My #1 Committee pick... not so much anymore?

[lickcakes]

Alright, so I'm an MFA Art student, and it's time to choose a committee. This consists of the head and two other members.

 

I've been thinking of this one faculty member that has been, by far, the most helpful since I started in Fall 2013. I connect with him on many, many levels, beyond any other professor I've ever had. I was 99% sure about him until today, when I started talking to others about him.

 

Everyone says that he's really helpful and supportive at first, but later on, he is extremely difficult. Different grads from different years have said this. Choice quotes:

 

"He's cool at first, but at the last meeting, you'll be duking it out with him."

"If he is into your work that's good. But you have to be 1000% on top of your shit or he will rip you apart especially as chair"

"I wouldn't recommend him for you."

 

I guess it's hard to swallow, because he really understands and pushes the unorthodox approaches I take (there is another professor who is like that, but a bit difficult to communicate with, and isn't quite as helpful).

 

I'm now leaning towards not making choosing him as my head, and maybe even not being on my comittee at all. I don't want to be challenged much. I know that sounds lame, but the reasons for this are:

 

1. I don't deal with stress well at all.

2. I'm just trying to get through grad school - I realized that it's a bit too much for the person I am. I basically got in/received a scholarship because of my nutty ideas and risk-taking, not on my academic standing or research or anyhing that's a part of most grad programs, really. I basically made the application process an art project, and it actually worked.

3. I'm a hedonist, and doing more work than I need to frustrates me.

4. I'm really stubborn, and will be ignoring anything that's not absolutely required, and

5. I actually do push myself without outside help. There's no way I could have done this well by following my undergrad instructors' advice (harsh, but true).

 

The more of this I write, the more it seems like the guy shouldn't be my head committee dude. Maybe I should just have meetings with him only unofficially. I think I just kind of need to hear advice from all y'all other grads.

 

[TakeruK]

First of all, I think it's important to point out that while opinions of older graduate students are usually very valuable, they are not the same person as you and every individual will have a different experience. I think it is important to incorporate their advice/wisdom into your decision, but you should not just make a decision based on what they say. It sounds like you have thought long and hard about including this professor so don't just dismiss your previous thoughts right away! From your post, it really does sound like this professor would be a great match for you and perhaps you have had a different relationship with this professor than other students did.

 

I am saying this because personally, I feel that I subconsciously weigh recent information over past information, so for important decisions, I always try to take a step back and let all the info "age" a little bit before taking about it again. Maybe this is not you, but just a thought that might be helpful.

 

Second, I think it might be a good idea to review what the committee chair/head's role actually is. In most of my previous programs, the chair/head is actually the least important/influential person on the committee. Their job may just be to ensure committees follow protocol and often ask very little questions. At my last school, they don't even get to vote on whether to pass you or not (unless they need to break a tie). 

 

How about asking your supervisor for advice? Perhaps they have sat on a committee with this professor before and they would know how they behave in a defense.

 

And finally, I understand your reasons and it does make sense for you to ensure that you are not just creating extra work for yourself by choosing this professor. But it sounds like this professor understands your work the most and that might actually mean less work for you. I've defended undergrad and masters theses before, and honestly, some of the most annoying/pointless work/suggestions came from people who were less familiar with the field (especially if they are just familiar enough to ask interesting questions but not familiar enough to realise how difficult/complex but useless some of the work might be). I don't want to give too many details but one of the most frustrating moments of my MSc (i.e. related to your point #3) was from one committee member that wanted to me write about an alternate method to my work that was completely unrelated and not practical to the problem I was addressing in my thesis. So, replacing this professor with someone less familiar with your approach might not save you any work/frustration at all.

[dr. t]

Have you read this: http://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/faq-the-snake-fight-portion-of-your-thesis-defense ?

[St Andrews Lynx]

There is a distinction between committee members who ask hard questions, rip into your work and fail you/send you back for major revisions....and those who ask hard questions, rip into your work...but in the end only ask for minor revisions/give you a favourable result. If this committee member is the former (it's hard to tell based on what you've told us) then I'd avoid them, but if it's the latter then I'd put them on your committee. 

[fuzzylogician]

I would actually be very concerned about choosing a committee member/chair who everybody who is more experienced in the program is advising against. It's one thing if it's some people but not others, and especially if he is serving on other committees and those people further ahead who are actually working with him can attest that working with this person leads to favourable results. It's a whole other matter if basically everyone who has recently worked with him is advising against it. In that case, I would think very carefully before going against their advice. 

 

That said, working with someone with high standards is not a problem per se, it's more a question of how it manifests itself. If he has high demands but lets you pass if you meet them, that's one thing. If his requests just get more and more demanding and you basically can't meet them, that's a different story. You want someone who pushes you throughout the process but then lets you finish, not someone who can't let go unless everything is perfect (because things rarely are, and students should get to graduate with imperfect theses, if they've met a certain standard). From your post, it's not clear what kind of person you're dealing with, but that's the kind of question I would try and ask the people who have been advising you against having this person on your committee. Some people don't like working with demanding advisors, but that can be very beneficial for your work as long as you get along with them and, as I said, they know when to let go.

