
Ask HN: Should I quit graduate school to avoid a bad advisor? - throwaway2439
I am eager to quit but I feel like I might need to be on good relations with him, otherwise, he won&#x27;t leave a good word in for me for anyone who contacts him as a reference. I don&#x27;t have many references because, I&#x27;m in graduate school. Let&#x27;s just say quitting in anyway would not be good for our relationship given his personality.<p>I could suck it up for three more years (granted I graduate in three, he&#x27;s not the best at science or getting us funding, he&#x27;s mostly a politician) and it&#x27;s too late to switch groups without wasting an additional 3 years. Sticking with it  seems like my best option right now, unless I am wrong and I do have other options.
======
GlueChemist
I am set to finish my PhD in organic chemistry in about 6 months... I could go
on for a while but, in retrospect it seems like a pretty huge mistake. (I love
it and the work, but the bills are coming due, and going into the post-doc or
adjunct prof pool seems like a high risk gamble to me.)

You seem to be at a point that is just about halfway. Can you master out? (you
can likely apply to a different program with a masters if you really want the
PhD.) You also mention that he is bad at science and funding, but good a
politicing. So unless you want to be a raging socialite, it does not seem he
has much to offer you.

If you do stick with it -- network heavily! This was my biggest mistake, and
seems to have put a real damper on any future prospects. My other mistake was
believing that STEM shortage garbage, so make sure that the degree has some
actual value. Otherwise you may find yourself teaching yourself programming
and looking at job threads on HN.

Good luck!

In short: probably.

------
ColinWright
_Added in edit: Assuming it 's not possible to change advisor ..._

You have to make a decision: Quit, or take control of your own education and
finish.

You will need your supervisor to deal with the administrative aspects of your
degree, so you can't avoid him entirely. However, you can limit your contact
with him to that role alone. However, you _will_ need someone to supervise
your academic requirements.

So you need to find someone with whom you can talk about your work, and
possibly with whom you can collaborate. A supervisor suggests problems to work
on, suggests material to read and understand, monitors that you're working
hard enough, checks on your progress, and if your progress isn't adequate,
suggests modifications to the current schedule/scheme of work.

You will need to do almost all of that yourself, or find someone else to
collaborate with to accomplish those academic aspects. But it can be done, and
if you succeed it becomes a major, _major_ accomplishment on your CV.

But you really need to take control.

Or quit.

~~~
shoyer
> But it can be done, and if you succeed it becomes a major, major
> accomplishment on your CV.

I agree with your advice except for this line. To be clear, a Ph.D does count
as a "major, major accomplishment on your CV" (at least to the right
audience). But you won't get any extra credit for putting up with a bad
adviser.

I am tempted to simply advise quitting, but switching to another adviser (or
even sticking it out) could also make sense. It depends on _how_ exactly your
adviser is bad, and whether you could honestly expect another Ph.D. adviser to
be significantly better. Actual abuse is one thing, but benign neglect and a
"sink or swim" attitude are pretty typical attitudes. If the problem is that
your adviser is just focused on raising funds and doesn't have much time or
inclination to help you on your research, then you can't expect any better if
you roll the dice another time.

Also - what field are you in? What are your career goals? Most people with
Ph.Ds don't end up in jobs that require them. If you think you'll be dropping
out of academia in three years anyways (and there's no shame in that), then
there really is little reason to stick it out for three more years of
suffering, regardless of the whys.

~~~
ColinWright

        > I agree with your advice except for this
        > line ... you won't get any extra credit
        > for putting up with a bad adviser.
    

The value doesn't lie in putting up with a bad advisor, it lies in taking
control and organising things. It lies in being in a bad situation and
devising a plan to deal with it. It lies in solving a problem, accomplishing a
goal, despite starting from a poor situation.

The value is in having proof that you can manage your resources and create a
positive outcome.

