phd supervisor responsibilities

• What to Expect from your PhD Supervisor

Written by Mark Bennett

Your PhD supervisor will play a vital role in your doctorate, supporting you from starting out to thesis submission (and beyond).

But what does ‘PhD supervision’ actually mean in practice? What sort of support and assistance can you expect your supervisor to provide?

This guide introduces some of the obligations and expectations that underpin a healthy supervisory relationship, as well as explaining how that relationship develops along with your PhD.

On this page

What you can expect from your phd supervisor.

Your PhD supervisor will have some core responsibilities towards you and your project. These will normally include meeting to discuss your work, reading drafts and being available to respond emails and other forms of contact within a reasonable timeframe.

Some universities may formalise these commitments in a research degree handbook and you should consult this if so. Other universities may leave more of the details to the student and supervisor themselves.

In either case, the following are some of the basic expectations a PhD supervisor should fulfil:

Expertise in your subject area

Regular supervisory meetings, feedback on work in progress, advice and support, mediation and representation.

Your supervisor will be an expert in your academic field. They will have recognised experience researching it, with a publication record to match. They may even have supervised other students working on related subjects.

What your supervisor won’t be is an expert in your topic. There’s a very simple reason for this: if they were, you couldn’t research it as an original PhD.

In practice this means that you can expect your supervisor to offer competent advice, particularly in the early stages of your research. If you’re suggesting a topic or approach that has been undertaken before, they should be able to alert you to that. If you’re looking for material to consult for your literature review they will be able to make suggestions and help you get started.

Eventually though, your expertise will outstrip your supervisor’s. It’s important to be aware of this and not to rely on your supervisor to understand your project for you.

These are the nuts and bolts of a supervisory relationship. Whatever your project, you can expect your supervisor to set aside regular time for one-to-one meetings and discussion of your work.

How regular these meetings are will be up to you and your supervisor to decide (though your university may set some guidelines). You’ll also have the freedom to set up a schedule (and venue) that works for the two of you. This could be a corner of the lab, your supervisor’s office or even just a coffee shop on campus.

Once this schedule is agreed you can expect your supervisor to be available at appointed times and to have reviewed any drafts, data or other work sent to them (with sufficient notice).

Note that the ability to attend supervisory meetings is an expectation of full-time PhD students who are based ‘on campus’. If you are studying by distance learning your supervisor may arrange for a different format, such as discussing work over the phone or via video conferencing.

Your supervisor may also take responsibility for any formal record keeping associated with meetings (though that doesn’t mean you won’t have any paperwork of your own to fill out).

Unlike other degrees, a PhD doesn’t normally involve any ongoing formal assessment. There are some exceptions such as first-year upgrade exams and training modules, but, ultimately, your doctorate will be judged on the strength of a single piece of work: the thesis you submit for examination at the end.

So what happens to all the chapter drafts, data reports and other work you do along the way? Your supervisor looks at it and offers you feedback. This feedback is formative rather than summative (you won’t be given a grade) but it’s still incredibly important.

In the early stages of a PhD feedback will help ensure you’re on the right track (or get you onto it). Later on you’ll know more about your project than your supervisor, but they’ll still be able to tell you how effectively presented your results are and how persuasive your argument is.

Standards for feedback vary between disciplines, projects and universities. You may find that your supervisor regularly sees your data as part of the working arrangement in your laboratory. Or you may find that you only submit drafts of written work every few months.

Your university may set out its own feedback guidelines, but, as with so many aspects of the supervisory relationship, setting up an effective system will be down to the individuals involved. As a general rule, you can expect your supervisor to review each piece of work in progress at least once and to offer further feedback on the final dissertation draft.

Contact with your supervisor doesn’t need to be restricted to scheduled meetings. They should also be able to offer advice on a more ad hoc basis.

This won’t normally extend to immediate feedback on impromptu chapter drafts sent over at 3am on a Monday morning, but you can expect a response to questions or ideas emailed during office hours.

Remember that one of the key things a supervisor offers isn’t topic expertise (we covered that earlier) so much as research experience. You haven’t completed a PhD before. They have. That problem that seems insurmountable to you? It probably isn’t. And your supervisor will be able to help you see why.

‘Support’ can also extend beyond your PhD thesis and include additional academic opportunities. It’s not uncommon for supervisors to identify suitable conferences for their students to attend or present at. In some cases you may also have the chance to publish work alongside your supervisor or participate as a second author on one of their papers.

You should make the most of these opportunities if they arise, but it’s important not to treat them as a basic expectation. Unless otherwise established by your institution, your supervisor’s main commitment is to your PhD.

For most of your PhD, your supervisor will ‘represent’ the university to you. They’ll be your most frequent point of contact and will be responsible for ensuring you do the things your institution expects of you.

Those include the obvious (researching your PhD) but can also cover other areas such as professional development, progression monitoring and compliance with any ethical policies. You probably won’t find the associated paperwork to be the most thrilling part of your PhD, but can take heart from the fact that your supervisor will probably agree with you.

