My advisor is pushing but not very helpful..

[quickoats]

Relationship with advisors seems to be a forever topic on this forum. My story isn’t new but it’s related to my graduation and further application, so I really appreciate if you could give me some advice… Thanks!

 

I’m a second year master student in a social science program. I’m writing my thesis and applying to PhD programs. I think I have some problems with my advisor and I’m really frustrated about it.

 

My advisor is not that kind of profs that delay your work. Instead she replies to my emails and my writings very quickly, which I really appreciate. And she’s worried about the progress of my thesis. Every time I emailed her she kept reminding me to get my experiment part start as soon as possible. This is good, since a little push would accelerate my work. But it seems that’s all what she wants to say to me right now, and she always ignores my other questions.

 

She isn’t not at all helpful. When I asked her for experiment materials she is willing to help. But other than that, she seems very reluctant to give further help.

 

She didn’t give me many academic advices on my project other than our first several meetings when I tried to pin down my topic and methods. After that I’m all on my own. When I asked her for suggestions on the experiment design, she either ignored my questions, or gave one-sentence comments that did not really help. She refused to meet with me—simply ignored my requests or brutally asked what’s the point of meeting. In fact, despite that I constantly brought up the issue of meeting, we haven’t met since last October. I’m not sure why she did it: maybe it’s a common practice of advising students; maybe because I’m not in her lab and not her PhD students; or she doesn’t like my project or like me. At least on my part, I sincerely think I need to talk with someone who’s working in the field. I shifted my field when I entered the MA program, and I did a good job on the core courses in my first year. But these classes are far from enough for my quite interdisciplinary thesis project (I chose the topic because it’s interesting and my advisor likes it). I have to learn everything on my own, and it takes time. Besides, without much help and support, I have been constantly getting confused, feeling uncertain about my designs, revising the proposal again and again, which resulted in a long long process of just writing up the proposal and apparently she is not very happy with that. Other members in my committee are also of little help because they are extremely busy and don’t care much about me: usually my email will not be replied until a few weeks after I send it. Besides, my advisor did not allow me to send my proposal to other members before she approves, and without they reading my proposal, it’s very hard to convey my ideas of the design and ask for suggestions. Now I’m almost ready to conduct the experiment, but I have no idea what other committee members think about my design—whether they would disapprove it and come to me after I’ve halfway finished or even disagree with it at the defense. I’m really afraid that I couldn’t graduate on time. This might further affect my enrollment into other PhD program.

 

Another thing that worries me is that I asked my advisor to be my reference when I applied to the PhD programs (I have no others to turn to since she’s the only one who knows my research and I think it might be weird to not include one’s advisor as the reference). Judged by her emails and attitude towards me, I feel she’s not very satisfied with me. I’m afraid this would be reflected in her RL and affect my chance to get in a good PhD program. I’m afraid she will talk about me as being incompetent in conducting independent research, which is not true—I have done several works during undergrad and the first year of MA, though most of them were not in my current field so I didn’t really mention it in my PS or CV (which was a mistake!).

 

I know It might be my pure guess (being panic of both the application and the thesis), but if it is true, how can I rescue the situation? I might never have the chance to talk to adcoms in the PhD programs; but if I do, should I explain to them that I’m capable of conducting good research? Should I mention the environmental factors that affect my performance, like limited faculty resources in our program (which is the main reason I reached out to my advisor and gave up another project I’d worked on in writing my term paper), unsupportive advisors and academic environment in general? Will adcom understand students’ current performance might be influenced by these factors? Will they even think of these possibilities during reviewing the applications? I know I shouldn’t hope too much. It should be my responsibility to find a reference that knows my ability and to explain the seemingly “weakness” in my PS and CV. But as I’ve turned in all my applications, any idea what I should do now?

Edited January 25, 2014 by quickoats

[Geologizer]

I obviously don't know your whole situation, so perhaps take this with a grain of salt.