[lickcakes]

I can’t adequately thank you all for complicating my decision. And I mean that in the best way possible - I have so much to think about now, instead of just writing him off. Oh, and the snake thing’s pretty funny.

Here’s where the MFA in Art at my school seems to differ from most other programs:
• The requirements: make artwork, take required classes, write short summaries of 5 art articles each term, write a 2,500-word thesis, write a couple papers for school-sponsored scholarships, do assistantship work, and attend the occasional meeting. That’s it - no publishing, in-depth research, internships, or anything else. Hence, why I was able to get in, LOL.
• The theory read by most artists in the academic context are the same things everyone reads at every art school. And these theories are far-reaching enough to speak to any topic. So, there really are no actual specialties, just subjects that can be attached to Baudrillard, Foucault, Kristeva, etc. This means that any professor can understand my work within an hour. I’m even working to where non-artists will be able to understand what I’m doing.

Also,
- The head goes over the thesis in-depth (this is probably where the trouble lay), as well as generally being in charge of everything.
- I don’t think the professor is evil, he just really pushes to the limit.
- I might have a very different relationship with him than most.
- Though I think having him would push me further, I honestly feel that even doing a thesis is inconsequential for me. I’m not putting myself down - MFA in Art aren’t necessary for anything except finding a teaching job. I don’t know if it’s worth the effort to even be grilled about my work.

Since I have 6 people in mind for my 3 slots, I think I might even interview him about his approach to being in a committee. I have talked to him about school politics and other things in a straightforward manner with him before, and I don’t think it would be detrimental to try this.

So much research to do! LOL

[TakeruK]

Since I have 6 people in mind for my 3 slots, I think I might even interview him about his approach to being in a committee. I have talked to him about school politics and other things in a straightforward manner with him before, and I don’t think it would be detrimental to try this.

I think that's a really good idea!

[rising_star]

Interviewing committee members is a fantastic idea. In fact, that's the approach my MA advisor advises everyone to take. I had a person that a lot of people consider difficult on my dissertation committee. Two of my friends and I actually all had him on our committees, though for three very different reasons. People looked at me like I was crazy since I added this person later in my PhD. But, it worked out. He asked good questions at my defense, provided good feedback on chapters, and has been very supportive of everything since then. I guess what I'm saying is that if I'd listened to more senior people, I might've stayed away from this person even though he and I had a good working relationship going in.

 

By contrast, there was a person outside my department who, on paper, was the perfect external committee member for my PhD. He knew one area of my research way better than I did and I even took a grad seminar with him to beef up my knowledge in that area. But, before asking him to be on my committee, I asked my PhD advisor (their preference was to be asked before you asked anyone). This "perfect" person was immediately ruled out by my PhD advisor, who informed me that the two of them did not work well together on a committee. I never asked for the backstory but, I didn't ask that person to be on my committee. I was also super glad I hadn't asked before checking with my PhD advisor. So I guess my advice would be to run all 6 of the names on your list by your advisor and see who they think would be a good fit for the committee BEFORE you go asking around, doing interviews, etc.

[lickcakes]

Hmm, I'm really nervous about sending him an e-mail to figure this out, how does this sound? (not so sure about the second sentence)

 

"

The number of faculty I'm interested in serving on my committee outnumbers the available spots, with you being one such candidate. If possible, I would like to inquire about your potential as a member, whether that be in person or otherwise. I don't know if this is requesting too much from you, being that you're on sabbatical, but I thought it would be better to ask than not.

"

 

By the way, he's always happy to meeting me, and already has done so during his sabbatical (he's on campus only for a fortnight or so longer), as well as the summer.

I've armed myself with a few questions pertaining to his approach already...

[rising_star]

I wouldn't word it that way. Instead, say something about how you'd like to meet with them about the possibility of being on your committee.

 

That said, if this person is on sabbatical and people have warned you away, perhaps you should talk to your advisor first to get their opinion.

[TakeruK]

Agree with rising_star times infinity on this!!

[St Andrews Lynx]

"

The number of faculty I'm interested in serving on my committee outnumbers the available spots, with you being one such candidate. If possible, I would like to inquire about your potential as a member, whether that be in person or otherwise. I don't know if this is requesting too much from you, being that you're on sabbatical, but I thought it would be better to ask than not.

"

That's way too formal! Coming from a grad student the whole thing would sound a little pretentious. 

Go with the phrasing that Rising_star suggested. 

[lickcakes]

LOL, that's exactly the point, because it's so highfalutin, and that's not me at all. But I don't know if he would have understood that in e-mail form. And I do sometimes speak extremely formally, 'specially since that can be a bit unexpected. But I went with the suggestion.

 

I did ask about the possibility, and he said that he's "flattered" that I'm considering him at all - and he'd be happy to meet me regardless.

 

Sorry if I gave the wrong impression, he's a really nice, sweet, super neat human being, he is just a hard-ass when it comes to the meetings.

 

Also interviewed another professor that said he'd be happy to be on my committee. But I'm thinking that this guy might be much better as an outsider.

 

Thanks everyone, so very muchhhhhhhhhhhhhh