As well as representing the university to you, your supervisor will also represent you to the university. They’ll understand the peculiarities of your project, together with any specific needs or circumstances you have as a researcher (such as a disability or conditions associated with your funding ).

Your supervisor will therefore be your first point of call if problems arise with your project. It’s part of their role to provide pastoral support and you shouldn’t be afraid to approach them with problems or concerns.

Second supervisors

Some universities assign two supervisors to each PhD students. If so, the 'second' supervisor may be more responsible for your pastoral support and for the administration of your project. This allows the 'primary' supervisor to focus on your academic work.

Targets, planning and meetings

Your supervisor (or supervisors) will be involved throughout your PhD, but their function will change slightly as your doctorate progresses.

In part this will reflect your changing needs as a student. You’ll go from mapping out a project to researching, writing and eventually submitting for examination. This is all part of the normal PhD journey .

Planning your project and setting targets

Most PhDs begin with an initial meeting between the student and their supervisor. This will be your first chance to sit down together and discuss your project.

You’ll review the aims set out in your research proposal and think about how to proceed with the first stages of your doctorate. This normally means gathering scholarly material for your literature review and / or identifying initial avenues for your own research.

Your supervisor’s input will be invaluable here. You’ll probably have some idea of existing studies that relate to your topic. You may also have some idea of the sources you’d like to examine or the data you’d like to collect first.

But your supervisor will have a much more complete sense of the current state of your academic field. They’ll also know many of the other scholars currently working in it.

If there are some avenues you haven’t considered, they’ll be able to make suggestions. And if there’s new work being published, they’ll be able to make you aware of it.

What happens at a PhD supervision?

PhD Supervisions can be as varied as the supervisors (and PhD students) involved.

You may meet formally in an office, or you might simply grab a corner table in the campus coffee shop. Most meetings last from one to two hours, but this will depend on how much there is to discuss and what stage of the PhD you’re at.

A typical PhD supervision normally involves:

• Checking your current progress – Your supervisor will want to know what you’ve done since the last meeting and how you’ve been finding things. If you’ve hit upon difficulties you can discuss these and benefit from your supervisor’s advice.
• Reviewing work in progress – As you get further into your PhD you’ll begin to gather results or even produce chapter drafts. Your supervisor will normally be able to offer feedback on this and make sure you’re heading in the right direction. Their encouragement will be a big source of support, particularly as you begin to get properly stuck into your project.
• Setting future targets – Reflecting on what you’ve done will be an important part of your supervisions, but so will agreeing new short and medium term goals. There are few formal deadlines in a PhD, but setting some ‘self-imposed’ deadlines with your supervisor can help keep you on track.
• Taking care of any admin – Part of your supervisor’s job involves reporting your progress to the university. For structured PhDs this can also mean checking completion of any formal training and development activities.

Eventually, PhD supervision meetings will also focus upon more specific milestones in your doctorate.

A PhD supervisor by any other name...

You might occasionally see different terms to refer to a PhD supervisor, such as dissertation advisor, thesis advisor or doctoral supervisor. Most of the time, these will all refer to the same person (the academic who will support and advise you through your PhD).

Progression and professional development

As you enter the middle stretch of your PhD the relationship with your supervisor will shift slightly. You’ll still have regular meetings, but won’t be as dependent on them to help set targets, or reassure you that you’re heading in the right direction.

Instead your supervisor will be much more focussed on the work you’re producing – particularly as the embryonic version of your final thesis begins to take shape.

Part of this could involve supporting you as you formally ‘upgrade’ to full PhD candidacy (many universities initially register research students for an MPhil ).

Once this is done you’ll be confirmed as a junior scholar, with an original contribution to make to your field. This may therefore be the time to think about taking on additional development opportunities and earning more exposure for your work – another area in which your supervisor’s support will be important.

Reviewing drafts and checking results

By this point in your PhD the outline of your final project will probably be fairly well established. You’ll have done a lot of the research that will form the basis of your thesis. Eventually you’ll begin gathering in your findings and laying the foundations of your dissertation .

Your supervisor will help identify the point at which you’re ready to do this. From then on a big part of their role will be to help review your findings as you move towards the final stretch of your doctorate.

If you’re in the Arts and Humanities this process may involve drafting actual chapters of your dissertation and receiving feedback on them. The writing usually comes later for STEM students, but you’ll still discuss the results of experiments and / or confirm that your data is up to the required standard.

Assisting your professional development

As your project progresses so will your expertise. The primary outlet for that expertise will be your thesis.

But the second and third years of your PhD are also an important period for your professional development – particularly if you’re considering an academic career.

Now is the time to think about:

• Conference presentations
• Scholarly publications
• Teaching work

Most supervisors will be happy to support their students at this point – and will take pride in seeing them step up to the academic stage (or at least the front of the conference hall). Some universities may also make professional development a formal part of their PhD programmes – particularly when it comes to undergraduate teaching.

Submission and examination

Eventually, it will be time to gather up your results, write up your thesis and submit it as a dissertation. The way you do this can vary between projects.

If you’re in the Arts or Humanities you’ll probably have been producing chapter drafts alongside your research and your supervisor will already have provided feedback on them.