It sound like you and your adviser have very different ideas about where you are, and what your roles are. Your adviser sounds like he/she is being perfectly reasonable to me.

First, your adviser and committee members have a ton of other things that they are doing. I wouldn't automatically jump to "they don't care about me" if you don't get the ideal timely and inspirational response from them. Second, your adviser sounds like she is pushing you to work on an aspect of your project that she thinks is crucial. Perhaps what she's doing is trying to steer your attention and discouraging distractions/procrastination by not providing a ton of feedback on other things. This leads into the idea do having conflicting ideas about eachother's function. Grad school is different than undergrad research, and her function is not to hand-hold but to guide. The "what is the purpose of this meeting" question could be a function of that. Perhaps her blunt personality is not a good fit for your learning style, but it seems like she's expecting you to be more independent and take ownership of your research. Also, it does seem like you're distracted with PhD programs to me, and perhaps she's getting the same impression which is contributing to her shortness. After all, you are still supposed to be working on your current project, and are having a lot of trouble progressing it. Ref letters and discussion of what to do after could be, again, a function of her trying to keep your attention focused. I'd say devote your time to the experimental stuff and that could go a long way to fixing the situation.

Maybe this perspective is helpful and apt, maybe it's way off.

[quickoats]

Thanks for your advice. Knowing it's my problem actually relieve me a lot. I guess I didn't have a clear understanding of the expectation of graduate study before. But I still hope I could meet an advisor who welcomes academic communication. I've met many other professors who love to talk academic things with students and reply long emails to students' inquiry, and I've learned a lot and was largely motivated by them. 

[Pretty_Penny]

Honestly, what is the difference between hand-holding and guidance? My advisor doesn't believe in teaching - she literally believes you will learn better reading on your own than talking with some else, and goes as far as to forbid asking questions of other lab members because "it's a waste of everyone's time." I personally think that people learn better in different ways and you can't take a one size fits all approach.

 

She recently told me I need too much hand-holding. I responded by saying I just want a little bit of guidance, like any guidance at all. The other first years in my cohort have advisors who tell them whether or not an idea is worth pursuing, send them articles they should be reading, and tell them what projects they should be working on and how they can contribute to those projects. My advisor refuses to do any of that. So am I asking for too much hand-holding?

 

I obviously don't know your whole situation, so perhaps take this with a grain of salt.

It sound like you and your adviser have very different ideas about where you are, and what your roles are. Your adviser sounds like he/she is being perfectly reasonable to me.

First, your adviser and committee members have a ton of other things that they are doing. I wouldn't automatically jump to "they don't care about me" if you don't get the ideal timely and inspirational response from them. Second, your adviser sounds like she is pushing you to work on an aspect of your project that she thinks is crucial. Perhaps what she's doing is trying to steer your attention and discouraging distractions/procrastination by not providing a ton of feedback on other things. This leads into the idea do having conflicting ideas about eachother's function. Grad school is different than undergrad research, and her function is not to hand-hold but to guide. The "what is the purpose of this meeting" question could be a function of that. Perhaps her blunt personality is not a good fit for your learning style, but it seems like she's expecting you to be more independent and take ownership of your research. Also, it does seem like you're distracted with PhD programs to me, and perhaps she's getting the same impression which is contributing to her shortness. After all, you are still supposed to be working on your current project, and are having a lot of trouble progressing it. Ref letters and discussion of what to do after could be, again, a function of her trying to keep your attention focused. I'd say devote your time to the experimental stuff and that could go a long way to fixing the situation.

Maybe this perspective is helpful and apt, maybe it's way off.

[Geologizer]

It is a fine line, and I will preface this by saying that context is everything. Little ques from the OP were what I ran with, and perhaps it was helpful. 

