The Plight of the PhD Student - On the Verge of Quitting

[Mystix123 60]

*Stands up.* “My name is Justin. I am a Grad Student. Perhaps not for long...”

 

As many of you may know, I’m currently a Ph.D. student in Cognitive Psychology.

Many people may wonder what grad school is like. Perhaps you have friends or relatives wondering if this is a path for them. Perhaps your own children are debating this future. Perhaps you’re in academia and wondering what the current generation of students think their future looks like.

Grad school is a wonderful place for most grad students. It used to be for me. However, one's dream world can turn into a nightmarish hell very quickly.

 

What did academia in Canada used to mean?

Working with your heroes. Contributing knowledge to an area that fascinates you. A small financial struggle as a student. Post Doctoral studies where the pay is average. A tenure-track faculty position, which originally requires a lot of pressure to publish but quickly becomes a secure job where you have a lot of freedoms, get to pursue research which is interesting to you (without worry if it fails), and to shape the researchers of the future.

 

What does academia in Canada mean now?

The above, only a longer Post Doctoral studies with a lower than average pay...and now a lower chance of a tenure-track faculty position (as there is a trend of removing the “job security” aspect from new faculty positions, in order to reap the productivity benefits of the “publish a lot or we fire you” mentality).

 

However, what happens to those who aren’t like “most grad students”. Allow me to share my experiences over the past few months with you.

I was a highly productive graduate student. I’ve always carried 5-9 projects at the same time, worked 16+ hour days, 6-7 days a week. I finished my Master’s degree in under 1 year (it’s normally a 2 year program). I enjoyed it and my future in academia was bright. However, the projects which showed the greatest promise were not within the knowledge of my advisor, so he suggested that I switch universities to work with an expert in my field.

At this point, I moved and continued my Ph.D. in a well-funded lab, with a well-respected advisor. I continued working 16+ hours per day, 6-7 days per week, but my productivity was slowly dwindling away. I stopped enjoying research. I started to cut down my hours and projects. Things became worse. I’m now currently working 4-5 days per week and barely 8 hours per day. Why did things change so drastically?

 

Working with someone at the top of your field has a downside. What happens when your research begins to falsify theirs? What happens when you see so many flaws in your field and structure projects around addressing those flaws...but the authors of those papers are your advisor’s friends?

Contribution of knowledge is limited by what your advisor allows you to publish. One loses interest in research quickly when yet another project is described at a conference as “a future high impact paper which will guide future research”, but is put to an abrupt end and denied publication, simply because the findings are “problematic in light of past research”.

What happens when your advisor picks a “Golden Child” and wants you to be the “#2” (who does all of the work for the Golden Child), but you refuse? (See: http://www.phdcomics.com/comics.php?f=1019) I use the term "child" because the "Golden Boy" is female in my case.

What happens when your advisor poorly manages the funds for the lab (leaving your lab with very little resources compared to 1 year ago), in a department which already has financial issues...at a university which is “...facing significant financial problems”? (That is a quote from a statement by the Principal in 2009...the situation has gotten far worse since then. I believe the university is nearing bankruptcy, if it's not already there.)

What happens when you are 2 years into your PhD and have started 2 thesis ideas, to have them rejected upon examination of the initial data (alongside 4 publications and several conference presentations)?

What happens when you attempt to switch advisors, to find out that no combination of advisors actually have enough money to fund you? (Government funding is increasingly given to neural imaging labs and “rat labs”...whereas I’m in the behavioural and human performance area.)

The answers to all of these questions:

Prolonged and increasing frustration. Depression.

Your funding (to cover living expenses) being cut year after year (despite having a contract). I currently live on around $18,000 CAD each year (on a contract which is supposed to guarantee more). Yes, we make less than minimum wage, if you assume a 40 hour work week. My actual pay equated to just around $4 per hour last year. Oh, and this number also excludes the $7500 per year in tuition that we have to pay back to the university.

Another scholarship rejection due to your area of study not being interesting to the government for multiple reasons, such as a) your field not being ready for quality neuroimaging studies (as the behaviour itself isn’t well understood...but research councils increasingly want fund neuroimaging studies) and b) the importance of the field not promoted in Canada by your advisor and his friends (because they’re getting most of their funding from US resources). My "lack of recent publications" doesn't help my application either.