If you’re in Science or Engineering you’ll probably have been focussed on conducting experiments and gathering results, with a dedicated ‘writing up period’ at the end of your degree.

Whatever your approach, your supervisor will help you put together a final version of your thesis. They will then read through that draft and provide any feedback or advice. Once your supervisor decides that your dissertation is up to the required standard they will advise you to submit it for examination.

Most universities will allow you to submit against the advice of your supervisors, but this is almost always a bad idea. If your supervisor does not believe a thesis is ready for examination it probably isn’t. Vice versa, your supervisor won’t recommend you submit unless the thesis is likely to pass a viva.

Selecting external examiners

Having guided you up to the submission point your supervisor has one final task to perform: helping you select the external examiner (or examiners) for your viva voce.

This may seem quite minor, but it can actually be one of the most important contributions a supervisor will make to your PhD.

Some universities allow supervisors to invite and appoint external examiners themselves, but this is relatively uncommon in the UK. Instead you will normally have the chance to suggest examiners and will have the final say over who is invited to examine you.

By this point you may have a good idea of who might be a good external examiner – particularly if you’ve been active at conferences and networked within your field. But you should make sure you take advice from your supervisor at this crucial point.

Not only will they know who in your field is best placed to examine your work, they will also know who is most likely to appreciate it. All PhD examinations are objective, but academia can be home to diverse methodologies and approaches. Selecting an examiner with very different principles to your own can make the viva much more challenging for both parties and put extra pressure on your thesis defence.

In most cases a supervisor isn’t directly involved in the actual viva voce exam that concludes your PhD.

They will have reviewed your thesis and helped you select your examiners (see above). They will also meet with you on the day of the viva and provide support as you get ready for the exam. This could simply involve finding the venue and waiting with you as your examiners arrive. Or it could mean calming a few last minute nerves and helping you relax before the event.

Once the viva is over your supervisor may be invited to discuss the result with the panel before you yourself receive feedback. This may allow them to provide some perspective on any areas of concern, but such contributions are usually off the record. Your examiners will be making a decision based on your thesis defence, not your supervisor’s.

Looking for a PhD?

Head over to our course listings to search PhD opportunities all over the world.

Our postgrad newsletter shares courses, funding news, stories and advice

You may also like....

What happens during a typical PhD, and when? We've summarised the main milestones of a doctoral research journey.

The PhD thesis is the most important part of a doctoral degree. This page will introduce you to what you need to know about the PhD dissertation.

This page will give you an idea of what to expect from your routine as a PhD student, explaining how your daily life will look at you progress through a doctoral degree.

PhD fees can vary based on subject, university and location. Use our guide to find out the PhD fees in the UK and other destinations, as well as doctoral living costs.

Our guide tells you everything about the application process for studying a PhD in the USA.

Postgraduate students in the UK are not eligible for the same funding as undergraduates or the free-hours entitlement for workers. So, what childcare support are postgraduate students eligible for?

FindAPhD. Copyright 2005-2024 All rights reserved.

Unknown    ( change )

Have you got time to answer some quick questions about PhD study?

Select your nearest city

You haven’t completed your profile yet. To get the most out of FindAPhD, finish your profile and receive these benefits:

• Monthly chance to win one of ten £10 Amazon vouchers ; winners will be notified every month.*
• The latest PhD projects delivered straight to your inbox
• Access to our £6,000 scholarship competition
• Weekly newsletter with funding opportunities, research proposal tips and much more
• Early access to our physical and virtual postgraduate study fairs

Or begin browsing FindAPhD.com

or begin browsing FindAPhD.com

*Offer only available for the duration of your active subscription, and subject to change. You MUST claim your prize within 72 hours, if not we will redraw.

Do you want hassle-free information and advice?

Create your FindAPhD account and sign up to our newsletter:

• Find out about funding opportunities and application tips
• Receive weekly advice, student stories and the latest PhD news
• Hear about our upcoming study fairs
• Save your favourite projects, track enquiries and get personalised subject updates

Create your account

Looking to list your PhD opportunities? Log in here .

• What You Should Expect from Your PhD Supervisor
• Doing a PhD

A good supervisor will act as your mentor. They will not only help you progress through each stage of a PhD program  but can also act as a source of information or someone to bounce ideas off. To get the most from your supervisor, it’s essential to first understand what their role and responsibilities are in relation to you and your PhD. This won’t only help you understand the different ways they can support you, but also enables you to define clear boundaries which will go a long way to ensuring an enjoyable and respected relationship between the two of you.

1. Expertise in Your Subject Area

You should expect your supervisor to be an expert in the subject you are focusing your PhD on. This is crucial as your supervisor will act as your primary means of support during your PhD. Therefore, the effectiveness of his or her support directly corresponds to their knowledge of your chosen subject, which could be the difference to your PhD succeeding or not.

In addition to this, a supervisor who is an expert in your chosen field could save you from unnecessarily adding a year or more to the duration of your PhD. This is because, as an expert, they will already possess an in-depth understanding of what can and cannot be achieved in the field and have an appreciation as to what would and what wouldn’t help your research stand out. This trait will help them keep you on track, which helps ensure your time is being used most effectively.

