A PhD Student’s

Race Against Time

– How To
Win/Graduate
Faster
september 6, 2013 by dave mumby 7 comments

Time As The Enemy for Ph.D.

Students

Most Ph.D. students worry at some point about how long it’s
going to take to finish their research, write a dissertation, and
defend it successfully so they can finally move on. The majority
will manage to get it all done within a reasonable amount of
time (albeit usually longer than they were expecting at the
outset), but many others will struggle for several months, or
even years, only to finally finish after much, much too long.
Many others will quit in frustration along the way.

The aim of this article is to help graduate students avoid some

common pitfalls associated with long Ph.D. completion times,
particularly those related to research. The most common
hindrances to good progress through a Ph.D. program can be
anticipated and avoided, and if not avoided, there are ways to
diminish their impact once they are recognized. I will suggest
some steps for maintaining good progress, and for those who
may have already fallen off the rails, I’ll offer suggestions for
getting back on track toward timely program completion. The
advice applies most directly to doctoral programs in the various
fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics
(referred to as STEM fields, in the U.S.), but much of it applies
also to doctoral programs in the humanities and fine arts.

Doctoral students and their supervisors share the responsibility

of ensuring completion within a reasonable time frame, so it’s
essential that they work well together. Not surprisingly,
conflicts sometimes arise, which can put at odds the interests of
student and supervisor. Whether justified or not, some doctoral
students actually see their supervisors as significant obstacles to
timely completion!

When Dr. Ryan Raver invited my comments on this topic, he

set the stage with the following questions:

Some grad students voice concern of being taken advantage of

by their professors to squeeze that last bit of data out in attempt
to get in a better journal. But what if those experiments don’t
work and are the only thing standing between you (the grad
student) and graduation? And what if you do all that extra
work, submit the paper to a peer-reviewed journal and the
reviewers ask for something completely different (maybe in
retrospect it was all in vain)?…  To put it in perspective, how
does it take someone 4.5 years vs. 6.5 years to graduate (if say
you kept the workload constant and both were to hypothetically
have similar research projects)? Since it is a symbiotic
relationship between the student and the professor, how can
both benefit without the balance tipping all to one direction? 

There are at least two separate issues behind Dr. Raver’s

questions. One issue concerns the timely completion of a
doctoral program, while the other has more to do with
navigating around an obstructive supervisor. Problems with the
first issue can sometimes arise as a consequence of the second,
of course. I will suggest a few things about coping with a
difficult supervisor after first discussing the more general issue
of finishing the Ph.D. in a timely manner.
 

The 3 Stages of a Ph.D.

To get an idea of how

long a Ph.D. should take and how things should progress along
the way, let’s divide a typical Ph.D. student’s program into
three stages: early stage (roughly the first 12-18 months, or
so), middle stage (the second, third, and in some cases, part of
the fourth years), and final stage (fourth or fifth year). Note that
these time frames may vary across disciplines, and across
individuals, depending on the nature of their research. The
important distinction for now is between the early, middle, and
final stages.

Research-related activities during the early stage may consist of

reviewing the literature, discussing important research
questions, and coming up with a proposal for the Ph.D.
research. In many cases, a student will start collecting data
during the early stage, at least from pilot experiments, some
type of preliminary analysis, or feasibility assessment. If a
doctoral student is given a research project that is part of an
established and ongoing line of research, it is usually possible to
begin collecting key data for the dissertation during the early
stage.

Communication between supervisor and student must operate

effectively from the outset.  Students need to feel they are
receiving proper direction from the supervisor, and that
expectations are clear and consistent. It’s also important that
students know throughout the early stage of their program how
things are going. Normally, the supervisor establishes effective
means for all this to happen, and the student gets off to a good
start.

