Transcript Document

ADVISING AND MENTORING
Daniel J. Jacob
• Advising is about helping students to set and accomplish their own goals,
drawing on your experience and knowledge of the system;
• Mentoring is about helping students and junior colleagues achieve
success in your profession, drawing on yourself as a model.
A professor isn’t much without good grad students
•
Research grants to university investigators assume availability of cheap
student labor
Students allow prof. to cover a broader research horizon
Successful training of students is an important factor of appreciation
within and outside the university
•
•
A grad student isn’t much without a good advisor
A good advisor should be a benevolent boss:
•
•
•
•
•
Helps develop your scientific curiosity, steers you toward interesting and
tractable problems, gives you the means to work on them
Serves as sounding board for research ideas, progress, difficulties
Educates you about methods for doing and communicating research
Assists you in navigating university rules, overcoming challenges
Promotes you in the scientific community, offers career advice and
recommendations
A successful advisor-advisee relationship
requires acknowledgement & respect of the other’s interest
•
Advisor should be committed to the professional development of students
– Provide a good and supportive research environment
– Help develop student’s creativity, interests, initiative, independence;
…while providing structure, monitoring progress, and enforcing standards (a
delicate balance!)
– Avoid exploiting the student
– Be generous with support, credit, visibility; actively promote the student
– Be respectful of student’s abilities, career goals
– Be fair and even in treatment of students
– Be careful with what you say
•
Advisee should deliver on research, take responsibility for professional development
– The prof. needs publications – that’s their metric for success
– The prof. sometimes needs help on tasks that may be menial or unrelated to your
research – be gracious
– Be committed to learn and develop independence; don’t be a ‘heavy-maintenance’
student
– Obsequiousness won’t get you anywhere – advisors want to learn from their
students
– Keep a positive attitude, don’t feel victimized (it’s too easy)
SHARING RESEARCH CREDIT
•
There’s a general perception in a paper that the prof. provided the ideas and the
student did the work; this may have some truth but doesn’t recognize that the
ideas often spring from the work
– Ownership of ideas is a very messy business, esp. between advisor/advisee.
It’s best to consider them ‘shared’, even if you think they’re yours
– Student needs to be first author on papers to earn some credit for the ideas.
Prof. will get enough credit anyway
– Student should get exposure by contributing papers to conferences. Prof. will
get invited to give talks anyway, and should take any opportunity to give
visibility to the student
– ‘Your advisor looks good, you look good’. Bite your tongue and relax when
you hear your work referred to as ‘your advisor’s research’. It’s no big deal,
it’s just easier for people to identify work with a shop rather than with
individuals. Avoid one-upmanship with your adviser. A good adviser will make
sure you get all the credit you deserve.
HOW DOES THIS ALL FIT WITH DILBERT & PHDCOMICS
STEREOTYPES?
•
•
•
•
•
Ego crushing by the boss
– A good advisor doesn’t crush egos but needs to maintain standards , which
sometimes means reining in students
– I recognize myself of course about the drafts covered in red…but what to do?
Work as dreary and meaningless
– Unacceptable - work should be meaningful to the research community and also fun
– Boss needs to convey meaning, but student is at least an equal partner in this by
creating meaning for the work as it evolves
Long and inefficient working hours
– Important to let people work the way they want – no reason you can’t work
efficiently 9 to 5, though it’s hard rising to top of profession that way
– Why not work inefficiently if it’s more fun? Surfing the internet, playing games,
hanging around the lab builds a comfort zone and there’s nothing wrong with that
(as long as work eventually gets done)
Boss as a clueless, bumbling idiot
– Appearing clueless on details is not a bad idea – it empowers the student
– But boss also needs to be articulate on the big picture – most are.
Senseless rules and bureaucracy, petty politics
– Well I try to minimize rules, perhaps even too much?
– I plead not guilty to petty politics, and am lucky that the group seems not to be too
affected by that
MENTORING IS A PERSONAL THING,
UNLIKE THE FORMAL ADVISOR-ADVISEE RELATIONSHIP
•
•
•
•
•
•
A mentor is a role model for reaching the next stage of your career; it can be
anyone with more experience than you and from whom you trust the judgment.