Ideally, your supervisor should have experience in supervising PhD students. Although you could theoretically tackle your PhD alone, there are many areas applicable to all PhDs, such as literature reviews, methodologies, experiments, thesis, and dissertations, that an experienced supervisor can guide you on.

2. Regular Supervisory Meetings

As good as your supervisor may be, their ability to support you only comes into fruition if you interact with them. You will be expected to arrange regular meetings with your supervisor, and if necessary, other members of your PhD panel. This will allow you to report back on your latest progress, discuss any issue you’re facing, and review any plans to identify potential improvements, etc. Some supervisors will suggest meeting at regular intervals, i.e. every other week, some will suggest meeting on completing a milestone, i.e. completion of your first draft of the literature review, and others will suggest meeting specifically as and when you need their support. While none are notably better than the other, the key is to pick what works best for you and to ensure you’re meeting them frequently, even if that means having to combine two or all of the approaches.

It’s important to appreciate your supervisor is going to be busy. They are not only going to be supervising you, but they’ll likely be providing supervision to several other students, teach undergraduate classes and have their own research projects going on. However, if you can’t meet your supervisor as often as you would like because of this, your communication doesn’t need to suffer. Instead, make use of email . Not only will your supervisor appreciate this as it gives him time to respond on his own schedule, but you’ll likely get a more detailed response.

3. Feedback on Work in Progress

Another vital aspect to expect from your supervisor is to receive continuous feedback on your work. With your supervisor being an expert in their field, he should be able to review your work and identify any issues or areas for improvement. Gaining feedback on your work is critical through all stages of your PhD. Initially, feedback will be imperative to ensure you’re staying on track. Besides this, it gives your supervisor the opportunity to help set up aspects of your PhD in ways they’ve witnessed first-hand to be most effective, for example, by suggesting an alternative way to structure your literature review or record your research findings. During the ending stages of your PhD, your supervisor will play an essential role in supporting you in the production of your thesis or dissertation. The more you liaise with them during this process, the smoother the process will be.

4. Advice and Support

The advice and support that your supervisor can offer you throughout your degree will be invaluable. As an old saying goes, you can never be distracted if you get the right advice from the right person, which in this case will be your supervisor. As well as providing technical support, many supervisors will also look to provide emotional support through words of encouragement when the moment warrants it. Having once undertaken the journey themselves, they fully appreciate how challenging and stressful the journey can be.

It’s important to note that although your supervisor is there to provide support, they are not there to help with the minor details or every problem you may encounter. The role of the supervisor is to mentor, not to teach, or do it for you. It will be your responsibility to plan, execute and monitor your own work and to identify gaps in your own knowledge and address them. Your supervisor may help by recommending literature to read or suggesting external training courses, however, you should expect nothing more intrusive than this.

5. Mediation and Representation

All universities and departments will have their own rules and regulations. As a professional academic student, you will have to adhere to these rules. These rules are unlikely to be limited to behaviour only with several rules influencing your work as a PhD student. These rules may relate to how you are expected to submit documentation or to the experiments that require special permission before being conducted within their labs. If you have any queries about any rule or regulation, your first point of contact should be your supervisor.

Before starting a PhD, it’s reasonable to have many expectations in mind. However, of all expectations, the one of your supervisors is likely to be the most important. Your supervisor will act as the backbone of your research project and should provide you with continuous support throughout each stage of your degree. A great supervisor may not only be the difference between a smooth and turbulent process, but sometimes may also be the difference between a successful and unsuccessful PhD.

Browse PhDs Now

Join thousands of students.

Join thousands of other students and stay up to date with the latest PhD programmes, funding opportunities and advice.

Ten types of PhD supervisor relationships – which is yours?

Lecturer, Griffith University

Disclosure statement

Susanna Chamberlain does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Griffith University provides funding as a member of The Conversation AU.

View all partners

It’s no secret that getting a PhD is a stressful process .

One of the factors that can help or hinder this period of study is the relationship between supervisor and student. Research shows that effective supervision can significantly influence the quality of the PhD and its success or failure.

PhD supervisors tend to fulfil several functions: the teacher; the mentor who can support and facilitate the emotional processes; and the patron who manages the springboard from which the student can leap into a career.

There are many styles of supervision that are adopted – and these can vary depending on the type of research being conducted and subject area.

Although research suggests that providing extra mentoring support and striking the right balance between affiliation and control can help improve PhD success and supervisor relationships, there is little research on the types of PhD-supervisor relationships that occur.

From decades of experience of conducting and observing PhD supervision, I’ve noticed ten types of common supervisor relationships that occur. These include:

The candidate is expected to replicate the field, approach and worldview of the supervisor, producing a sliver of research that supports the supervisor’s repute and prestige. Often this is accompanied by strictures about not attempting to be too “creative”.

Cheap labour

The student becomes research assistant to the supervisor’s projects and becomes caught forever in that power imbalance. The patron-client roles often continue long after graduation, with the student forever cast in the secondary role. Their own work is often disregarded as being unimportant.

