Mentor = adviser?

[AbaNader]

Are they, should they, be the same?

I would think a faculty mentor in the department that is not your adviser would be more appropriate since you do not necessarily have to juggle with the "professional" pseudo employer-employee type relationship.

I would really like to have the advice and guidance of an older, experienced, accomplished faculty member without feeling like I am compromising my professional position and/or worrying about pressure from them.

Is it normal to seek out non-adviser mentors? Is it an affront to your adviser that you don't consider them mentors per se?

Edited April 30, 2012 by AbaNader

[juilletmercredi]

I've heard it both ways. I think any advisor who begrudges you seeking out a second (or third) mentor is being silly and potentially dangerous; after all, when you apply for jobs and funding you will need 3-4 recommendation letters. So it's good to develop relationships with other professors. Not only that, but other professors will have had a different journey than your advisor, and so they may have unique input. Another thing is that my advisor is junior and I have benefited from having the voice of some senior scholars as a mentor. If your advisor is senior, you may also benefit from the input of those closer to the job market and going through the tenure process.

I have not had to juggle the pseudo-employee relationship with my advisor, but then again, he does not fund me. I've been on external funding since I've been here. Still, I work on his data and projects. I think it depends on the personality of your advisor - some of them will make great mentors, and others will just be your advisor. But yes, it is normal to seek out other mentors.

[TMP]

What the above said.

Your adviser is your adviser. If s/he becomes a mentor, there's nothing wrong with that. I agree about the junior/senior/mid-career.

My MA adviser was a senior scholar and I really benefited from working with junior faculty members because they had fresher perspectives and more eager to give advice. Now I will be working with a younger scholar for my PhD and I've been seeking out mentoring relationships with senior scholars. These senior scholars can give me insights and direction to help me succeed because they have the long view of the field and have sat on number of committees. It's good to have mentors across the career spectrum from newly minted PhDs to just-about-to-retire scholars. You get a variety of perspectives and you will choose someone who can be advise you for whatever circumstances you have going on.

[robot_hamster]

At my school, mentor typically equals adviser. Most people are not "employed" by their advisers, unless they have an RA position. The TA positions I had were for professors other than my adviser. So that part wasn't a problem for me. It's not unheard of to have more than one mentor though. If you happen to connect with someone else on stuff and they take an interest in what you're doing, then a relationship can certainly develop.

[TakeruK]

I feel that sometimes a mentor relationship can evolve out of an advisor-student relationship. It might also be easier to have a mentor who is/was your advisor because they have spent a lot of time working with you and know your abilities well. But as others said, it's important to have a good relationship with other faculty as well and having more than one mentor is helpful. So I don't think it's neither appropriate nor inappropriate to have your advisor also be your mentor! It's up to both of you to choose

[AbaNader]

Thanks for all the responses.

My adviser is also junior faculty so I thought the mentorship of a more experienced faculty would be helpful. I feel the mentor is someone you can always seek sincere advice from, unlike the adviser where there might be a conflict of interest.

[Dal PhDer]

I think people have pointed out really great advice. I feel like I am also in a similar situation, as my advisor is junior faculty and I am his first PhD student. For me, I think the presence of an additional faculty member to be a mentor would be beneficial for my supervisor and me. So, I think a mentor for you might be really great. My biggest piece of advice is that you don't use this mentor to discuss issues/problems you have with your supervisor. It is my experience that word travels, and you would hate to say something to the mentor that gets back to your advisor...that would be my only concern.

[CarlieE]

Nice thread! Just read this article in the Chronicle of Higher ed. http://chronicle.com/article/Seeking-the-Mentors-You-Need/131747/?sid=oh&utm_source=oh&utm_medium=en

It's about "how to find a mentor", what to expect from one, what to expect as one etc. And also talks about mentoring circles, rather than a single mentor. I thought it was pertinent to the discussion here.