But some new doctoral students discover after a few months

that their supervisors have been neglecting them, either
because they are too busy, distracted, or just plain
neglectful. Students in this situation must not wait too long
before taking control of things themselves.
It is important to have a regular meeting time during which the
student and supervisor discuss problems. By “regular” I mean
something like every Wednesday at 2 pm. Having a fixed time
makes it less likely that a busy professor will neglect meeting
with grad students. An hour, once a week or every two weeks,
is usually enough. The supervisor should normally be the one to
request the regular meeting time, but a student should not wait
for that to happen.

Don’t worry if these meetings are often cancelled because there

is little or nothing to update since the last meeting. The
important thing is to have the provision to meet at a fixed day
and time, if needed. This way, the student is assured to have the
supervisor’s attention when the need to discuss something
arises. (It goes the other way, too — meeting regularly eases the
professor’s task of monitoring the student’s progress).

The middle stage of the Ph.D. program is when the bulk of the
data are collected. It tends to be a very busy period, lasting from
several months up to a few years for most successful Ph.D.
students. Many people fail to maintain healthy eating and
sleeping habits during this busy period. This can become a
significant problem for some, and it certainly has an adverse
effect on the performance and general wellness of many. It’s
not worth it, and increases the risk of burnout.

Regular meetings between student and supervisor should

continue during the middle stage. To the extent that it is
possible, specific milestones should be established to indicate
the approximate dates by which various points in the overall
project should be reached. These milestones set out a critical
path for the student’s research. But since we are talking about
original research, which by definition does not always go as
expected, the critical path should be frequently revisited.

The time it takes to write a dissertation is usually much longer

than anticipated, and the importance of getting an early start on
a first draft cannot be overemphasized. As soon as possible
during the middle stage, a draft of the introductory chapter
should be written, even if it has some gaps, and a rough draft of
each chapter should be written as each corresponding part of the
overall project is completed.

In an ideal situation, a student enters the final stage of the Ph.D.

having completed the actual research, or at least nearly so. The
final stage is mostly about tying-off loose ends in terms of data
production, and of course the major task of putting together a
final version of the dissertation. If drafts of the introductory
chapter and the other major chapters have already been written,
this stage should last only a few months.

A common mistake is to wait until all the data are in and the
results are clear before starting to write in a concerted way.
Most of the writing can actually be done before the all the data
have arrived, and understanding this is key to getting an early
start on those initial drafts of the dissertation during the middle
stage of the program. For example, one does not need to know
the results of an experiment before writing most of the report,
either for a manuscript to be published or for a chapter of the
dissertation. After all, the rationale for having done the
experiment doesn’t change with the results, so the introduction
can be written without knowing the results. The methodology
does not depend on the results, nor does the nature of the
analyses that will be preformed on the data; so a framework for
the results section can be written before the data are in. Much of
the discussion can even be framed before knowing the final
results.

Now, some experienced researchers might argue that the results

must be known before one can put the proper spin on the
introduction. That might be necessary (sadly) in order to get a
paper published in a top journal, but spin is not needed for the
dissertation — and it’s not how objective scientists and
researchers are supposed to behave, anyway

What are the reasons for yourdelays

There are no doubt a wide variety of reasons why people fail to
complete a Ph.D. in a reasonable amount of time. Here, we will
only consider reasons related to the research and production of
the dissertation. ‘Real-life’ reasons such as health problems,
substance abuse, having children, or finding employment,
should receive a dedicated and thorough discussion at another
time and place.

One of the most common reasons for a long completion time is

a slow start to the research. If a student does not become
engaged early on with the intellectual issues, such as
formulation of research ideas and experiments, many of the
remaining activities are likely to be a mix of compromises and
inefficiencies. The message here is simple: If you are in the
beginning stages of your Ph.D. program, do not procrastinate
about getting started with your research. And this doesn’t just
mean reading the literature. You should be doing that already,
anyway. You need to start collecting data, as soon as possible.