 _Since several people are saying the same thing I 'll add my response here:_

 _Yes, absolutely, probably not actually the thing to put on your CV. Bu
anyone who values a PhD in a candidate will appreciate the comment_ "As it
happens I didn't get along with my supervisor, just personal chemistry as it
happens, but I overcame that by taking control." _I believe that for most
people who knows about PhDs that is actually worth something._

 _To the original poster - people disagree with me, and that 's worth
considering. I could be wrong._

~~~
bllguo
It's a big achievement, of course. But on your CV? No. I fail to see how you
could convey the lengths you went to in dealing with a bad adviser in a brief,
tactful way on a CV. Nor would I want to; seems like it could easily backfire.

~~~
chestervonwinch
Exactly. Replace "advisor" with "boss", and see how it works out. It might be
a good life experience for the OP, but putting it on a CV? No way. I wouldn't
even mention _in conversation_ the true explanation for quitting or switching
advisors, unless it were a close friend who was genuinely interested in
hearing the details --- for anyone else, a generic, "we had different artistic
visions".

------
JSeymourATL
> I don't have many references because, I'm in graduate school.

You don't need the bad advisor, move on. References are completely over-rated.
Still, companies ask for references as some sort of social proof. Curate an
alternate list of 3-5 individuals, (old supervisors, employers, senior
colleagues, club officers, etc...) these are people who can vouch for you and
the quality of your work.

If some one asks specifically for your advisor contact, be candid-- 'we didn't
have much of a relationship and don't think he is best placed to comment on my
abilities'.

~~~
dexwiz
To add to that, many professionals will not get a recommendation beyond, "Yes,
they worked here." And many recruiters do not look for anything beyond that.
There are a whole host of reasons to not give out positive or negative
reviews. Most of them related to potential legal issues. Also a neutral review
can often be interpreted as a polite negative review if a positive review was
given in the past from the same reference about a different person.

This article has more details:

[http://www.inc.com/suzanne-lucas/your-former-employees-
want-...](http://www.inc.com/suzanne-lucas/your-former-employees-want-a-
reference-here-is-what-your-attorney-thinks-about-t.html)

~~~
giltleaf
Woah, interesting article. The perils of a litigious society geez.

------
heckless
I recently finished my PhD and had a terrible relationship with my
"advisor"\---who left part of the way through to start a startup doing the
exact same thing he had brought me on to do (except I was not invited). I
don't have any continuing contact with him and I certainly don't list him as a
reference on my CV (nor did he help me make any useful connections before he
ditched his lab group). In a difficult situation like that, what kept me going
as what amounted to a self-advised graduate student for almost five years was
that I enjoyed the work I was doing. If that intrinsic motivation was not
there, I would not have finished---or if I had, it would not have been very
meaningful: why get a PhD studying something I wasn't fully enjoying and
engaged by?

I have watched enough graduate students "stick with it" non-enthusiastically
and it doesn't usually work out well. I hate to be black-and-white, and I
don't think it's as black-and-white as I'm about to put it, but either you
love the work and nothing can keep you from it (or something close to that),
or you should leave the PhD program (and there's nothing wrong with that!). I
think PhDs do not really made to reward folks who don't fully enjoy the work
they are doing, because often the post-graduation prospects are "pay a big
price to keep doing your research" or "do something else".

Granted, I don't know much of your situation, so take the advice for what it's
worth, but I hope that what I've written here is helpful.

------
lvs
I've been through this. Actually I was well-supported by my department and
switched groups even later than that -- too late if you ask anyone. When
you're motivated and on the right project, you can do a PhD in only a couple
of years. Grad school can be extremely inefficient, and we all know that.

The larger question is whether you need a PhD to do what you want in the
world. But don't get too down on academia because of one bad advisor. (There
are many better reasons!)

Edit: To your political question, my old boss and I don't talk by design. I've
found much better supporters since then, and some bridges should be burned.
Your boss may seem like your whole world right now, but that's mostly
Stockholm syndrome talking. There are many supportive people -- you just have
to ask around.

------
regrettablephd
[Without the benefit of both sides of the story, am assuming the advisor is
truly bad.]

I was in your shoes, and I didn't leave my advisor. I greatly regret that. I
stayed because I felt ethically obliged to, and because I am non-
confrontational. I made a big mistake. Even trying to change advisors (within
the same university) seemed awkward. And it would indeed have been too awkward
and difficult to pull off. I should have just quit.