[Sigaba]

@AbaNader

It depends upon the sensibilities of the professor doing the advising. I've been in two situations where my advisers weren't that interested in mentoring anyone. In the first situation, the professor was a senior scholar in the twilight of his career with a wife who was dying. Within the matrix of his priorities, he simply did not have enough time to be as hands on with me as I'd have liked. Consequently, I actually changed schools because I didn't feel I'd get the kind of support/ass chewing I need to maximize my potential as a historian. In the second situation, I've benefited from having three mentors (one of whom who has since died) to balance out a less-than-ideal relationship with my adviser.

An additional point. A previous comment that characterizes as "silly and potentially dangerous" a dynamic in which an adviser "begrudges" a grad student for finding other mentors is, in my view, overly broad. First, in a discipline like history, the degree of specialization and range of philosophical views can lead to a graduate student being caught in the middle if an adviser and a mentor are from opposite ends of the spectrum.

Second, there are often issues going on 'behind the curtain' within a department that professors will not disclose even to their most trusted graduate students. A professor can have professional and personal issues that make him or her a less than ideal candidate for a mentor despite that professor's best intentions. For example, a professor could be up for tenure but the writing is on the wall that he isn't going to make the cut. Or a professor can have personal issues (a messy divorce) that are going to drain that person's time, energy, and concentration during a graduate student's intervals of greatest need for mentoring. Is it inherently "silly" for an adviser to warn off a graduate student even though she cannot disclose the details?

[Tall Chai Latte]

I think people have pointed out really great advice. I feel like I am also in a similar situation, as my advisor is junior faculty and I am his first PhD student. For me, I think the presence of an additional faculty member to be a mentor would be beneficial for my supervisor and me. So, I think a mentor for you might be really great. My biggest piece of advice is that you don't use this mentor to discuss issues/problems you have with your supervisor. It is my experience that word travels, and you would hate to say something to the mentor that gets back to your advisor...that would be my only concern.

Dal PhDer, I don't think being someone's first PhD student is necessarily a bad thing for mentoring. The person just started, he or she would still have qualities of a post doc and maybe less intimidating to work with, more willing to spend time with you, anticipate where difficulties may arise etc. The cavet is that you may be under a lot of pressure to produce, as your PI will be pushing to establish his/her research. At least from my experience, I think these junior faculty are better at tuning in to your needs than more established faculty, because you two would be no more than 15 years apart in age.

[Dal PhDer]

Dal PhDer, I don't think being someone's first PhD student is necessarily a bad thing for mentoring. The person just started, he or she would still have qualities of a post doc and maybe less intimidating to work with, more willing to spend time with you, anticipate where difficulties may arise etc. The cavet is that you may be under a lot of pressure to produce, as your PI will be pushing to establish his/her research. At least from my experience, I think these junior faculty are better at tuning in to your needs than more established faculty, because you two would be no more than 15 years apart in age.

I think there are pros and cons- and of course, it's dependent on personality etc. I am finding two major downfalls (1) lack of time: Mind you, this is not just for new faculty, but TT has caused a lack of time both to meet, review my products, and provide guidance. There is just so much on his plate that teaching often falls on the back burner- or in the garbage can under the sink. I think this is not necessarily the fact that he's new, but it certainly doesn't help. (2) Lack of skills/experience: This is truly the most difficult aspect of a young prof. If they are not willing to take the time and effort to learn how to supervisor, manage, organize, etc...it can be a difficult process. Having worked with someone who has been 'in the business' for quite some time, I notice a huge difference. It takes experience and skill to truly help guide a student through this process- simply helping them adapt their project to make it manageable is a big skill. Pair that with learning how to successfully write grant application and publishable papers- these are things that profs don't just pick up after their PhD/Post-doc, these are skills they learn throughout their career.

I do think you make a good point that it might be easier to maintain that connect and understanding, since they would have just gone through the process...but for me, the lack of skills/experience and little time- is making it very difficult.

I have recently picked up 2 mentors. One is a committee member, and the other is a woman I work with who is in a completely different discipline. It's nice to see 'seasoned' professionals/professors work, and really provide insight. I think it's important to have a balance between a new eager professor, and a seasoned experienced professor- it's not black or white, and it's dependent on personalities...but I really believe that a well-rounded, balanced, and muti-perspective committee is best for this experience...mind you, I am in interdisciplinary studies, so I might be biased!