A second common reason for a long completion-time is a

student or supervisor who is never satisfied, who can always
think of a way to improve results, and who therefore has
difficulty bringing projects to a conclusion. Perfectionism can
be an asset for scientists and researchers, but not when it
hampers progress. In most instances, if a student would just
write up whatever he or she has already achieved, and discuss it
with the supervisor, this would clarify whether any changes or
refinements are necessary, what additional data may be needed,
or whether it makes sense to attempt additional work in light of
the time it would require.

Another major reason for delay is distraction from the primary

line of investigation. Some students can’t resist the temptation
to explore all the interesting byways or potential side-projects
that come up during the course of any major research project.
Curiosity and a willingness to work long hours are important
attributes for any new scientist or engineer, but they need to be
harnessed and channeled toward completion of the Ph.D., not
just toward support of the supervisors’ research program.
Delays can also occur when students spend too much time on
tasks that keep them in their comfort zone; for example,
working in the lab, collecting data, or reading the literature —
instead of writing. Don’t fool yourself into believing that if
you’re always amassing more and more data, then you’re being
productive and making good progress. You are only being
productive and making progress if you are turning those data
into peer-reviewed papers and chapters for your dissertation.

The same goes for reading. You need to be on top of the

literature, both current and historical — but don’t read too
much! You don’t need to read it all, and anyway, it’s
counterproductive to try to make everything fit together. The
literature in every field is full of discrepant findings and
competing ideas. These are natural products of research, and it’s
a mistake to expect that reading just a few more papers will
bring greater clarity. Just get writing. The writing process will
help your ideas become clearer and better organized.

Is your supervisor holding you

back?
All professors are aware that doctoral students need to complete
the program and move on. On the other hand, some will argue
that anyone hoping for a career as an independent researcher
should worry more about prudently disseminating the results of
their Ph.D. research in good-quality journals, and less about the
precise number of months it takes to write and defend the
dissertation. I would generally agree with this sentiment, but
only for students who are planning to find a postdoctoral
research position and eventually apply for an academic job. To
be competitive in the postdoc and academic job markets, and to
get the most leverage possible from your doctoral training, it is
better to finish strong than to finish fast. (If you’d like to read
about an example of why this is so, check out The Sham Ph.D.,
a short article I posted on my blog a while back).

The foregoing arguments apply to only to a minority of doctoral

students, however. Most will not end up with an academic
position. It’s not because they aren’t qualified or capable — it’s
because there simply aren’t enough academic jobs around for
more than a small fraction of the students currently pursuing a
PhD in a science or technology field. Besides, not everyone is
interested in an academic research career following the Ph.D.
(for a reality-check on the academic job market, check out this
article from The Economist).

Although some professors might not care whether their grad

students develop successful careers of their own, most
professors do care a great deal. Problems can arise, however,
because the needs of the doctoral student are not in complete
concordance with those of the professor, and it is easy for a
well-meaning professor to lose sight of the differences.

Students should not to assume too much about their

supervisor’s motives. It is unlikely that the professor is
intrinsically evil or sadistic, or has a pathologic desire to control
and oppress graduate students. It’s more likely the professor has
simply been overlooking the student’s need to complete the
program and move on to the next stage of his or her career.

Students should generally give their supervisor the benefit of

the doubt. Perhaps your professor is not as indifferent to your
interests as you think, and they simply haven’t been informed of
your long-term career plans. Unless informed otherwise, some
professors assume that every doctoral student they supervise
wants to pursue a research career, and probably in an academic
setting. Maybe they aren’t aware of your concerns about the
Ph.D. taking more than a reasonable amount of time. Maybe
they are actually ready to help you try to complete by a
particular target date.

You just might need to shake your supervisor a bit to

momentarily get his or her attention away from your newest
data, or the revisions to the manuscript you’ve been working on,
or their need for a progress report on your next study, or the
undergraduate projects you’ve been supervising…  These issues
are of shared interest to the graduate student and professor, and
if the professor is allowed to take control of every serious
discussion about the student’s progress, such things will
naturally be the focus of nearly every conversation.