Mentoring and being mentored is a career-long and diverse thing. Different
mentors can serve different needs at different stages of your career
It is often logical but not necessary that your advisor serve as mentor; an advisor
should offer the relationship but not force it
Things are different for postdocs: there, the advisor should be a mentor – else it
doesn’t make much sense
There’s a lot of responsibility in being a good mentor :
– setting high professional standards for yourself with knowledge that others are
watching you
– making yourself available, being generous with your time and ideas
– being considerate and encouraging
But there’s also a lot of satisfaction:
– everybody likes to be respected and have their opinion count
– your ‘academic children’ are part of your legacy as a scientist
– thinking about someone else’s problems deepens your general perspective
MY OWN EXPERIENCE WITH ADVISORS AND MENTORS
•
•
•
•
•
Lucky (or unlucky?) to have had my dad as professional mentor
Graduate student advisor Michael Hoffmann
– I went to him in my first quarter at Caltech – he wasn’t my original assigned advisor
– Encouraged fun and irreverent attitude to science, facilitated research, promoted
independence, was generous with credit, always on my side, definitely a mentor
– …but I wasn’t held to very high standard
Other Caltech mentors: Prof. Glen Cass and his sr. grad student Greg McRae. They did
modeling, which I thought was for math geniuses, but seemed respectful of what I did
and generous with their time and advice. They influenced me to switch to modeling
Postdoc advisor Mike McElroy
– Totally impressive figure – legend in his own time. I thought, ‘If I can make it there
I’ll make it anywhere’
– Very high standards, very supportive
– …but big ego, difficult to engage unless I worked on ‘his’ problems
Other Harvard mentor: Steve Wofsy throughout my time at Harvard, and still the person I
go to for professional or research advice. Mentoring is lifelong business…
MY EVOLUTION AS ADVISOR
•
•
•
Pre-tenure (1987-1994) – small group, embedded in McElroy/Wofsy’s
– Did most work myself and was better for it; hence my advice to beginning asst.
profs., “your best work will be done by yourself”
– Interacted with grad students and postdocs at both scientific and technical levels
– Regularly dropped by students’ offices to ask how they’re doing
Post-tenure (1995-2001) – growing independent group
– Lose ability to do work myself; research becomes vicarious through grad students
and postdocs
– Still have some technical control
– Don’t drop by students’ offices anymore, but have open door and encourage
students to drop by
Mature (2002-present) – large stable group
– Gave up technical control long ago
– Increasing external demands on time (committees, reports…)
– Electronic age transforms contact with advisees; can exchange email instead of
meeting
– Internet connections mean people spend less time in the lab, work more out of home
– Rely increasingly on mentors within group to help manage students
– Ask students to make appointments rather than dropping by
MY PRIORITIES IN ADVISING
•
•
•
•
•
Selection of student research topics, approaches
– Try to strike a balance between being overly directive vs. laissez-faire
– Try to excite students in their projects, develop ownership. broaden their perspectives
– Make them started on project quickly, get hands dirty
Standards
– Work has to contribute to fundamental knowledge, else it’s not worth doing
– Works has to be correct – which means checking and re-checking again
– …but it is possible to be too careful – then you don’t get anything done
Convey the fun of science
– Focus on results rather than process – avoid rules of behavior
Writing of papers
– Encourage early writing of papers, in parallel with research, as tool to think about
research and to force the writing process
– Interacting through drafts
Promotion
– Encourage contact with exterior, visibility
– Discuss career options – be attuned to diversity of talents and interests
There are some things I have a hard time caring about:
• helping students with course selections
• students’ activities outside their Ph.D. work
• micro-managing (except for publications/presentations…)
• group or university politics
• technical issues – because I delegated that long ago
HOW COULD MY ADVISING IMPROVE?
•
•
•
•
•
Choice of research topics/approaches: do you feel that I am too directive? Not enough?
Face-to-face interaction with students – right now I leave it to the initiative of the student’s email
request for appt, but make sure to respond promptly and be available – I’m not that busy, just trying to
be efficient!
– Result is that I don’t see some students for months
– Are students intimidated? Easier to avoid contact with adviser?