Five years from now, each of your present-day years will seem much more
valuable than it does now. One of your years now has much more leverage now
than it will five years from now. Do not waste years on a bad advisor. It
sounds like this is the perfect time -- you say you expect another 3 years,
which suggests you're 2 or 3 years in right now. One more year, and your
identity will get too strongly coupled with your advisor's.

If you're in CS and taking up a CS job, there will not be an expectation of a
reference from your advisor, if you can position these 3 years as an extended
Masters. Get other references, and be honest but diplomatic about your advisor
if asked.

------
sohamsankaran
Switch advisers or quit. Everyone I know who's ever done different in this
situation has regretted it. 3 years of the prime of your life is worth a whole
lot more than a middling recommendation letter.

------
lisper
> it's too late to switch groups without wasting an additional 3 years

Question this assumption.

There's something that you might not be aware of: you are a valuable resource
to your advisor. The Ph.D. students he graduates go on _his_ CV. Somewhere out
there is an associate professor for whom graduating an additional student
could be the difference between getting tenure and not. Find that person and
negotiate a better situation for yourself.

------
fastaguy88
This conversation might be more helpful if you had it with other faculty,
particularly the Director of Graduate Studies, in your department. In general,
Departments want their graduate students to graduate (statistics on graduation
rate are used to justify training grants), and to be successful in their later
careers. And Director's of Graduate Studies have a useful historical
perspective; they may know that your advisor has had a history of problems, or
that your situation is unusual and bears looking into.

There are almost certainly resources in your Department to support you and
help you with your decision. You should explore them.

You should also understand that you can ask for letters from other people in
your department, in particular from your thesis committee. While it is not
ideal, it is not unheard of for students to provide letters that do not
include their advisor. The more you interact with other faculty, the better in
your situation.

------
jib
3 years of anything is not worth a reference. Doesn't matter what.

You should figure out what is best for you, and do that. Without being you, I
think it will be hard for people to give any advice other than don't worry
about recommendations/perceptions. This isn't about that guy, it's about what
you want to do.

Whether that is asking for a transfer, work on your relationship with the guy,
stopping altogether or not, that's something you'll have to figure out, but it
is about you, not about your adviser.

------
eob
You're making the assumption that quitting would burn the bridge but my guess
is that might not be so. Bosses of course don't like when they lose an
employee but it's also not the end of the world.

My best piece of advice is to decide what you want (not what you believe
others want of you) and then explain you've made your decision to your advisor
in a way that is final, but also authentic and showing compassion for your
understanding of their situation.

------
freyir
You don't mention (a) your reason for pursuing a PhD / what you plan to do
after grad school, (b) what you've achieved so far in the past 3 years, or (c)
your field of study. Without at least that information, it would be very
difficult for anybody to advise you here.

> _I don 't have many references because, I'm in graduate school._

That's not a valid reason. Networking takes work, and you should start now. I
can't stress that enough.

> _he won 't leave a good word in for me for anyone who contacts him as a
> reference_

If he's as bad as you say, his reference might not carry a lot of weight
anyway. If you're set on pursuing an academic career, moving to a professor
who does good science and has a good reputation might be worth another couple
years in the long run.

> _it 's too late to switch groups without wasting an additional 3 years_

In my experience, this isn't necessarily true. You may find an advisor who
won't completely ignore the work you've already done (unless you have nothing
to show for the last three years). Some people here advise you to meet with
other professors and "explain the situation." Be extremely careful how you
explain the situation, and don't disparage your current advisor.

------
ISL
Academic references are probably of greatest import in an academic setting.
Industrial hires generally care about what you can do for them, not what
you've done in the past.

In addition to HN as an advice/support group, consider looking around within
your department and peer group. Chatting with other professors may yield
useful insights (and provide a back-channel communique to your advisor). It's
fine to continue working (and doing good work) for your advisor while you
aggressively network for other options.

As I tell every student I work with in Physics; do it for love. If you don't
love it, other things are probably more worth your time.

------
arcanus
> I could suck it up for three more years

I would be very hesitant to assume you will be 'out in three'. Unless you are
actively discussing graduation, 3 years might as well be \infty, in graduate
school-land.