 

There is a huge difference between hand-holding and guidance. In grad school, you're supposed to be creative and contribute original thoughts on a matter; do your own thinking. The mentor's job is to help guide your thoughts and help you to grow, but in my opinion, is not to tell you what to do all the time (obvious exceptions here), what to think, how to think, etc. At that point you're just a trained chimp - i.e. an undergrad (lol had to). Obviously asking questions should be perfectly well within the realm of reason. It just sounds like you and your mentor need to hash some things out. 

[bsharpe269]

It is a fine line, and I will preface this by saying that context is everything. Little ques from the OP were what I ran with, and perhaps it was helpful.

There is a huge difference between hand-holding and guidance. In grad school, you're supposed to be creative and contribute original thoughts on a matter; do your own thinking. The mentor's job is to help guide your thoughts and help you to grow, but in my opinion, is not to tell you what to do all the time (obvious exceptions here), what to think, how to think, etc. At that point you're just a trained chimp - i.e. an undergrad (lol had to). Obviously asking questions should be perfectly well within the realm of reason. It just sounds like you and your mentor need to hash some things out.

Totally agree here. Asking questions is expected. If you're ready to do stuff 100% on your own then you should be a professor. Also, having a professor that discourages help within the group sounds horrible to me! I'm a masters student and regularly go to my group for help since I'm the youngest, least experienced at the moment. I have been able to learn so much through a mix of their help and my own reading. I contribute original thoughts, present the ideas to my PI, and then he builds on that and we create an idea. That's grad school. Post docs should be even more independent and then professors mostly on their own but of course still get input from others.

[Pretty_Penny]

It is a fine line, and I will preface this by saying that context is everything. Little ques from the OP were what I ran with, and perhaps it was helpful. 

 

There is a huge difference between hand-holding and guidance. In grad school, you're supposed to be creative and contribute original thoughts on a matter; do your own thinking. The mentor's job is to help guide your thoughts and help you to grow, but in my opinion, is not to tell you what to do all the time (obvious exceptions here), what to think, how to think, etc. At that point you're just a trained chimp - i.e. an undergrad (lol had to). Obviously asking questions should be perfectly well within the realm of reason. It just sounds like you and your mentor need to hash some things out. 

 

Totally agree here. Asking questions is expected. If you're ready to do stuff 100% on your own then you should be a professor. Also, having a professor that discourages help within the group sounds horrible to me! I'm a masters student and regularly go to my group for help since I'm the youngest, least experienced at the moment. I have been able to learn so much through a mix of their help and my own reading. I contribute original thoughts, present the ideas to my PI, and then he builds on that and we create an idea. That's grad school. Post docs should be even more independent and then professors mostly on their own but of course still get input from others.

 

That version of grad school sounds great to me! Haha thanks for the responses - I was actually curious as to what responses people would have!

[bsharpe269]

Good luck! Reading forums like this have been really helpful to me in realizing how picky I need to be about the type of PI I do my phd with. I think that when I go to my interviews I am going to be more focused on finding out these sorts of details than on getting accepted to the school.

 

For those of you struggling with your advisors, is switching an option at this point? Also, did you notice any indication that they would be like that during interviews or conversations before you started? Id like to make sure I get this sort of info before hand if possible.

Edited February 18, 2014 by bsharpe269

[Pretty_Penny]

Good luck! Reading forums like this have been really helpful to me in realizing how picky I need to be about the type of PI I do my phd with. I think that when I go to my interviews I am going to be more focused on finding out these sorts of details than on getting accepted to the school.

 

For those of you struggling with your advisors, is switching an option at this point? Also, did you notice any indication that they would be like that during interviews or conversations before you started? Id like to make sure I get this sort of info before hand if possible.

They say that switching is an option in my area, but when I tried last semester they basically shut me down. As for signs before I came here, there were none particularly from my PI. We just had some email exchanges and an hour interview during interview weekend. That went fine. But there were signs from other people. Everyone in the program was very diplomatic about it, saying she is very "direct" and has a certain style that isn't suited to everyone. Some said "well I like her and get along with her..." - implying that not everyone does. I thought that didn't sound too bad because I work hard... I should have really noticed when grad students from my undergrad institution said things like "oh yeah I've heard some things about her." These were students in a different area of a different school hundreds of miles away!