A short trip to the hospital to have a tumour removed from your stomach (turned out to be benign, but was caused by stress). Additionally, the need to return to the lab only 4 days after your operation, to an advisor who expects that you’re already well enough to show up every day of that week (and questions you when you need take 2 sick days that week).

Having your research abilities questioned (again) because your data, interpretation and explanation does not match the theory that your advisor supports.

Ultimately, being told that if you were to quit now, it would be “best for everyone”.

 

So, one might ask why I wrote this.

I’m not trying to say that my advisor is a horrible ogre to everyone. Only to those who don’t believe what he believes, and those who refuse to help his Golden Child get an easy Ph.D.

I’m not trying to say that graduate studies are a waste of time and money, because it’s really not. It’s a wonderful experience in most cases, which can be marketed correctly for a very good job. In fact, I’ve written replies against articles which claim that graduate studies are a waste of time (as they are often based on very weak cases of PhDs who gave up on becoming a professor around 6 months after graduation...without having started the required Post Doctoral studies).

I’m not looking for pity, because I’m much better off than some my friends who are stuck in comparable situations as myself, but lack the resources to escape (whether those are financial resources, contacts, or the ability to market themselves to a market much different than academia).

I am, in the words of a retiring professor who I frequently chat with, “a professional sh*t-starter”. My job in research is to simply expose reality for what it is, no matter who doesn’t like the results. In some cases (like this post), my job is to simply present a view which no one may have thought about (or thought existed).

...I also wrote this because it’s now almost 3 AM and I can’t sleep, for good reason.

 

What does my immediate future hold? Currently, fulfilling a request for a meeting with my advisor, who asks that I write a thesis proposal for my last idea before deciding whether or not to quit. This scenario may result in a middle-finger (or two) after he rejects the idea.

Likely, a hunt for a short-term job to hold me over until I can find an applied research job.

 

On the positive side: I’ll likely have more free time available for playing Sacred 2 and working on new projects for the Wiki.

[Knuckles 904]

Wow Justin....sounds like you're going through a pretty rough time....sounds like you and your 'advisor' just don't see the same things in the same light. I would hate to see you quit though. It sounds like you're almost done with formal education and having a PhD on your resume has to be a good thing. How much longer do you have to go?

 

I guess at this point switching universities isn't an option. If helping the 'golden child', distasteful as it may be, helps you reach an end goal, is that something you could put up with for awhile. I know it sounds like you'd be selling yourself out, and I guess you would be. I've just never been in a postion like that. I probably would have been expelled by now lol. But finishing post-grad studies just sounds too important to walk away from now.

 

Now I've never got a masters or been a grad student so I don't know what's involved. But if leaving negatively impacts your future then I think you have to find a way for you and your advisor to get on same page. Or if it's simply too much, then use whatever resources available at the university and see if there are any other opportunities out there like another school or research lab.

 

Wish I knew more about the whole thing...I have a feeling my advice may simply be not applicable to your situation. I do hope everything works out for you and wish you the best of luck with the upcoming meeting

 

Hang in there

[Mystix123 60]

I assure you that your advice makes sense, as it's what I'm debating about and pursuing.

 

I would definitely like to finish my PhD. I'm 2-3 years away from finishing it. Unfortunately, he's shot down all of my thesis ideas so far, and hasn't provided an alternative that he likes when he sees the data, so my chances of finishing are dwindling quickly.

 

As for helping the Golden Child: There's no promise of a PhD in return for working on that project (as she'll get first dibs on all of the data, which could potentially leave me without anything)...and she's a real piece of work. That topic is another rant (including the 6 months that I was forced to work on a project with her...which was denied publication).

She's in her 4th year of Master's (it's supposed to be a 2 year program) and hasn't finished a single project on her own. She'll need a Master's thesis and a PhD thesis, from a field that she's never done any work in before. The only reason why she's in our lab is because her original advisor was going to kick her out of grad school for lack of productivity (and my advisor thinks he can "save her", for lack of a better term).

