely prefer students with their methods (a lot of Burroway's students' books, for example, have a familiar ring to them), 6) In the end, I just work really well with her and she likes me. I'm really happy with her. When we're both at a lecture, and the speaker says something boring, she'll find me in the crowd and make a face at me. That wasn't something that happened until my second year. Not everyone needs that kind of connection, but I can tell you, it goes a long way towards making me not feel crazy during graduate school. Those are the kind of things that you can't find out from the internet or even meeting them once (but you can get clues about it).

Your visiting day will really be like the first date of a multi-year relationship, and like romantic relationships, sometimes things that look great on paper are a mess, somethings that make no sense on paper make perfect sense when you see them, sometimes you think you're headed one direction until you meet someone else, etc. I knew exactly who I was going to work with when I came in (I work in relatively small subfield) but not everyone did. However, by second year, all of us have found a relatively permanent home (in some case, multiple homes) and it's pretty clear who will at least chair all of our committees. With some people it's intellectual agreement, with some people they just get along well.

[MashaMashaMasha]

Oh and future students, be VERY nice to the administrative assistants. They can make your life so much easier.

Couldn't agree more than this. True in life as well as academe.

In undergrad, an admin I was friendly with gave me the lowdown on the entire department, which professors were grumpy, who I should talk to and how about my ug research, et cetera. Admin staff have also been helpful in the application process this year, as they seem to be the only ones who know how the TA assignments are distributed and what first year TAs should expect!

[socscholar]

This was pretty helpful: http://www.rackham.umich.edu/downloads/publications/mentoring.pdf