[quickoats]

Now I got totally confused about what my advisor expects from me. Last minute she pushed me to do whatever I could to get things done as quickly as possible; now she's blaming me for doing several things at the same time to facilitate the study and not reporting to her what I was doing and planed to do. 

 

I am thinking maybe I AM doing things wrong. But that's why guidance is so important, especially it's my first time conducting such studies. However, instead of giving academic guidance (not hand-holding), she usually either says "you shouldn't do it" with no positive/constructive suggestion (and with very harsh tones), or  "you should do it" with no further explanations and is more like a commend that I must obey. I should and planed to learn many things from this first experience so that I could do better in my later research, but I feel all I got were negative feedbacks, and it does not only make me frustrated, but also confuses me even more about what academic research and the academic world is like. I'm now desperately wanting to finish this stage as soon as possible and move to my next stage of study, where I know the professor(s) is/are nice to students and the interaction is healthy and equal.

 

I guess I'm more complaining than asking for suggestion here. But I really wish to know how other grad students interact with their advisors. If you feel your advisors are being discouraging and negative, what should you do?

[danieleWrites]

I read the newer thread before I read this one. My bad.

From what I gather, a thesis committee cannot work as a committee from the very beginning. You can't get feedback on every step from every person on the committee. They'll disagree and you won't get anywhere. It's more important for you to think of your adviser as the gatekeeper of the committee. With every step of the process, you'll go through her first, and then on to the others. She'll let you know when whatever stage of work you're at is ready for the committee to look at. They aren't teachers. You're doing the research yourself, but at every stage, the adviser is there to herd you toward the path to success. You should have had at least two methodology courses (one in undergrad and one during the MA) by now. You should know how to design and implement a research project.

To echo geologizer, your adviser and your committee expect you to be able to manage a research project on your own. They're there to steer you back when you go off course, not to verify that you're doing it right. The fact that you spent months revising and revising and revising your research proposal because you didn't feel it was ready, and you wanted your adviser and your committee to what? Be supportive how? You write a proposal draft, send it to the adviser, the adviser tells you what to fix (not what you did right), you fix it and send it back, she tells you what to fix, repeat last two steps until she tells you to send it to the others in the committee. They send you minor fixes, if necessary, and then your proposal is approved. You move on. You use your proposal to guide how you complete your research project. You don't email your committee often. It's your advisers job to guide you through the process, not the committee's. They come in when your adviser feels that you need their help, or when they need to approve the next step of the process.

It sounds as if your adviser and your committee are frustrated with you. You want guidance (not hand holding), but you may be asking them for hand holding without realizing it. Send your adviser an email with a subject line that requests a brief meeting about expectations for a thesis student. At the meeting, tell her that you think you've been going about things the wrong way, and that you're frustrated, and that you believe she is frustrated, so you'd like to clarify what she expects from you. Specifically, what she needs to approve before you proceed with something and what you need to do on your own. You should suggest that you alter how you communicate with her that best suits you both. Perhaps you should schedule weekly or bi-weekly meetings, to be changed as necessary during the course of the thesis. At the end of that meeting (and each meeting), you should ask her (if she hasn't already told you) what you should have ready for the next meeting. Theoretically, she's approved your proposal, your research design, and other things. You should know what needs her approval before you should do it, and you shouldn't concern yourself with approval in between those things unless you run into a problem that stops you (not an insecurity, but a problem).