 

If I'm looking to enter the job market, a PhD might make it more difficult to find a job (over-qualification for certain jobs, incorrect specialization for other jobs). I might also find less offers which will lead to a secure job, as I'll be potentially closing off options from contacts that I have right now (various companies, law firms and accounting firms in Toronto).

In reality, I may make more money in the long run if I quit grad school now and work.

 

As for university resources: I have appointments booked with a few administrative-types to discuss my situation and what can be done. This wouldn't be the first time a grad student has been put in this position (most have quit in the end), and I'm not the only one from my department who has an appointment booked (4 of my friends will also be quitting grad school before September for similar reasons).

 

This is what's making the decision much more difficult: There's no path which is clearly the better option. There's a lot of "might" and "maybe" on every path.

[Ysne58 236]

It can be a problem when your research doesn't match your advisor's "reality". There are no easy answers. Best of luck, however this resolves.

[Thorin Oakshield 260]

Allthough I don't have any grad, I've been into a situation which is more or less similar to what you're experiencing.

 

I graduated my education in 1990, got a draftnote not long after that and because of it, wasn't able to find me a job; simply because a company had to take me back after serving 14 months. Eventually I did find myself a job, which was way below my education, but I took it because sitting at home and living of social wellfare isn't my kind of cookie. And my employee didn't have to take me back after serving, meaning I was free to roam the jobmarket after those 14 months in the military. However, by the end of October I got a note of the DoD, telling me I didn't have to serve into the military, because there were already enouh draftee's from my year of birth. By then the job market was basicly empty, meaning I got stuck in a "temporary job".

I spend the next 7 1/2 months doing that job, looking for anything I had studied for, until I eventually called my former decan for help. He offered me an add of a company looking for Process Operators; which was something I had studdied for. So I applied by phone, wrote the letter the same evening and within 2 weeks I was employed there.

The first months were hard. Partially because of my arrogance - I had the theoretical knowledge and a better education, so I was looking down at those a lot longer as I was - partially because I couldn't get allong well enough with my shiftleader, partially because I was unfamiliar with the machinery used.

Eventually after working for 4 months there, I got called to the office for an evaluation. In short: if I didn't improve, my contract would be terminated after 2 months, meaning my year-contract would have become a half-year contract. If things did improve, I would get another evaluation after 8 months.

Things didn't work out with that shift leader, so after another 4 months I had my 2nd evaluation. Main reason for this conversation was a major run-in I had with my shiftleader, embarrasing him in front of 20 people. In the 15 years after that event, he never forgave me. his time I was given the choice to have the contract being termintated at the end of the year, or setting up a completely new function inside the company; although that also meant I had to change shifts and doing all kinds of FECAL MATTER!ty jobs. Since the first would mean I had to drop back to 70% of minimum wages, I chose the latter; knowing I was able to do my job right and I certainly would proof it to them. I knew I as kicked upstairs. But that always is a lot better as being kicked out.

 

The next 10 years I worked as hard as I could; occasionally making 16 hours a day to get the job done in both ways of speaking. When the company began to introduce an electronic inventory system, I set up a similar system in Excel, which I eventually had to give up because my replacements couldn't work with it.
When one of our female operators had a day off, had her vacation or was ill, I was the person to replace her. I was even chosen to be the once training her replacements, as officially I wasn't part of the production team anymore. Eventually I became her replacement after she had an accident, meaning I was once more a Process operator. And those 10 years of doing another job, also helped me to become a better operator, as this time I managed to improve the production process, resulting in a higher efficiency, thus more profit for the company.

Yet, my new shift leader never trusted me completely; although I often gave me the most dreadful jobs.
Up until last year.

Being in the convenience food sector, the company I work for has suffered quite some financial losses. The CEO responsible for it, left march last year, claiming "he had found new challenges" - read: a far better paycheck - and estimates were we'd end up about 100K Euro's in the red.
The last months of the years is also the time we're quite busy with seasonal backings; which happen to be produced at my production line. Two years ago I managed to show my shift leader that my idea of recycling scrap pastry was more beneficial, as it meant less changing of the machine values.
This year I've made several changes to the production process, resulting in a high quality improvement. In fact, the quality improvement was so high, the company was able to make 0.5M in profit, thus turning a 100K loss into a 400K profit.