------
impendia
I am a professor at a Ph.D.-granting mathematics department in the US, so I
can speak for the "other side".

Please, please do NOT suck it up for three years just because you are afraid
of pissing off your advisor. That isn't worth three years of your life. Hell,
it isn't worth three days of it.

If you were seeking a postdoc then, yes, a rec letter from your advisor would
be absolutely required. But I presume you intend to seek non-academic
employment? In that case a letter from another faculty member who knows you
(and who knows your work) would fit the bill.

If you have an alternative career path in mind, why not apply for jobs now
(i.e., without quitting)? If you find one to your liking, then you shouldn't
care whether or not your advisor gets angry. If you don't find a job, or don't
yet know in which field you would like to work, you can bide your time while
you do some research on the job market.

------
noahtovares
I was recently in this position, chose to leave my program, and did my best to
leave on good terms. Ultimately the relationship with my advisor soured.

I believe the most important question to ask is whether you will be happy for
the next 3 or more years continuing to work under your advisor. You should be
fine without a letter of rec. from your advisor.

------
giardini
If this is for a Ph.D. you likely should leave for other reasons. To
understand why I say this, navigate to

"Career Guide for Engineers and Computer Scientists" by Philip Greenspun

[http://philip.greenspun.com/careers/](http://philip.greenspun.com/careers/)

Examine the graph at the bottom of that page.

~~~
chrisseaton
As the page says, it isn't serious. But more than that there isn't even an
ounce of truth in it, so I don't see what the joke is at all.

Computer science has many extremely well paying, and simultaneously satisfying
and intellectually rewarding jobs, for PhDs in industry.

There are some more serious articles linked above the silly graph, but they're
not about computer science, and they're not about this decade.

~~~
dnautics
the crazy thing is while I agree with your statement about CS PhDs, the
greenspun article really hit home (I'm a chem PhD). In chem and bio, there's a
lot of pressure to get hands on a project, so more students are trained than
there are jobs for them when things get out. There's even a term for this
"postdocapalypse". We don't know what field OP is in.

------
blastrat
I don't know what options are available to you for psychotherapy, but whenever
I tell myself things like you are telling yourself, that's what I need. There
are many hurdles to getting a PhD and then there are more hurdles to becoming
a professor; your professor has surmounted all these hurdles, you have have
surmounted some of them; in all probability there is much you can learn from
him. Psychotherapy helps you learn to manage your own feelings about it.

You like your field and you have progressed quite a bit further than most
people ever do, you are a success so far. I'd like to see you not give up at
this stage. Life includes dealing with people we don't like, you can learn to
deal with this.

My advice, at least give it a try before you make such a momentous decision.

------
kemiller2002
If you think you are wasting your time, you need to leave. Three years is a
long time to spend on something where you see little benefit. The question you
have to ask yourself is: "What are you going to do with your degree after you
graduate?" If your answer is, "I don't know," then it's probably time to quit
and form another plan, and it really sounds like this is possibly the case. If
you aren't learning from your adviser, that's three years of you falling
behind all the other candidates who you are going to compete with to get the
job you want.

Realistically consider for a moment how many people graduate with an advanced
degree in your field vs. how many jobs there actually are.

------
microDude
Find a different advisor now (possibly at a different school). One that has a
proven track record of graduating students (which sounds hollow, but think of
it this way, would MIT be a good school if only 50% of their students found
jobs after graduation?).

There is a point where your advisor will look at you as a failure and give up
on their responsibility of tutelage. Most of the time, this is not the
students fault (assuming that you are hardworking and proposing your own
ideas). Most likely, the advisor is putting undo burden upon you (does he have
a history of pushing out students?). Saying that you have 3 years left is not
true, since the advisor can hold you in servitude much longer with little
recourse.

------
bluenose69
You begin by saying you're eager to quit, so I will take that as your true
desire, and those first five words are enough to advise you to quit. Nothing
in your query suggests that you are enjoying the work or look forward to
continuing in the field. Given the negative sentiment and the lack of positive
sentiments, the case seems quite clear. Quit, and get on with your life. Chalk
the past three years up to experience, and set about enjoying the next three
years and the years after. Life is short, after all. Find the thing you love
and are good at, and don't worry about the fact that you didn't finish this
PhD.

