100% agree, this is the crux of the issue. Pretty much everyone I know, myself included, felt used and taken advantage of by their PhD advisors.
The combination of complete control over their students (mainly due to being able to decide when/whether they can graduate) and the pressure of tenure and the publishing race makes it no surprise that so many professors slide into abuse. Reporting abuse while still a student is obviously extremely risky, and even reporting it after graduating can cause a career setback by giving up the recommendation letter.
I wonder if it would be possible to expand the role of the PhD committee (which is currently pretty much relevant only for the thesis defense) to become a replacement for a single advisor.
I agree with all you said but am not optimistic about empowering the committee as a universal fix.
Power politics in academic departments were worse than any I’ve seen in my subsequent career. My committee was firmly under the thumb of my advisor. Any discussions I had with them about the pi being unreasonable were terse at best, and “we’ll talk in the next meeting when everyone is there” at worst.
Comments
100% agree, this is the crux of the issue. Pretty much everyone I know, myself included, felt used and taken advantage of by their PhD advisors.
The combination of complete control over their students (mainly due to being able to decide when/whether they can graduate) and the pressure of tenure and the publishing race makes it no surprise that so many professors slide into abuse. Reporting abuse while still a student is obviously extremely risky, and even reporting it after graduating can cause a career setback by giving up the recommendation letter.
I wonder if it would be possible to expand the role of the PhD committee (which is currently pretty much relevant only for the thesis defense) to become a replacement for a single advisor.
I agree with all you said but am not optimistic about empowering the committee as a universal fix. Power politics in academic departments were worse than any I’ve seen in my subsequent career. My committee was firmly under the thumb of my advisor. Any discussions I had with them about the pi being unreasonable were terse at best, and “we’ll talk in the next meeting when everyone is there” at worst.
Recommendation letters should be dropped as selection means. Leads to extreme subjectivity, unaccountability, and opens the door to abuse.