 

Now if you wonder what this has to do with you, here's the punchline:

 

If you quit now, you'll always regret it because you know you can do it.
When applying to a job, you have to proof yourself double, because you give people the impression you quit the moment things work against you.

What you can do is to confront your advisor.
When he turns down your thesis, ask him what he wants you to do, because he's turning your thesis down so far. If he replies with "that's up to you", ask him why he has turned down your previous thesis-idea's, if you have to make the decission.
In case things are about to get out of hand, make sure you got all documented. I hope you have saved your previous thesis-idea's because you might need them.

Make sure that no matter what happens, he's the one sending you off, instead of quitting. Even if he suggests you have to quit, tell him into his face you'll never quit; thus forcing him to send you away.
He'll most likely spread word you're a trouble maker; reason why you need those previous thesis-idea's. Other researchers might be interested in them and you can use them as proof of your intelect; thus showing your advisor's wrong.

 

As for that "Golden Girl", help her when needed, but document every thing you do for her. She's the kind of person who's climbing the career ladder by bootlicking her superiors and kicking down those below her. If I read it correctly, you're ahead of her, despite she's having a 2 year headstart. If you manage to get your Ph.D you'll run into her sooner or later. Then it's the time to show everyone the kind of person she really is: someone who uses other person's ideas for her own benefit. Eventually she'll hit a wall, because the moment she has to bring up a good idea in an emergency, she fails. Not to mention: using your idea's is plagiarism; which is a legal offence. And since your advisor approves the situation, he's involved in it as well. However you need to have evidence for it.

 

As for switching advisors and the lack of funding: There are two solutions to that. One is to find a sponsor, but you'll need your previous thesis-ideas for it to show them of your capabilities.

The other one is to find a (part-) time job.
Although it isn't the best solution, because it means you need to cut down the time you use to study; it shows your future employer two things. A) you won't quit easily, no matter the problems you encounter; B) you're prepared to get a job below your education, just to get to your final goal. An employer prefers that over a couch-potato.

 

 

Thorin

[Mystix123 60]

Thanks for sharing Thorin.

 

If you quit now, you'll always regret it because you know you can do it.

This is probably the concept that bothers me the most right now. Finishing is just in reach, but it keeps on getting pushed further and further back.

 

When applying to a job, you have to proof yourself double, because you give people the impression you quit the moment things work against you.

Thankfully, I have contacts who are willing to offer me jobs in companies (some of whom have discussed hiring me before/after graduation). In one case, one contact's son quit medical school because of a similar issue with his residency supervisor, so they'll completely understand where I'm coming from.

 

What you can do is to confront your advisor.

When he turns down your thesis, ask him what he wants you to do, because he's turning your thesis down so far. If he replies with "that's up to you", ask him why he has turned down your previous thesis-idea's, if you have to make the decission.

His defense to turning down the other 2 thesis ideas is simply "I don't think they'll work as a thesis". Unfortunately, as he's a well-established, tenured professor...this is considered a sufficient reason. It also still leaves the responsibility on me to find a topic which we agree on.

 

In case things are about to get out of hand, make sure you got all documented. I hope you have saved your previous thesis-idea's because you might need them.

Done and done. And I mean done!

I definitely have my previous (and 2 current) thesis ideas saved. I also have all of the data and stimuli for the previous 2 thesis topics (as well as the written proposals). Paranoia of losing any data comes in handy.

 

Make sure that no matter what happens, he's the one sending you off, instead of quitting. Even if he suggests you have to quit, tell him into his face you'll never quit; thus forcing him to send you away.

While I see where you're coming from, it's the opposite in academia. If a professor lets you go against your will, that means you weren't cut out for graduate school (aka: weren't productive). Its actually better to quit having officially stated that you chose to withdraw for some other reason (medical, financial, family), as those leave the door open to re-join the university at a later date, or go elsewhere with minimal issues.

 

He'll most likely spread word you're a trouble maker; reason why you need those previous thesis-idea's. Other researchers might be interested in them and you can use them as proof of your intelect; thus showing your advisor's wrong.

