Help! Need Advise about Advisor / Dropping out?

[HopefulElephant]

I'm in my third year of my PhD in English working on my oral lists right now. Unfortunately, my advisor and I are not getting along. She doesn't think my work is up to par, and made it clear that if I don't "learn how to write better" that she worries I will not be ready to move on to the dissertation stage (I have taken this to mean that she thinks I should drop out if I can't prove I'm good enough). She told me this in June.

This semester I've been working on a paper to prove to her that I belong here. I'm in a publication workshop led by our department chair, and we've been workshopping this paper all semester. I expressed my concerns about my advisor and my writing to the department chair, and she reassured me that she thinks my writing is on track and that it is PhD level work. 

Today I met with my advisor after she finally read a full draft of my paper. She hated the paper. She doesn't think that it's where it needs to be. It's hard to tell all the details without talking about the paper, but she basically thinks that it needs a lot of work. And, that's okay with me. I'm okay with getting criticism. What I'm not okay with is the way in which she delivers it--she treats me like I'm dumb. It's almost as if I'm offending her with my bad writing. During our conversation she asked me why I was in grad school and I gave several reasons. She followed up by saying that I should reconsider being in grad school, especially with the job market. She also told me that perhaps her and I are just not on the same page and that perhaps I would work better with someone else. 

I'm smart enough to know that being told that I should consider dropping out and having an advisor suggest different committee members is pretty much the worse news someone can get in grad school. Clearly I'm doing something wrong. I'm willing to face that. What keeps me going is that other professors like my work. The only issue is that they're not in my direct field of study so I would have to change my focus. I'm willing at this point to do that because I want to finish the degree. I'm sending the same paper I gave to my advisor to two other people to see what they think, and that will largely be my determining factor for staying. 

At any rate, I guess I'm just curious if this is common--could it just be that my advisor has a different standard and we're just not seeing eye to eye? Or should I drop out like she says? 

At this point obviously I can't work with this advisor anymore. It's sad because I have to shift my area of study. Oh well. I don't want to be naive or defiant. I don't want to go against my advisor simply because I am invested and am emotional...I just need to get advice from someone outside of my department. Any help would be appreciated. 

 

Edited November 30, 2016 by HopefulElephant

[AP]

Can you switch advisors?

[knp]

Yeah, I'm not sure how much you'd have to change your topic to work with someone else. Is there really nobody else in your department with even mediocre subject knowledge who could serve as your advisor? If you're very, very alone in a small department—working on Old English in department where literally every other faculty member besides your advisor studies the twentieth century, and nobody even did a comps field in medieval literature—I see your point about having to either change your project or drop out. But don't faculty advise dissertations on topics quite far afield from their own research like, all the time? It sounds like your old advisor is bad news, I agree, but I'm not understanding why the new advisor would require starting your research over on something different. Even if you work on something really particular, I would hope you could get a broad base of curious committee members at your school whose research even has a tangential connection to your own, and then seek out an outside committee member on the Particular Thing. (But are outside committee members universal? Here, they're encouraged, but I suppose I don't know if every department allows them.)

[HopefulElephant]

Yes, I can change advisors. I don't think my topic is super specific, but in a change of advisors I'd be going from studying Victorian literature to studying 18th century literature. I imagine that the 18th century person could help if I wanted to do a chapter on Victorian literature. But it seems like it wouldn't make sense to do an entire dissertation on Victorian literature with the 18th century advisor. At this point, I've mulled it over quite a bit and I'm okay with doing 18th century literature because I care more about the theoretical framework that I'm working with and can do that in any century. So, yes, I can switch advisors...that is if the 18th century person reads my paper and thinks that I am in an okay place to continue with the program. 

I guess I'm just so shaken up about everything it's hard not to feel like a failure. I mean, if you're advisor tells you to drop out, how can you continue? This doesn't seem like something most grad students face. It's just tough to know what to do. 

[serenade]

Really sorry to hear this, OP. I can imagine how devastating it would be to hear something like that coming from your advisor. We all struggle with imposter syndrome and comments like that can really kick it into overdrive, I know. But since other professors in your program affirm your work, I suspect that your advisor may be over reacting here. My suggestion would be to sit down with one or two other professors that do like your work and ask them for candid opinions of how you're doing academically and if they seem affirming, then come up with a plan to switch advisors. Not ideal, I know, but in the end, I think it's worth it to work with someone who works well with you. 