– Is interaction through email (including through powerpoints) an adequate substitute for face-toface meetings?
– Should I force a (bi)weekly meeting? Kind of do that with G1s (‘reading & research’ course) but
not beyond ( careful what you ask for)
– Meetings tend to be directed toward tasks at hand – are we missing opportunity to discuss
bigger picture?
– I try not to be nosy in students’ personal lives – but does it then come across that I don’t care?
Interacting through drafts
– Efficient for me – I have a record of what you’ve done, I have time to think about it in the context
of the final product that I want to see
– Efficient for you it would seem (to me!) – you have a record of my comments, are forced into the
writing process…but do you think differently?
– I do micro-manage and cover the drafts in red. That’s because (1) it’s a paper from my shop and I
hold it to the highest standards; (2) I do my thinking on your work through the writing/editing
process; (3) I’m a frustrated French major and love the Word
– Can lead to a lot of frustration for students – what do you think?
Coaching students in their approaches to research, presentations, contact with exterior…
– Should we do more presentation dry runs?
– Do you feel empowered in your research?
– Do you feel need for more contact with exterior? Scientific conferences?
Group dynamics – do we need to improve them?
– More/less formal meetings, social events?
– More formal mentoring postdocs -> students, senior students -> junior students?
** GROUP FEEDBACK AFTER PRESENTATION **
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Need to better define expectations for advisor-advisee interactions to the
beginning grad student; reduce intimidation by reminding students that you want
to hear about their difficulties as much as their results. Remind them often
Going to external meetings is important for students and should be encouraged
more. Meetings early in the graduate career are beneficial – expectations don’t
have to be high
Having a small publication early in the grad student career is beneficial
Focus early feedback on drafts on general structure/content issues – save detailed
editing for later
Suggest that students may want to start their writing with outlines instead of full
drafts
Make connections between students/postdocs happen; let folks know about others
in the group doing (or starting to do) similar things. Suggest and encourage (but
don’t force) mentoring between students and postdocs; mentoring experience is
appreciated on both sides
Remind students/postdocs of opportunities to invite visitors
See next page, “demarcating yourself from your advisor after you leave”
** DEMARCATING YOURSELF FROM YOUR
ADVISOR AFTER YOU LEAVE **
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
It is important that you develop your own research directions, particularly in the academic world.
You don’t want people saying 10 years from now, “he’s been doing the same thing ever since his
Ph.D.” or “her best work was done when she was at Harvard”. At the same time, the legacy of your
Ph.D./postdoc work is very important for your career – you want people to be able to say, “he
accomplished X during his Ph.D. and then went on to accomplish Y during his postdoc and Z in his
faculty position”. It’s wonderful if Z builds on X and Y – that kind of growth is highly valued in the
academic community because it’s associated with depth. Just make sure that there is a Z.
This doesn’t mean changing fields (see my previous presentation, “Life after the Ph.D.”). Ideally
you want to build on what you’ve done at Harvard to go into new directions. Could be chemclimate, pollution, atm-bio, experimental research…or simply a new global atmchem modeling
problem. Global atmchem modeling is so broad that there are a large number of problems and
support to go around– it is a fact that my former students/postdocs who have remained in that
general area have all done very well
Remember that your ex-advisor is an important cheerleader as you develop your career – writing
letters, giving you visibility, and often facilitating your research behind the scenes. Don’t sour your
relationship with your ex- advisor just to demarcate yourself – that doesn’t make sense.
Separate the tool you’re using (i.e., the model) from the science you’re doing. No one cares what
tool you use – GEOS-Chem or something else. What matters is the science that you accomplish
with it.
“Competing with your ex-advisor for funding” is the stuff of legend. You’re competing with plenty
of people, but at least your advisor will generally try not to step on your toes
Competing with your ex-advisor for students is a reality but here again you’re more broadly
competing with established groups and senior professors. It’s tough but keep a positive attitude,
develop your research directions, and the students and the grants will eventually come.
It’s perfectly understandable to feel oppressed by your ex-advisor’s shadow, but it’s not very
productive. Keep a positive attitude as you go find your own place in the sun.