I would also suggest that you spend some time considering your personality and what you need from others, particularly your authority figures, for your emotional well-being, and how you go about meeting those needs. I don't mean this in a you're wrong way. I mean this in a self-awareness is useful way. Everyone is different, yanno? I have to tell my profs and advisers that they must be blunt with me, even if it seems rude and hurtful, because I rarely get hints. I get hurt feelings when they get upset because I never seem to realize "That's a great insight; thanks for sharing!" actually means "Shut the heck up and let someone else say something! Argh!" Anyway, it's about figure out what your needs are and then figuring out where your needs don't fit with your adviser's (and others) responsibilities (either for realsies or in their way of thinking), and then where to get those needs fulfilled. For example, if a person where to need a weekly dose of "you're doing fine, you're doing good work, don't give up!" and the adviser is the kind of person that thinks "just fix this one thing, see you next week" is high praise, that means cultivating a mentor somewhere else.

Personally? I've haven't had problems with negative and/or discouraging profs and/or advisers even though I've had my share of profs/advisers with bad attitudes. My master's thesis was a pitched battle with my thesis adviser. We fought tooth and nail from the get-go. She thought I was being a stubborn, condescending know-it-all arguing just to argue (or so she told me). I thought she was myopic and hypocritical. Our weekly meetings generally involved a lot of "you can't do that" and "this is worse than before" and "change this and this and this and..." Anyway. I have a completed thesis that's been defended and signed. My thesis adviser and I still talk often. She thinks I'm stuck up and I think she's wearing blinders.

I prefer my advisers to be hands-off. I come organized, prepared, and with a delineated list of expectations from both sides. I also know where to find the psychologist on campus for my perfectionist flare-ups. I don't accept "because I said so" and I feel free to argue. Any suggestion of change requires an answer a reason why. I don't think I have problems with advisers and/or profs simply because I really don't care if they like me or not. I need their professional approval and that professional approval is ultimately expressed by a signature on a thesis (and eventually a dissertation). I will modify my work and my behavior for that goal. Naturally, I like it when they give me personal approval, but it's not necessary. I find my personal approval elsewhere.

[St Andrews Lynx]

I am thinking maybe I AM doing things wrong. But that's why guidance is so important, especially it's my first time conducting such studies. However, instead of giving academic guidance (not hand-holding), she usually either says "you shouldn't do it" with no positive/constructive suggestion (and with very harsh tones), or  "you should do it" with no further explanations and is more like a commend that I must obey.

 

I'd agree with what DanieleWrites says in that your definition of "academic guidance" might be what she considers "hand-holding". 

It isn't clear from this what kind of questions you are asking. But if you were asking questions like "Should I repeat this study again, changing X variable?" or "Should I alter this chapter to include a brief discussion on Y?" then that probably counts more as hand-holding. They are questions concerned with the minutae of the project, that a bit of self-reflection or consultation with another senior group member could probably answer. 

 

What I would consider to be "academic guidance" would be asking more macro-level questions about the project. "I was thinking of changing the variables X, Y & Z in the study because I think otherwise __ will affect the results. Do you think this is an effective way to test the hypothesis?". A good way to assess whether your question is a hand-holding vs. academic guidance is if you think a fellow group member or postdoc could answer the question for you just as well as the advisor (often-times they can, especially if they've run similar studies or examined similar topics to you). You advisor clearly expects you to fill in the blanks after her commands. That makes sense if her main concern & responsibility is with the "macro perspective" of your thesis.

[quickoats]

Thanks for sharing your experience. And indeed your experience echoed what I have encountered before and had an opinion back then, but I have figured out that's part of the life of grad students. 

 

I think there're two more things that I should mention.. 

I'm not a member of my PI/advisor's lab and I'm in an interdisciplinary program, which means my advisor/committee members/their students come from different departments and mostly have their priority in their department. So I seldom have the chance to consult a "senior group member" because I'm not in a group. It's not saying I don't have friends to turn to. In fact, they're extremely friendly when I seek help from them. But I consciously keep such communication at a low frequency because I know they're extremely busy and, as pointed out by the advisor of one of my friends I turned to--"it's not your responsibility to help her (me)".  So I got this feeling of "all on my own" and "no one to turn to" when I got tons of questions (which can be answered not by just reading papers but, I think in most of the cases, from an experienced researcher).