[HopefulElephant]

Thanks, serenade. That's exactly it--we all feel like imposters, and I felt like it was confirmed that I am one. 

At any rate, I have a little bit of an update and would like more advice if anyone has any. As of now, the other people on my committee think my work is fine. I met with someone outside of my committee to see if he was willing to be on it, and he said yes. But, the DGS (who is on my committee, and is married to the person who I want off of my committee) doesn't think I should kick the 19th century person off of my committee. She thinks I should just rearrange the committee so that someone else on the current committee is the main advisor. That would mean that I would still have to do an orals list in the spring with the person I want kicked off, as well as make it through the orals exam, and then as a second reader she could still veto my dissertation chapters in the future. It's causing me so much anxiety to think that she would remain on my committee. 

I get that I would be switching my area of study, and perhaps the DGS is trying to help me keep studying "what I love," but it seems like I should put my self-worth as the most important thing and just re-arrange my committee. Thoughts? 

[HopefulElephant]

*correction, not "re-arrange my committee" but "replace the one committee member with a new one, as well as have one of the current committee members be the new main advisor"...if that makes sense. 

[fuzzylogician]

I personally would think that working with people who make you feel good about yourself should be your top priority, even if it means changing advisors and/or topics. You can't do good work if you're constantly anxious, and frankly the PhD is not worth ruining your mental health. Especially since you seem to have others' agreement, I would try to find a way to diplomatically insist on getting this person off your committee who is causing you so much stress; I can't tell if the DGS is trying to help by trying to allow you to keep your topic or if they have some additional motive, but it's not clear what good can come out of keeping someone on your committee who's already expressed displeasure with your work. So yes, I would switch.

[ZeChocMoose]

Since you are changing topics, this makes it fairly easy/justifiable/understandable to explain the change in committee members and let the 19th century person go.  Don't keep a toxic person on your committee.  Just don't.  There is no benefit to doing this especially given the behavior of this person to you in the past. You'll feel a lot better once you make the clean break and you can move forward with a group of people who at the least are neutral towards you and at the best will be supportive.

I would also be concerned that the DGS is not going to be that supportive/helpful if you have problems with the 19th century person in the future given that hu is married to this person. That seems like a fairly large conflict of interest that most people will find it difficult to navigate even if they try to not let that affect their judgement of the situation. I also have watched readers on people's comprehensive exams try to actively fail the person so the potential for horrible outcomes seems too high IMO to keep this person on your committee. 

Edited December 12, 2016 by ZeChocMoose

[HopefulElephant]

Thank you both for the advice. That was my gut feeling too--get the 19th century person off my committee. I'm not sure what the motive is of the DGS, but I don't see why I can't switch things. I agree, my mental health is the most important. Thank you for reassuring me I'm not insane to want to move my committee in a different direction! 

[HopefulElephant]

I hate to keep beating a dead horse, but this whole scenario is so depressing. I can't help but keep thinking that all of my options are sucky. I guess deep down I don't want to give up studying the 19th century. I've been so negatively affected by this person on my committee that I'm willing to give it up, and I just hope I won't regret it down the line. I just keep turning all the different scenarios over and over again in my mind. But I guess ultimately I just have to keep going with the degree, and it's better to have a supportive committee. le sigh. 

[rising_star]

Kicking the 19th century person off your committee isn't the same as giving up studying the 19th century. You can still study something tangentially, whether now or in your future career, that isn't the main focus of your work now. If you really want to be prepared to teach and write about the 19th century, you could keep that person on through your exams, then drop them for the dissertation. That would enable you to include the 19th century as one of your minor fields when framing your research and teaching abilities in job applications. 

Grad school can be quite depressing at times. You just have to keep going until you get through it.

[HopefulElephant]

Thanks for the suggestion, rising_star. I've thought about going that route (keeping her on till after my lists). But, the way that she does the lists is that I have to write four mini papers, have four meetings with her (rumor is that they're like interrogations) and then have to pass my oral exam. I just don't see how I'll make it through, just on a psychological level.