A frank discussion is needed to make the supervisor aware

of the student’s concerns about timing the end of the Ph.D.
research and the defense of the dissertation. One way to
make sure the professor gets the message is for the student to
request a special meeting for the express purpose of discussing
the dissertation. This meeting should be in addition to the
regular student-supervisor meetings, and if possible, it should
take place in a different setting. Such measures might make it
less likely the conversation will end up drifting to the same
topics as usual.

No other issues should be mentioned when asking for this

meeting — only the dissertation. If the meeting does eventually
occur, make sure it begins with your issues, before it slides
toward a discussion of those shared interests. You need to really
control the direction of this discussion, because your supervisor
may conflate your issues pertaining to completion of the Ph.D.
with the interests you both share pertaining to the research.

Professor: “Sure, Mike. I agree…, we should talk about your

timeline for finishing the Ph.D. and finally getting out of here.
Okay, so I guess we should start by talking about those latest
data and what we need to do next.”

Mike: (sigh)…

Disconnect your writing projects

Sometimes a professor who feels pressure to publish some data
will project that pressure onto the students involved in the work.
The student and professor share interests in seeing the work
through, but if doing so means the student’s dissertation will be
on the backburner for a while, this will be a significant concern
only for the student. Not a big deal for the professor.

Doctoral students on the academic career path should try

todisconnect development of their research credentials from the
compilation of their dissertation.

Here’s what I mean by that: Every Ph.D. student understands

that a successful research project should culminate in at
least two major writing tasks. One task is to write the
manuscript for publication in a research journal or some other
appropriate outlet. The other task is to write the relevant portion
of the dissertation. Some of what is written will be used for both
purposes, but that is beside the point.

It’s essential to think of these two objectives, the publications

and the dissertation, as two distinct writing projects. What
makes them distinct is not the comprehensiveness of the story
or the format in which it is written — the important distinction
is that one of these projects is of vital importance to the student
only. The professor wants the publications as much as the
student does, but only the student’s career is dependent on the
production and defense of the dissertation.
An important truth for all Ph.D. students to remember is that
those significant results your supervisor is waiting for may
indeed be necessary for publication, but that does not mean they
are necessary for the dissertation. Consider a situation in which
the results of a key experiment point toward a particular
conclusion, but the data overall do not make as convincing a
case as would be needed in order to get published in a top
journal. The corresponding chapter of the dissertation should be
written up, regardless; if the reviewers of a journal manuscript
has pointed to certain limitations in the data, those should
become part of the discussion at appropriate points in the
dissertation.

For the purposes of the dissertation, it is important that the

student acknowledges limitations in the data and has ideas
about how they could be improved by future work. As long as
the student’s work was done properly and the data were
analyzed thoroughly, there is no reason why additional work
necessary for publication in a good journal cannot be
completed after the dissertation has been defended.

If you are a doctoral student on the academic career path, you

must understand that your career has already started. How far
you go toward ultimately fulfilling your career goals will
depend on how you come across as a researcher and scientist.
No one will look to your dissertation for insight — they will
look at your publications, they will want to know what ideas
you have for future research, and what grants you will apply
for.

This might not sit well with someone who is currently working
on their Ph.D., but the truth is, no one will care about your
dissertation once you have defended it. As Dr. Karen Kelsky, an
academic career counselor, explains in an article for Chronicles
of Higher Education, the more you discuss your dissertation,
the less likely you are to land an academic job (at least in
a STEM field, whereas this may be less so in the humanities or
social sciences). And no one in a position to hire you for a
postdoc, or as an assistant professor, will ever ask or even care
how long it took you to finish your Ph.D.

Your ultimate goal should be publication of your findings in a

good journal. Even if you’ve decided you won’t pursue an
academic research career after your Ph.D., you owe it to
yourself and to the other people you have worked with and who
have supported you in some way (including your supervisor),
and you owe it to the taxpayers who paid for it all.