------
BDGC
I switched advisors in my fourth year of a neuroscience PhD. I distinctly
recall wondering if it was worth burning 2+ years in a different lab for an
experience that might not be better. For me, switching labs was 100% the right
decision. I'm still in science, love what I do, and I'm glad I changed even if
it was "too late."

Try to distance yourself a little to get perspective. Even from a one week
vacation, a month in a collaborator's lab, anything to try to remove yourself
and then re-evaluate. Your advisory committee can also help, once you
articulate that you're considering leaving.

------
sijoe
Mine was in theoretical physics. I liked my advisor and the work. But she
wasn't a go-getter on grant writing, or on paper writing.

Many of my friends left and went to medical physics. I thought of it, but
decided against it.

This was 20+ years ago.

In hindsight, it was a mistake (for me) not to do this.

First off: There is no shortage of PhDs to fill tenure track ranks, and there
are precious few tenure track ranks available. Unless you are at a top school,
with a really special advisor, and your work is getting attention, you should
assume that academe is not in your future.

Yes, I know this is harsh. I wish someone had said these words to me in
1992-1994.

Second: The magic of a PhD is that it is a union card for some jobs, and a
good way to open other doors. But know that the time you spend doing it, is
time you spend away from economic productive life.

Has my now 20+ year old PhD been a boon to my career? I don't know how to
answer this. It conveys (via a mal-advised appeal to assumed authority) some
intelligence. And maybe it gets me better bargaining ability. Or maybe not.
Maybe it typecasts me. I don't have enough data to know.

What I do know is, given the benefit of hindsight, I would have done very
different things.

Third: You always have options, and you always have choices. You need to ask,
and answer, a very hard question for yourself. Specifically, what do you want
to do with your life? And even if you don't have a hard answer, which is fine,
a roughly general sense of what you want to do is a good thing.

I decided after seeing the FSU collapse, and the market flooded with fairly
senior FSU physicists, that I would focus on learning to be an entrepreneur
and business guy. I like working with, and building, supercomputers, and it
turned out there was at least some demand there at the time.

You need to ask yourself these sorts of questions, and you know, its ok to
answer "I don't know". But take the time to figure out what makes you happy.
Because YOLO, and its better not to waste time doing something that you won't
be happy doing and not making any living doing it.

------
jahewson
You should try to find a new advisor. Try seeking out other potential advisors
in the department for advice on your work. Work through some task with them
and if you have a good rapport, schedule another meeting with them and explain
the situation. Maybe you can pivot your work in a direction that suits their
expertise better.

It might be that you don't need a new advisor as much as a mentor or co-
advisor from your department. That might be an easier solution politically.

Universities deal with lots of problems all the time. Figure out who the right
person is to reach out to and seek them out.

------
blackguardx
I had a really bad advisor and bailed out of my Ph.D program with a masters
degree. I don't regret it, although in hindsight, I recognize there were
things I could have done to salvage my Ph.D. program. The main thing would
have been to switch advisors. Is that possible for you?

------
quantumhobbit
Is graduating in 3 years garunteed? I was in a similar position, advisor
pretty much checked out which would have made graduating nearly impossible.

I managed ok after quitting, I found a job which didn't go after references
too aggressively.

I don't know what to say other than good luck.

------
sjg007
I would switch advisors or leave. Also ask yourself if you really need a PHD.
This is all in retrospect since I was in your situation and I tried to make it
work and ended up leaving eventually anyway.

Decide what is right for you, be authentic, regardless of your advisor.

------
pbreit
I get the sense that the issue might be you. I would first work on a major
attitude adjustment. You're going to run into people that are difficult to get
along with. It's useful to be able to make those situations work.

------
rubidium
What field? What's your career hopes (teaching, research, industry)?

------
raincom
If you don't want to stick in the academia, why worry about the reference from
your advisor. Just move on, as simple as that.

------
jmount
Hard question. Additional issue: do you think this advisor would support you
if you were to graduate?

------
toomim
I was in the same situation. Quit.