Again, another example of something completely contradictory between business and academia (or at least Psychology): "Professional sh*t-starter" is actually a great title to have. My Master's advisor had a saying: "It's our job to push science forward...and to weed-out bad science." (By "bad science", he means things like faulty experiments and incorrect interpretations of data, which can lead public knowledge astray. For example: The studies which concluded that vaccines can cause autism turned out to be mistaken.)

Some professors may not want to work with a sh*t-starter like myself, but those professors are far, few and usually don't have a lot of grant money anyways.

 

As for switching advisors and the lack of funding: There are two solutions to that. One is to find a sponsor, but you'll need your previous thesis-ideas for it to show them of your capabilities.

The other one is to find a (part-) time job.

Unfortunately, I've looked at both options already.

I've been offered industry sponsorship in return for running some applied experiments which they would like data for. Essentially, they would like to hire me, but don't have the money to give me a position as an employee. However, they can afford "grad student wages".

However, all contracts of that sort require the permission of the advisor, and my advisor does not support industry involvement (including, in the case of his last PhD student, seeking industry employment after graduation).

Also, my university does not support part-time graduate studies (I asked), so that's not an option either.

 

The university does not have a good track record of providing student-friendly solutions to student-advisor conflicts.

 

I had a lunch meeting with a friend of mine (who is currently in a Post Doctoral research position). He's actually looking to make a similar move, so we're looking to help each other out as much as possible.

Also, the aforementioned "last PhD student of my advisor" apparently had similar issues with my advisor. We're going to have a conversation over the phone on searching for applied research jobs, as well as potential ways to handle my advisor.

 

Basically, everything comes down to the meeting on next week.

[wolfie2kX 528]

Ya know, I think I know why your professors are putting the kibosh on your thesis ideas. It's really rather simple when you look at it.

 

You mentioned something to the effect of your ideas - should they be proven true, would prove them wrong somehow.

 

Stable datum: NO ONE likes to be made wrong. Especially if they built their career on a given idea.

 

Example: Back in the day, everyone "knew" earth was the center of the universe. And yet, various astronomers rose to challenge those notions and were persecuted for such "heresy". Today, we know the Sun is the center of the solar system, not the Earth. We know that our solar system is nowhere near the center of anything - let alone the universe. Our solar system is merely a 3rd rate spec on a spiral arm of a fairly typical galaxy that's just one of many other galaxies out there.

 

The clergy persecuted bold thinkers like Galileo, Copernicus and others like him because they dared to contradict their teachings that the Earth was the center of everything. If one tenet of their teachings was proven wrong - then that opened up the proverbial can of worms that lead to the possibility of doubt about other things they were teaching. And that wouldn't do good for the traditional 10% tithings the clergy relied on for their income.

 

The same can be said for the Flat Earthers. Back in the day, everyone 'knew' it was flat. And should you go too far from the coast, you'd drop off of the edge. And yet, people like Magellan, Columbus, and others eventually proved them hopelessly WRONG.

 

Sadly, there are still a few 'tards out there who think the Earth IS flat - in spite of all of the evidence to the contrary.

 

That said... If you plan to buck the system with ideas that go contrary to the ones put forth by the powers that be, you best be prepared to take abuse... LOTS of it.

 

Even Einstein was originally laughed at - at least, until his theories were proven.

[Ysne58 236]

Unfortunately, Wolfie is all too right.

[Etherian 76]

Well...once again, wolfie rises up with a unspoken truth.

 

There is a reason why the Sheep go with the current, not against it.

 

Against the grain, one must have resiliance. A LOT of it. Deep fortitude if you will.

 

Never give in, never give up. Even if you have to play by the rules to rise up later. So be it...

 

I remain,

[Thorin Oakshield 260]

After reading Mystix reply, my first thought was: "I thought the purpose of science was to advance by proving the other guy / gall was wrong?"

Was about to post it too.

Then I read Wolfie's post............