But, publication of one’s findings is not a criterion for

completing a Ph.D. program. If you feel under pressure to
publish at least some of your data before finishing and
defending your dissertation, you need to pause and figure out
exactly why you feel that pressure. Is your supervisor really the
direct source, or does it come from within?

Strategies for avoiding delays

Many problems related to student-supervisor conflicts and long
completion times can be avoided with the following strategies:

1. Use your Ph.D. committee, not just your supervisor

Students often fail to make efficient use of their Ph.D.
committee, choosing instead to deal with only with their
supervisors when planning research and monitoring its progress.
This has become the normal way of doing things in many
doctoral programs today. Most professors are content to work
closely with their own Ph.D. students, so they make little or no
effort to draw their faculty colleagues into the process.

But it doesn’t have to be this way. And it shouldn’t be, because

a student’s supervisor isn’t the only professor around who can
be gleaned for knowledge, advice, and feedback.

Resourceful grad students create their Ph.D. dissertation

committees as early as possible, usually after first establishing
with the supervisor some general aims or scope for what will
comprise the doctoral research. It is wise to get everyone
involved at this point by putting together a written or oral
proposal that is evaluated by at least one or two members of the
committee, other than the supervisor.

Students need to keep on top of this process, and not expect

someone else to take it over. It is a good idea to have a
progress-report meeting with the Ph.D. committee, at least those
members internal to the student’s program (i.e., from the same
department) every 12 months, or so — with the option to have
additional meetings if major problems arise with the work that’s
agreed on, and if there are reasons to change the direction of the
research. When many people are involved it is less likely the
student will fall behind without anyone noticing.

2. Write every day — even if you don’t feel like it

This is probably the most important advice for nearly any

graduate student. It really can’t be emphasized enough. It takes
a lot of practice to get good at writing. And every grad student
knows there is always something in need of being written up.
Students who are having difficulty with the writing process
often procrastinate on major projects, such as a manuscript or
dissertation, resulting in feelings of guilt and anxiety, in
addition to the delays.
Dr. Inger Mewburn manages The Thesis Whisperer, one of the
most helpful websites I know for scientists and researchers who
need advice on the writing process. Graduate students should
check out the archives and the many helpful resources available.
The blogs provide fresh insights into various facets of the early
to mid-stages in an academic research career.

Getting into good writing habits will smooth much of the way
through a doctoral program. Writing frequently will reveal gaps
in one’s knowledge or understanding. Vague and disorganized
writing often reflects vague and disorganized thinking. Writing
about complex arguments or concepts helps most people
understand them more deeply.

3. Don’t operate in passive mode

A salient difference between undergraduate and grad school is

the degree of self-reliance required. New grad students need to
realize that it will be largely up to them to teach and train
themselves. The graduate supervisor’s primary role is to keep
students on track and facilitate their self-education. The
professor should also be a resource of knowledge and advice,
but it’s up to the student to seek it.
Some students waste a lot of time in the early months of grad
school, as they wait around for their supervisor to tell them
what needs to be done. Most eventually figure out they need to
take the initiative to make certain things happen. Meanwhile,
time is lost due to the slow start.

Take the initiative for arranging the necessary meetings with

your supervisor and other members of your Ph.D. committee.
Taking matters into your own hands might even make a good
impression on others that you didn’t anticipate, perhaps
including professors from whom you will later need references.

4. Get to know your potential supervisors before you make a

commitment.

This applies to prospective new grad students, of course, rather

than those who are already in a Ph.D. program.

Interpersonal problems between student and supervisor are

behind a large proportion of grad school dropouts. (I have
written more about this in a previous commentary). If it
becomes impossible for a particular grad student and
supervising professor to continue working together with mutual
respect, it may be possible to switch to a different supervisor
part way through a program — if the student can actually find a
professor in the department who is willing —  but it is next to
impossible to gracefully change supervisors. And there is no
doubt that changing supervisors will add considerable time to a
Ph.D. program.