 

Also, I think I haven't built a good method to communicate with my advisor from the beginning. Though I don't know why, at some point, she started to ignore, and later refuse, my request to meet. So I have no way to address my problems and report my progress to her in person, not to mention ask her expectations and explain my frustration. This, combined with my own problems (do not know much about the fields (it's a very interdisciplinary and ambitious study and now in thinking back, beyond my current ability), the procedures, academic norms, and procrastination), largely delayed the whole process, and now I do lack time to finish the whole thing if I wish to graduate on time (a friend of mine got an extension of graduation from her advisor early in this semester just in case things go beyond control. But I really doubt if my advisor would sign anything like this. But this I can totally understand and I really don't want to bother my committee members with a June/July defense). I can tell she's unsatisfied with all these delays and with good reasons. Gradually I grew fear in talking to her and dare not to ask her questions unless is very necessary, and that's why I made a mistake which she thinks should never happen if I had consulted with her first. The thing is, on the one hand, I do get hurt every time she's being harsh on me and refuse/ignore my requests (maybe it is the personality thing. I am very sensitive and have a tendency of desperation. But most of time I can have it under my control). On the other hand, I don't know what counts a small thing or big thing and what in her eyes must consult her with and what are just trivial stuffs that I should never bother her with.  The communication and relationship cannot be rebuilt given little time left. And if I were she, I would also think that a meeting about "expectation" at this point is the least important thing to do.

 

In any case, I will hold on with my current study and be cautious next time in choosing advisors. I have several choices at hand and I'm glad every POI I contacted seem so nice and I share with them some real research themes and interests. I do believe I'm passionate in doing research and I'll do my best to adjust and keep pursuing my passion. Thanks again for every suggestions and comments you kindly provided!

Edited March 4, 2014 by quickoats

[bsharpe269]

I really have to disagree with last couple posts. I know I posted above as well but what you mention doesn't seem like hand holding to me at all. It seems like normal questions that most people would ask an advisor. Yes, right now you are trying to develop into an independent researcher... that doesnt mean that you are one right now though!

 

My group meets once - twice a week. My professor and other group members give feedback at every meeting. Sometimes it is just "good work... keep reading and thinking" other times I will get specific advice like "Rerun these simulations like this and lets compare the results." From what I see from other students in my program, this is normal, not over the top. I am in a sciency field so I dont both my professor with questions regarding little things like trouble installing software or error messages in simulation. I go to senior grad students for this stuff or figure it out on my own. I do ask him to meet though if I want to discuss larger things like whether these seperate ideas that I read about in different papers could be related to each other somehow.

 

One of the great things about doing a masters (I am also in one) is that you see the importance in things like advisor personality where many undergrads jump into the highest ranked program they get into. I like an average to involved professor I think. I like to form a friendly relationships where I feel comfortable stopping by the office randomly with questions. I think you are looking for this type of advisor too. I think we should both just keep this in mind when choosing phd programs and ask grad students this sort of info.

[quickoats]

Thanks! It's at least emotionally encouraging. 

 

I know some departments/programs have this generally friendly, close and cooperative atmosphere. Some others are less so and it depends on different advisors. I had heard some not-very-positive words about my advisor before I came to her and I could see signs from her students--when being asked in a presentation, one of the students couldn't even tell why the things she's working on are meaningful. But I know some other students in my program received great help from their advisors (despite that this is an interdisciplinary program), some have group meetings every week, some cooperated with their advisors to produce several co-authors, and some have their advisors help with their research in a real hand-holding way--and it seems perfectly fine with the professors. I DO think I don't like this mode. I appreciate independence and freedom as much as being helped, respected and valued. In fact, I changed my research design (in a big way) from what my advisors had let me do because I thought such a design suited my research purpose better. I agree with bsharpe that it is a valuable lesson/advantage a MA student can learn to know what kind of advisors they want to work with in the process of becoming an independent researcher. Some professors might be wonderful and wonderful with other students, but it ultimately comes back to you and him/her to decide.