The “ghost supervisor”

The supervisor is seen rarely, responds to emails only occasionally and has rarely any understanding of either the needs of the student or of their project. For determined students, who will work autonomously, the ghost supervisor is often acceptable until the crunch comes - usually towards the end of the writing process. For those who need some support and engagement, this is a nightmare.

The relationship is overly familiar, with the assurance that we are all good friends, and the student is drawn into family and friendship networks. Situations occur where the PhD students are engaged as babysitters or in other domestic roles (usually unpaid because they don’t want to upset the supervisor by asking for money). The chum, however, often does not support the student in professional networks.

Collateral damage

When the supervisor is a high-powered researcher, the relationship can be based on minimal contact, because of frequent significant appearances around the world. The student may find themselves taking on teaching, marking and administrative functions for the supervisor at the cost of their own learning and research.

The practice of supervision becomes a method of intellectual torment, denigrating everything presented by the student. Each piece of research is interrogated rigorously, every meeting is an inquisition and every piece of writing is edited into oblivion. The student is given to believe that they are worthless and stupid.

Creepy crawlers

Some supervisors prefer to stalk their students, sometimes students stalk their supervisors, each with an unhealthy and unrequited sexual obsession with the other. Most Australian universities have moved actively to address this relationship, making it less common than in previous decades.

Captivate and con

Occasionally, supervisor and student enter into a sexual relationship. This can be for a number of reasons, ranging from a desire to please to a need for power over youth. These affairs can sometimes lead to permanent relationships. However, what remains from the supervisor-student relationship is the asymmetric set of power balances.

Almost all supervision relationships contain some aspect of the counsellor or mentor, but there is often little training or desire to develop the role and it is often dismissed as pastoral care. Although the life experiences of students become obvious, few supervisors are skilled in dealing with the emotional or affective issues.

Colleague in training

When a PhD candidate is treated as a colleague in training, the relationship is always on a professional basis, where the individual and their work is held in respect. The supervisor recognises that their role is to guide through the morass of regulation and requirements, offer suggestions and do some teaching around issues such as methodology, research practice and process, and be sensitive to the life-cycle of the PhD process. The experience for both the supervisor and student should be one of acknowledgement of each other, recognising the power differential but emphasising the support at this time. This is the best of supervision.

There are many university policies that move to address a lot of the issues in supervisor relationships , such as supervisor panels, and dedicated training in supervising and mentoring practices. However, these policies need to be accommodated into already overloaded workloads and should include regular review of supervisors.

• professional mentoring
• PhD supervisors

Service Centre Senior Consultant

Director of STEM

Community member - Training Delivery and Development Committee (Volunteer part-time)

Chief Executive Officer

Head of Evidence to Action

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• PLoS Comput Biol
• v.17(9); 2021 Sep

Ten simple rules for choosing a PhD supervisor

Department of Biology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

Catherine Bannon

J. scott p. mccain, introduction.

The PhD beckons. You thought long and hard about why you want to do it, you understand the sacrifices and commitments it entails, and you have decided that it is the right thing for you. Congratulations! Undertaking a doctoral degree can be an extremely rewarding experience, greatly enhancing your personal, intellectual, and professional development. If you are still on the fence about whether or not you want to pursue a PhD, see [ 1 , 2 ] and others to help you decide.

As a PhD student in the making, you will have many important decisions to consider. Several of them will depend on your chosen discipline and research topic, the institution you want to attend, and even the country where you will undertake your degree. However, one of the earliest and most critical decisions you will need to make transcends most other decisions: choosing your PhD thesis supervisor. Your PhD supervisor will strongly influence the success and quality of your degree as well as your general well-being throughout the program. It is therefore vital to choose the right supervisor for you. A wrong choice or poor fit can be disastrous on both a personal and professional levels—something you obviously want to avoid. Unfortunately, however, most PhD students go through the process of choosing a supervisor only once and thus do not get the opportunity to learn from previous experiences. Additionally, many prospective PhD students do not have access to resources and proper guidance to rely on when making important academic decisions such as those involved in choosing a PhD supervisor.

In this short guide, we—a group of PhD students with varied backgrounds, research disciplines, and academic journeys—share our collective experiences with choosing our own PhD supervisors. We provide tips and advice to help prospective students in various disciplines, including computational biology, in their quest to find a suitable PhD supervisor. Despite procedural differences across countries, institutions, and programs, the following rules and discussions should remain helpful for guiding one’s approach to selecting their future PhD supervisor. These guidelines mostly address how to evaluate a potential PhD supervisor and do not include details on how you might find a supervisor. In brief, you can find a supervisor anywhere: seminars, a class you were taught, internet search of interesting research topics, departmental pages, etc. After reading about a group’s research and convincing yourself it seems interesting, get in touch! Make sure to craft an e-mail carefully, demonstrating you have thought about their research and what you might do in their group. After finding one or several supervisors of interest, we hope that the rules bellow will help you choose the right supervisor for you.