[Tall Chai Latte]

I think there are pros and cons- and of course, it's dependent on personality etc. I am finding two major downfalls (1) lack of time: Mind you, this is not just for new faculty, but TT has caused a lack of time both to meet, review my products, and provide guidance. There is just so much on his plate that teaching often falls on the back burner- or in the garbage can under the sink. I think this is not necessarily the fact that he's new, but it certainly doesn't help. (2) Lack of skills/experience: This is truly the most difficult aspect of a young prof. If they are not willing to take the time and effort to learn how to supervisor, manage, organize, etc...it can be a difficult process. Having worked with someone who has been 'in the business' for quite some time, I notice a huge difference. It takes experience and skill to truly help guide a student through this process- simply helping them adapt their project to make it manageable is a big skill. Pair that with learning how to successfully write grant application and publishable papers- these are things that profs don't just pick up after their PhD/Post-doc, these are skills they learn throughout their career.

I do think you make a good point that it might be easier to maintain that connect and understanding, since they would have just gone through the process...but for me, the lack of skills/experience and little time- is making it very difficult.

I have recently picked up 2 mentors. One is a committee member, and the other is a woman I work with who is in a completely different discipline. It's nice to see 'seasoned' professionals/professors work, and really provide insight. I think it's important to have a balance between a new eager professor, and a seasoned experienced professor- it's not black or white, and it's dependent on personalities...but I really believe that a well-rounded, balanced, and muti-perspective committee is best for this experience...mind you, I am in interdisciplinary studies, so I might be biased!

You know, I think I am going to agree with you on #2, the lack of skill/experience to supervise and manage. My PI is in similar situation as you, who's young and but not as new as yours (I'm the second grad student in the lab). The nature of my project is in a completely different discipline, and research of the lab is very interdisciplinary as well, which means the PI will have to manage all sorts of fields she's not familiar with. Like you said, this can potentially be salvaged by a well-balanced thesis committee. I also have the same concern as you do, but I guess we have to remain confident in them and do as much as we can to help ourselves. After all, these new faculty are still in the growth phase like us.

I was wondering if anyone else has other tips on how to ensure smooth completion of PhD program when your PI is a new faculty. We are far less experienced in terms of sensing good projects or good directions to pursue, but other than appointing a well-balanced committee, what are some of the things that we could do to self-help at least?

[Gneiss1]

For me my adviser is one of the professors. He is great, but I am very glad he appointed one of the other female grad students to be my mentor (the only other female under him at that). She has a similar background to me and is able to give me some better mentoring advice than I feel he could (i.e. steer clear of X professor's classes). She also is very organized and on top of things which I feel isn't his best strength. To me an adviser is someone who is wise and experienced, able to offer advice to further your future. Their focus is your success from more of a business standpoint. A mentor I feel knows you a little more personally and gives advise to you from more of a personal standpoint taking into account more of your personal strengths and weaknesses from their experience. That's just my personal opinion but I mean you could find an adviser that had all the mentor qualities as well. I think it would really depend on their experience as well as your connection with them.

[fuzzylogician]

I was wondering if anyone else has other tips on how to ensure smooth completion of PhD program when your PI is a new faculty. We are far less experienced in terms of sensing good projects or good directions to pursue, but other than appointing a well-balanced committee, what are some of the things that we could do to self-help at least?

I am in a situation like you describe, working with a new faculty member (long story short - he was tenured just a week ago (phew!), after 2.5 years at our institution. He came from an undergrad-only institution so he has very limited experience advising graduate students. I am the main person who works with him, along with one other student who is graduating this year). It's been a learning experience for both of us. I learned that I need to be more active than I might have otherwise been about the status of my projects and where they are headed. When I ask him for advice, I usually present a problem and solicit ideas. He always has interesting things to say. Then I tell him what my thoughts were and we talk about how/why they are different. Usually we end up with a plan that combines some of my ideas and some of his, and I think that's a great way to work. This is the case both for work-issues and more general life issues, because I do consider him one of my mentors. For life issues I also have a second mentor who is one of the more established professors in my department. I find it useful to talk to him about many issues - not to compare advice but to get another perspective.