Edited March 4, 2014 by quickoats

[St Andrews Lynx]

I really have to disagree with last couple posts. I know I posted above as well but what you mention doesn't seem like hand holding to me at all. It seems like normal questions that most people would ask an advisor. Yes, right now you are trying to develop into an independent researcher... that doesnt mean that you are one right now though!

I don't necessarily disagree with this. I think the line between hand-holding and academic guidance varies between advisors. I know of some PIs who would be quite upset if a student DIDN'T consult with them on the minutae of their project before implementing a study. 

 

But in this case it looks like the PI is viewing most of what quickoats wants as "hand-holding". It does sound like you could make more use of the senior group members - remember that they've all been in your position as a newbie to the lab, and so understand that you will have plenty of questions & be unsure about stuff your PI deems "obvious". If say you cluster your questions and ask a bunch of them at once rather than interrupting them regularly throughout the day (and ask the people who aren't currently looking too busy!) then there shouldn't be any problems. 

 

When it comes to selecting the PhD PI, the best filter question you can ask is: "Do you see yourself as a hands-on or a hands-off kind of mentor?" If they self-identify (or if their group members identify them) as a hands-on PI, then that means you can ask them lots of questions and they will want to be closely involved in your daily research. A hands-off PI will be like your current advisor: they really only want to talk to you when you have results and a solid plan of action. 

[quickoats]

Thanks Andrews! 

 

As I mentioned before, my situation is a little bit complicated and I'm not in a group/lab and not really have any senior group member to turn to. But I will include this in my decision making process in choosing the PhD program.

Since many people do encounter and know of such hand-on and hand-off advisors, I come to believe that it's not about my advisor but the comparability between us two. I now know better what kind of advisor I want to work with (=being productive and comfortable when working with) and again, I will take this into consideration when choosing programs. 

As for the definition of "hand-holding" vs. guidance, I'm still not sure and will try to find out my understanding in my future study. I believe I value independence and freedom as much as being supported and I think I have shown abilities to work in such a way. 

[danieleWrites]

I totally feel ya on the interdisciplinary thing. I want to focus my research on the sociology of literature, but I'm coming up through the literature track. The literature-ologists don't know what to do with a sociology paper (once again: pitched battle. my data set is stuff that went out of fashion a century ago) and the sociologists don't know how to work with me (the soc. of literature isn't big these days). A literature-ologist once told me that I can't use Marx to examine precapitalist literature. Puh-leeeeeeeze. Well, to be fair, most of them only read the Gundrisse, and usually only a summary thereof. When I get around to my dissertation, I'll be doing work that my adviser doesn't have the first clue how to do. (Statistics? We don't need no stinking statistics! And the sociologist I'd hoped to have on committee retired in January. Le sigh.

If the lack of communication with her is causing problems in moving forward with your thesis, you may have to beard the dragon in her den. She has to work with you. You have to work with her. Swapping advisers at this point would be awful. Drop by her office hours, settle yourself in her visitor-chair, pretend her oh-gawd-I-don't-want-to-deal-with-this-now face is indigestion, and hammer out a communication plan. You're way cool with understanding her side of the story, but she likely completely misunderstands you. Because you're so open to working with her and you want from her what she wants to give you (guidance not hand holding), you aren't asking her for anything she's unwilling to give. I'm a big believer in clarifying when a breakdown in communications seems to be going on. It may not help her help you, but you can point to how you did try to work with her should you have to take the issue up with someone higher up the food chain (direct of graduate studies in the department, for example). An uncommunicative adviser at this point in the thesis process is not a good sign.