Rule 1: Align research interests

You need to make sure that a prospective supervisor studies, or at the very least, has an interest in what you want to study. A good starting point would be to browse their personal and research group websites (though those are often outdated), their publication profile, and their students’ theses, if possible. Keep in mind that the publication process can be slow, so recent publications may not necessarily reflect current research in that group. Pay special attention to publications where the supervisor is senior author—in life sciences, their name would typically be last. This would help you construct a mental map of where the group interests are going, in addition to where they have been.

Be proactive about pursuing your research interests, but also flexible: Your dream research topic might not currently be conducted in a particular group, but perhaps the supervisor is open to exploring new ideas and research avenues with you. Check that the group or institution of interest has the facilities and resources appropriate for your research, and/or be prepared to establish collaborations to access those resources elsewhere. Make sure you like not only the research topic, but also the “grunt work” it requires, as a topic you find interesting may not be suitable for you in terms of day-to-day work. You can look at the “Methods” sections of published papers to get a sense for what this is like—for example, if you do not like resolving cryptic error messages, programming is probably not for you, and you might want to consider a wet lab–based project. Lastly, any research can be made interesting, and interests change. Perhaps your favorite topic today is difficult to work with now, and you might cut your teeth on a different project.

Rule 2: Seek trusted sources

Discussing your plans with experienced and trustworthy people is a great way to learn more about the reputation of potential supervisors, their research group dynamics, and exciting projects in your field of interest. Your current supervisor, if you have one, could be aware of position openings that are compatible with your interests and time frame and is likely to know talented supervisors with good reputations in their fields. Professors you admire, reliable student advisors, and colleagues might also know your prospective supervisor on various professional or personal levels and could have additional insight about working with them. Listen carefully to what these trusted sources have to say, as they can provide a wealth of insider information (e.g., personality, reputation, interpersonal relationships, and supervisory styles) that might not be readily accessible to you.

Rule 3: Expectations, expectations, expectations

A considerable portion of PhD students feel that their program does not meet original expectations [ 3 ]. To avoid being part of this group, we stress the importance of aligning your expectations with the supervisor’s expectations before joining a research group or PhD program. Also, remember that one person’s dream supervisor can be another’s worst nightmare and vice versa—it is about a good fit for you. Identifying what a “good fit” looks like requires a serious self-appraisal of your goals (see Rule 1 ), working style (see Rule 5 ), and what you expect in a mentor (see Rule 4 ). One way to conduct this self-appraisal is to work in a research lab to get experiences similar to a PhD student (if this is possible).

Money!—Many people have been conditioned to avoid the subject of finances at all costs, but setting financial expectations early is crucial for maintaining your well-being inside and outside the lab. Inside the lab, funding will provide chemicals and equipment required for you to do cool research. It is also important to know if there will be sufficient funding for your potential projects to be completed. Outside the lab, you deserve to get paid a reasonable, livable stipend. What is the minimum required take-home stipend, or does that even exist at the institution you are interested in? Are there hard cutoffs for funding once your time runs out, or does the institution have support for students who take longer than anticipated? If the supervisor supplies the funding, do they end up cutting off students when funds run low, or do they have contingency plans? ( Fig 1 ).

Professional development opportunities—A key aspect of graduate school training is professional development. In some research groups, it is normal for PhD students to mentor undergraduate students or take a semester to work in industry to get more diverse experiences. Other research groups have clear links with government entities, which is helpful for going into policy or government-based research. These opportunities (and others) are critical for your career and next steps. What are the career development opportunities and expectations of a potential supervisor? Is a potential supervisor happy to send students to workshops to learn new skills? Are they supportive of public outreach activities? If you are looking at joining a newer group, these sorts of questions will have to be part of the larger set of conversations about expectations. Ask: “What sort of professional development opportunities are there at the institution?”

Publications—Some PhD programs have minimum requirements for finishing a thesis (i.e., you must publish a certain number of papers prior to defending), while other programs leave it up to the student and supervisor to decide on this. A simple and important topic to discuss is: How many publications are expected from your PhD and when will you publish them? If you are keen to publish in high-impact journals, does your prospective supervisor share that aim? (Although question why you are so keen to do so, see the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment ( www.sfdora.org ) to learn about the pitfalls of journal impact factor.)

Rule 4: It takes two to tango

Sooner or later, you will get to meet and interview with a prospective PhD supervisor. This should go both ways: Interview them just as much as they are interviewing you. Prepare questions and pay close attention to how they respond. For example, ask them about their “lab culture,” research interests (especially for the future/long term), and what they are looking for in a graduate student. Do you feel like you need to “put on an act” to go along with the supervisor (beyond just the standard interview mode)? Represent yourself, and not the person you think they are looking for. All of us will have some interviews go badly. Remember that discovering a poor fit during the interview has way fewer consequences than the incompatibility that could arise once you have committed to a position.

To come up with good questions for the prospective supervisor, first ask yourself questions. What are you looking for in a mentor? People differ in their optimal levels of supervision, and there is nothing wrong with wanting more or less than your peers. How much career guidance do you expect and does the potential supervisor respect your interests, particularly if your long-term goals do not include academia? What kind of student might not thrive in this research group?