You can’t ask people directly whether they are good graduate
supervisors, but you can look for clues. Making a personal visit
is the best way to find out in advance how a particular professor
works with students. One should give at least as much attention
to meeting with a professor’s graduate students as to meeting
with the professor. Use your intuition, but also look for other
warning signs that there may have been problems in the past,
such as current students who have been working on their Ph.D.
for an unusually long time, or stories of former grad students
who either quit without finishing or changed to a different
supervisor part way through their program.

Dealing with a difficult supervisor

Universities do not generally have much in the way of
quality-control mechanisms to ensure that individual
professors do a good job of supervising their graduate
students. Luckily, relatively few professors truly abuse their
authority over students. There are some bad apples, of course —
professors who think of grad students and postdocs as research
employees, without any regard for their career-development or
personal needs. It’s not an all-or-nothing attribute; some
professors are far worse than others.

A student who feels that he or she is in this kind of situation

may need to clear a few potential impediments before taking
steps to deal with it. One potential obstacle to resolving such
conflicts concerns the emotional state of the student
Conflicts that arise between graduate student and supervisor
tend to be emotionally charged. This can seriously impede
attempts to resolve issues to the student’s satisfaction, because
strong emotions can cloud a person’s judgment and bias his or
her perception of a situation.

If you feel angry with your supervisor for letting you down, that
may in fact be justified. But if you want to get through a
predicament you absolutely must shed the anger and forget
about the blame game. Remember that your goal is to finish
the program — it’s not to take your supervisor to task for
something you think is an injustice.

But there is no doubt that some professors spend more time

managing their own career than looking out for the interests
of their students. The effectiveness of a student’s efforts to
work through a Ph.D. program with an unsupportive or abusive
supervisor will depend on their perception of the student-
supervisor relationship and expectations regarding how this
relationship is intended to work for the benefit of both parties.

Many professors share the notion that giving doctoral

students plenty of work to do in the lab is all that’s needed
to train them to become good researchers. But all this does is
train a student for a career as someone else’s research
employee, and this is exactly the type of career that many
doctoral students end up with after years of “training” — one
postdoctoral position after another, never having long-term job
security, and never becoming an independent researcher with
grant money and facilities of their own.

Students should push back at being treated like an

employee. The greatest danger is accepting that this is the way
it’s supposed to be. It’s easy to get lulled into that belief over
time, especially when other professors and grad students seem
to have accepted that this is the right way. But it is notsupposed
to be that way. Students must fight the illusion that they are
their supervisors’ employees. Those who assume the role of
employee and behave accordingly are likely to continue being
treated that way, and some of their needs as doctoral students
may be neglected.

If it gets to the point that there is too much distrust or other bad
feelings between you and your supervisor, or if you suspect you
are being abused, it will be necessary to seek advice and support
from the Graduate Program Director(GPD). The GPD
probably knows your supervisor in ways that you don’t, and
may know some things about this professor’s supervising
history. The GPD is likely to at least understand your situation
and offer perspectives you haven’t been able to see. Thus, at the
very least, the GPD should provide hope that you’re not entirely
under the thumb of your supervisor.

One should also keep the other members of the Ph.D.

committee abreast of what’s going on. Since your supervisor
doesn’t own you, you are free to seek advice or guidance from
other professors. It might not seem that way, depending on the
prevailing culture amongst students and professors in your
program; but just because the majority of your peers tend to
consult only with their supervisors, that does not mean you have
to limit yourself in such a way. Most of your professors are
extremely knowledgeable and willing to help. But they will not
come to you, so you must go to them.

One or more of those other professors might even have some

novel insights or useful suggestions for you. When asking a
professor for advice or guidance on such a touchy subject,
however, it is important to behave in a professional manner at
all times.  If seeking advice from another professor, do not
speak disparagingly about your supervisor or blame them
outright for any of the problems. This never helps, and it
usually costs the student some credibility.

Remember that these other people will be watching how you

deal with this difficult situation. You are likely to need letters of
recommendation from them at some point in the future, either
when applying for a postdoctoral position or for some other
employment.