Of course, it's also useful to have a balanced committee and to talk to as many people as will listen to you, to get advice and criticism on your work. I also think it's important to present your work in local venues (in your department, in the area), though I know not everyone agrees on this. I like to present work in progress, or even just ideas I think are wrong but in an interesting way, to get more feedback. The more people, the more fresh perspectives. A good way to learn if a project is interesting and feasible is to talk about it with people. Talk about the data, talk about your ideas, talk about future plans. If people are excited about the data, understand the ideas and think the future plans make sense, you're probably doing alright.

Edited May 15, 2012 by fuzzylogician

[AbaNader]

@AbaNader

It depends upon the sensibilities of the professor doing the advising.  I've been in two situations where my advisers weren't that interested in mentoring anyone.  In the first situation, the professor was a senior scholar in the twilight of his career with a wife who was dying.  Within the matrix of his priorities, he simply did not have enough time to be as hands on with me as I'd have liked.  Consequently, I actually changed schools because I didn't feel I'd get the kind of support/ass chewing I need to maximize my potential as a historian.  In the second situation, I've benefited from having three mentors (one of whom who has since died) to balance out a less-than-ideal relationship with my adviser.

An additional point.  A previous comment that characterizes as "silly and potentially dangerous" a dynamic in which an adviser "begrudges" a grad student for finding other mentors is, in my view, overly broad.  First, in a discipline like history, the degree of specialization and range of philosophical views  can lead to a graduate student being caught in the middle if an adviser and a mentor are from opposite ends of the spectrum.

Second, there are often issues going on 'behind the curtain' within a department that professors will not disclose even to their most trusted graduate students.  A professor can have professional and personal issues that make him or her a less than ideal candidate for a mentor despite that professor's best intentions. For example, a professor could be up for tenure but the writing is on the wall that he isn't going to make the cut.  Or a professor can have personal issues (a messy divorce) that are going to drain that person's time, energy, and concentration during a graduate student's intervals of greatest need for mentoring.  Is it inherently "silly" for an adviser to warn off a graduate student even though she cannot disclose the details?

Thanks for the calm, contemplative comments.

[AbaNader]

I think there are pros and cons- and of course, it's dependent on personality etc. I am finding two major downfalls (1) lack of time: Mind you, this is not just for new faculty, but TT has caused a lack of time both to meet, review my products, and provide guidance. There is just so much on his plate that teaching often falls on the back burner- or in the garbage can under the sink. I think this is not necessarily the fact that he's new, but it certainly doesn't help. (2) Lack of skills/experience: This is truly the most difficult aspect of a young prof. If they are not willing to take the time and effort to learn how to supervisor, manage, organize, etc...it can be a difficult process. Having worked with someone who has been 'in the business' for quite some time, I notice a huge difference. It takes experience and skill to truly help guide a student through this process- simply helping them adapt their project to make it manageable is a big skill. Pair that with learning how to successfully write grant application and publishable papers- these are things that profs don't just pick up after their PhD/Post-doc, these are skills they learn throughout their career.

I do think you make a good point that it might be easier to maintain that connect and understanding, since they would have just gone through the process...but for me, the lack of skills/experience and little time- is making it very difficult.

I have recently picked up 2 mentors. One is a committee member, and the other is a woman I work with who is in a completely different discipline. It's nice to see 'seasoned' professionals/professors work, and really provide insight. I think it's important to have a balance between a new eager professor, and a seasoned experienced professor- it's not black or white, and it's dependent on personalities...but I really believe that a well-rounded, balanced, and muti-perspective committee is best for this experience...mind you, I am in interdisciplinary studies, so I might be biased!

I've so far worked for 4 different professors at different schools and I strongly identify with your experiences; I guess that is why I started this thread.Does anyone have any advice about how to choose a mentor and how to approach "the chosen one" about it?

[robot_hamster]

I've so far worked for 4 different professors at different schools and I strongly identify with your experiences; I guess that is why I started this thread.Does anyone have any advice about how to choose a mentor and how to approach "the chosen one" about it?

I would start with those you already have a relationship with. If you feel a connection, then go for it.