Treat the PhD position like a partnership: What do you seek to get out of it? Keep in mind that a large portion of research is conducted by PhD students [ 4 ], so you are also an asset. Your supervisor will provide guidance, but the PhD is your work. Make sure you and your mentor are on the same page before committing to what is fundamentally a professional contract akin to an apprenticeship (see “ Rule 3 ”).

Rule 5: Workstyle compatibility

Sharing interests with a supervisor does not necessarily guarantee you would work well together, and just because you enjoyed a course by a certain professor does not mean they are the right PhD supervisor for you. Make sure your expectations for work and work–life approaches are compatible. Do you thrive on structure, or do you need freedom to proceed at your own pace? Do they expect you to be in the lab from 6:00 AM to midnight on a regular basis (red flag!)? Are they comfortable with you working from home when you can? Are they around the lab enough for it to work for you? Are they supportive of alternative work hours if you have other obligations (e.g., childcare, other employment, extracurriculars)? How is the group itself organized? Is there a lab manager or are the logistics shared (fairly?) between the group members? Discuss this before you commit!

Two key attributes of a research group are the supervisor’s career stage and number of people in the group. A supervisor in a later career stage may have more established research connections and protocols. An earlier career stage supervisor comes with more opportunities to shape the research direction of the lab, but less access to academic political power and less certainty in what their supervision style will be (even to themselves). Joining new research groups provides a great opportunity to learn how to build a lab if you are considering that career path but may take away time and energy from your thesis project. Similarly, be aware of pros and cons of different lab sizes. While big labs provide more opportunity for collaborations and learning from fellow lab members, their supervisors generally have less time available for each trainee. Smaller labs tend to have better access to the supervisor but may be more isolating [ 5 , 6 ]. Also note that large research groups tend to be better for developing extant research topics further, while small groups can conduct more disruptive research [ 7 ].

Rule 6: Be sure to meet current students

Meeting with current students is one of the most important steps prior to joining a lab. Current students will give you the most direct and complete sense of what working with a certain supervisor is actually like. They can also give you a valuable sense of departmental culture and nonacademic life. You could also ask to meet with other students in the department to get a broader sense of the latter. However, if current students are not happy with their current supervisor, they are unlikely to tell you directly. Try to ask specific questions: “How often do you meet with your supervisor?”, “What are the typical turnaround times for a paper draft?”, “How would you describe the lab culture?”, “How does your supervisor react to mistakes or unexpected results?”, “How does your supervisor react to interruptions to research from, e.g., personal life?”, and yes, even “What would you say is the biggest weakness of your supervisor?”

Rule 7: But also try to meet past students

While not always possible, meeting with past students can be very informative. Past students give you information on career outcomes (i.e., what are they doing now?) and can provide insight into what the lab was like when they were in it. Previous students will provide a unique perspective because they have gone through the entire process, from start to finish—and, in some cases, no longer feel obligated to speak well of their now former supervisor. It can also be helpful to look at previous students’ experiences by reading the acknowledgement section in their theses.

Rule 8: Consider the entire experience

Your PhD supervisor is only one—albeit large—piece of your PhD puzzle. It is therefore essential to consider your PhD experience as whole when deciding on a supervisor. One important aspect to contemplate is your mental health. Graduate students have disproportionately higher rates of depression and anxiety compared to the general population [ 8 ], so your mental health will be tested greatly throughout your PhD experience. We suggest taking the time to reflect on what factors would enable you to do your best work while maintaining a healthy work–life balance. Does your happiness depend on surfing regularly? Check out coastal areas. Do you despise being cold? Consider being closer to the equator. Do you have a deep-rooted phobia of koalas? Maybe avoid Australia. Consider these potentially even more important questions like: Do you want to be close to your friends and family? Will there be adequate childcare support? Are you comfortable with studying abroad? How does the potential university treat international or underrepresented students? When thinking about your next steps, keep in mind that although obtaining your PhD will come with many challenges, you will be at your most productive when you are well rested, financially stable, nourished, and enjoying your experience.

Rule 9: Trust your gut

You have made it to our most “hand-wavy” rule! As academics, we understand the desire for quantifiable data and some sort of statistic to make logical decisions. If this is more your style, consider every interaction with a prospective supervisor, from the first e-mail onwards, as a piece of data.

However, there is considerable value in trusting gut instincts. One way to trust your gut is to listen to your internal dialogue while making your decision on a PhD supervisor. For example, if your internal dialogue includes such phrases as “it will be different for me,” “I’ll just put my head down and work hard,” or “maybe their students were exaggerating,” you might want to proceed with caution. If you are saying “Wow! How are they so kind and intelligent?” or “I cannot wait to start!”, then you might have found a winner ( Fig 2 ).