 

 

 

 

Wolfie is right though. Most people don't like to be proven wrong. Especially if their work has a significant importance. What your advisor is overlooking - if this rule applies to him - is that your work won't be possible if you didn't question his work. If he can't accept being criticized in the first place, he shouldn't have accepted you as his pupil. Not to mention that he fails to see that resisting your idea's only makes things harder to him. If your theories are true, he'll be known as the "guy that resisted the idea's of a brilliant scientist".
If he, on the other hand, reaslizes you might be right, helps you and it turns out your idea's were correct, he might become known as the "guy who admitted his wrong and helped a brilliant scientist to proof it." People like Einstein, Madamme Curie, Oppenheimer and many others did the latter. As for those who did the first: I can't come up with a name, since they're forgotten. And there's a reason for it.

Now for that other student: I think you only need to ask him / her one question. Being: "Were you having problems with X because you had theories which proved him wrong?"
I wager the answer is "yes". If it is, you know what to do.

Thorin

[Mystix123 60]

Indeed. I've never hidden the fact that this is why I believe this is happening. The attitude extends not only to his work, but the work of his friends (and I've been denied publication for both). It's simply about protecting the theory that he supports, no matter how much credit for another significant finding he would get (as his name would be on the paper, and he would likely get most of the credit for it).

 

The behaviour in general isn't scientific, which is a general problem for our field. Our field has so much "bad science" (due to this issue being wide spread) that any new ideas will likely attack the work of someone else, so it's very hard to do anything that's both new and interesting without conflicting with someone.

However, this is part of science. As Wolfie's examples suggest, this situation has occurred from the beginning of science. My undergraduate advisor spent his whole career disproving his PhD thesis (which included helping students who find contradictory evidence). Part of my former hopes in academia was to find a young researcher who comes along and challenges (or disproves) some of my work. I was hoping it would be within the span of my career too, so I can shake their hand and offer them a Post Doc.

So, while part of me understands why my advisor is reacting this way, part of me doesn't and 100% of me shows no sympathy towards it.

 

Fortunately, the final idea which I'm proposing as a thesis lacks my trademark confrontational approach. Ideally, it will provide the data for a group of us to create 1-2 pieces of software that can be sold to companies (and we'll get some royalties for a long while). It will also get me a PhD and I can move on to get a secure job with a research company. As I've discussed with my Post Doc friend: Choices being made with funding and tenure-track positions are going to turn the dream of academia into a nightmare (at least within Canada, and for our generation of researchers).

However, my final thesis proposal also completely removes any and all possible variations in interpretation (the data from the 1st phase will tell us what to do in the 2nd phase, and the data in the 2nd phase will not be flexible in interpretation), so I'm not confident that he's going to think that this is a "safe" move to make.

 

Thorin:

As for my advisor's last PhD graduate, she didn't support a theory which conflicted with his. I think she supported the same theory actually. However, crucial experiments turned out with opposite results, which created powerful evidence against his theory. She wanted to publish this data, and that ultimately led to her PhD taking 7 years to finish in return. I believe she had to change thesis ideas (like I'm pursuing) in order to finish entirely.

The same thing is happening to a current lab-mate. While he supports my advisor's theory, his last experiment turned out in a way they did not predict (which is, again, powerful evidence against the theory). He has to re-structure his entire thesis to exclude that experiment, so he'll be spending a 6th year in PhD. If he was allowed to include that data into his PhD (which he easily could have), then he would have graduated already.

 

Edit: Etherian, in regards to "Never give in, never give up. Even if you have to play by the rules to rise up later. So be it..."

My Master's advisor originally gave me this advice 2 years ago (play by the rules now for the PhD, tear the field a new one later). Unfortunately, he's had to withdraw that advice this past summer (because of the current state of academia in Canada). Most PhD students of my cohort are being told to prepare for industry jobs, because funding changes and attempts to remove tenure-track positions are going to remove job security from all new professors (at least in Psychology). This will eventually correct itself (I believe the UK attempted something similar and they're in the process of reversing it now, which will take years), but my cohort will either be nearing retirement age or will have already retired.

Unfortunately, it's basically "now or never" for my cohort, and most of my friends are receiving the support to make it "now", as this could open the doors for them to demand job security upon applying for jobs (otherwise they'll go to another university, perhaps in another country, which will offer them job security). We're in need of the high-impact publications now, to secure a job for our future.

Edited February 23, 2013 by Mystix123

[Mystix123 60]

The end of yet another chapter.

"The career path I seek can no longer be pursued at [this university]." - Excerpt from the e-mail I just sent to my advisor this morning

 

I may be able to salvage a publication out of the past 1.5 years, as I've been working on another project with the professor who brought up the term "Professional sh*t-starter", and he wants to publish it when it's finished. Of course, nothing that I've done with my advisor will ever see the light of day.

 

I'm applying to another university to start a new PhD in Human-Computer Interaction (hopefully in the realm of "the effect of virtual environments on perception and cognition"). I have 1 month to create a rough research proposal, so I'll be doing a lot of reading over the next week or two.

I also have a few job options in Toronto, which I'll take if the salary is impressive enough.

 

Despite having future alternatives, I haven't been sleeping well lately (around 2-3 hours each night).

I've been having dreams about the whole situation (I rarely remember my dreams) and I wake up in a fairly foul mood from each of them. They usually revolve around one of two themes: "This is something that I can do, but I'm being completely screwed out of it." and "My friends will be able to finish their PhD and publish, I won't." Both, of course, involve lack of control over my life, but an element of jealousy in the latter case. What misfortune that I managed to pick the one advisor in the whole department that acts this way.

It's to the point where I don't want to sleep some nights (like tonight), but fatigue eventually wins that argument.

 

However, in the end, I keep in mind what the last graduate from my lab said in our conversation: "If I'd known I was in for 7 years of hell working with [my advisor], I wouldn't have even gone to grad school."

 

So, this is my current reality...and what a reality it is.

[Thorin Oakshield 260]

I'm not gonna comment about what I think of you leaving your current advisor, as I've done that in one of my previous posts.

However, I do hope you're gonna proof his wrong by getting that new PhD in record time.

 

Go give them hell, mate!

 

 

Thorin

[Ysne58 236]

You need solid good qualify sleep. The negative health impacts of too little sleep are well documented.

[Mystix123 60]

So, we had our last meeting today, with a mediator. It went to hell pretty quickly. My advisor had an agenda to fulfill (chewing me out) and he declared that he's not willing to write a letter of reference for the other university that I'm applying to...so I had no reason to be polite to him anymore.

Simply put: 1.5 years of bottled up rage released. The mediator sat there in horror, concluding that this was not going to work.

 

My advisor and I both got everything out in the open, so we were able to look each other in the eye and shake hands. He wished me all the best and hopes that I find a career that matched the enthusiasm I showed when I first arrived.

So, I think things ended relatively well. Granted, we never want to see each other again.

 

I've submitted my papers and I am free to leave.

 

As a side note: After that meeting, it feels like a huge weight has been lifted from my shoulders. I now feel that I can leave this behind me without any regrets.

 

On to new opportunities...which will pay more than $4/hour!

[wolfie2kX 528]

Oh come now. Of course you want to see him just ONE more time.. At his funeral.. So you can dance on his grave.

[Ysne58 236]

:snicker:

[Ysne58 236]

This video was posted by another friend of mine when she was asked why she quit, under similar circumstances (this did happen in the United States).

 

[Mystix123 60]

Haha! That's pretty funny.

I know a few people in the "rat labs" who are going through a similar situation (a project that looked promising, which is turning out null results). They'll thankfully get their Master's degree out of it though, and will change projects for their PhD.

 

I ended up going to breakfast with my undergraduate advisor (who is now retired).

He was able to guess exactly why I was leaving (despite not giving him any details), simply based on which theory my former PhD advisor supports. Apparently, fanatical behaviour towards that particular theory is rampant, and my undergrad advisor was hoping that some sort of compromise would allow me to finish my PhD.

He recommended not abandoning research for industry altogether, but if I take a year off to change my focus, it couldn't hurt. In the meanwhile, he's trying to put another research group together, and would like me to join.

 

The current plan that I'm following is to find a research job in Toronto (I've applied for quite a few, but I also have the administration/management jobs as my back-ups) and do some research for publication on the side. Sounds like a lot of work, but I'm used to more.

 

It's strange to not identify as a "grad student" anymore...

Edited March 15, 2013 by Mystix123

[Ysne58 236]

It is pretty funny. I hope it helps to know just how not alone you are in this. It sounds like it's pretty common.