Rule 10: Wash, rinse, repeat

The last piece of advice we give you is to do this lengthy process all over again. Comparing your options is a key step during the search for a PhD supervisor. By screening multiple different groups, you ultimately learn more about what red flags to look for, compatible work styles, your personal expectations, and group atmospheres. Repeat this entire process with another supervisor, another university, or even another country. We suggest you reject the notion that you would be “wasting someone’s time.” You deserve to take your time and inform yourself to choose a PhD supervisor wisely. The time and energy invested in a “failed” supervisor search would still be far less than what is consumed by a bad PhD experience ( Fig 3 ).

The more supervisors your interview and the more advice you get from peers, the more apparent these red flags will become.

Conclusions

Pursuing a PhD can be an extremely rewarding endeavor and a time of immense personal growth. The relationship you have with your PhD supervisor can make or break an entire experience, so make this choice carefully. Above, we have outlined some key points to think about while making this decision. Clarifying your own expectations is a particularly important step, as conflicts can arise when there are expectation mismatches. In outlining these topics, we hope to share pieces of advice that sometimes require “insider” knowledge and experience.

After thoroughly evaluating your options, go ahead and tackle the PhD! In our own experiences, carefully choosing a supervisor has led to relationships that morph from mentor to mentee into a collaborative partnership where we can pose new questions and construct novel approaches to answer them. Science is hard enough by itself. If you choose your supervisor well and end up developing a positive relationship with them and their group, you will be better suited for sound and enjoyable science.

Funding Statement

The authors received no specific funding for this work.

Roles and responsibilities of supervisors

Introduction.

Effective graduate student supervision requires complex interactions between graduate students and their supervisors. The role of a supervisor is threefold: to advise graduate students, monitor their academic progress, and act as a mentor. Supervisors not only provide guidance, instruction and encouragement in the research activities of their students, but also take part in the evaluation and examination of their students’ progress, performance and navigation through the requirements of their academic program with the goal to ensure that their students are successful.

Supervisors are responsible for fostering the intellectual and scholarly development of their students. They also play an important role in providing advice about professional development and both academic and non-academic career opportunities, as they are able, and based upon the student’s career interests. 

While these expectations apply to all graduate students, supervising PhD students reflects a longer-term, more substantive commitment.  The privilege to supervise PhD students requires that the supervisor hold  Approved Doctoral Dissertation Supervisor (ADDS)  status. The intent of ADDS policy is to ensure that faculty have the appropriate knowledge to facilitate excellence in PhD supervision.

Knowledge of regulations, policies and procedures

Effective graduate student supervision requires a knowledge and understanding of the University’s requirements and expectations.  To this end, supervisors should:

2.1    Be knowledgeable and remain updated on department, Faculty and University regulations, policies and procedures, and have these protocols guide the supervisors’ decision-making and behaviour as they interact with graduate students. Supervisors are encouraged to take the necessary steps to be well-informed with those Policies identified in  section 1.2 .

2.2    Be familiar with the support services available to students and faculty at the University including those articulated in  section 1.2 . This information is normally available through department graduate co-ordinators, Faculty Graduate Studies Offices, Graduate Studies and Postdoctoral Affairs (GSPA), the Graduate Student Association (GSA) or the University Secretariat.

2.3   Be informed about University of Waterloo policies and procedures that  inform academic integrity  (Office of Research).

2.4    Be aware of the University of Waterloo and Tri-Agency policies and procedures associated with the conduct of research.   Where appropriate, supervisors should be prepared to provide guidance to students on:

• The responsible conduct of research, with particular emphasis on the Tri-Agency Framework as defined in the  Faculty Association of University of Waterloo (FAUW) /University of Waterloo memorandum of Agreement (Section 14).
• The  ethical conduct of research  (Office of Research) involving animals, animal or human tissues, and human participants

2.5    Have knowledge of the  policies and procedures that govern international travel and security  that can be found at Waterloo International.

Advice on program of study, research and professional development

As noted above, supervisors are expected to serve as mentors to their graduate students.  To this end, supervisors should be prepared to provide well-informed advice on academics and professional development.  More specifically, supervisors should be prepared to advise students on:

2.6    An academic program that is challenging, at the appropriate level for the degree being sought, and that can be accomplished within commonly understood and desirable time and resource expectations of the student and the supervisor.

2.7    The choice of courses and seminars needed to fulfil the degree requirements.

2.8    The development and construct of a research topic and proposal.

2.9    The development of a communication plan with the supervisory/advisory committee as to how the student’s progress will be assessed (including during thesis writing and completion), and the role of advisory committee members in the assessment.

2.10    The availability of internships, practica, co-op or other experiential learning opportunities as part of the program.

2.11    The availability of professional development resources for Waterloo graduate students to help advance the students’ career objectives.

Meetings/consultation 

The establishment and communication of common expectations are critical elements to positive experiences for both graduate students and their supervisors.  Achieving these outcomes can be facilitated by regular meetings and/or consultation between students, their supervisors, and where appropriate advisory committees. Especially important is timely feedback on students’ written submissions. 

The University encourages supervisors to:

2.12    Ensure, especially important in the case of doctoral students, that the student has:

• An advisory committee as required.
• A program of study consistent with department and Faculty requirements that has been approved by the advisory committee as required.
• A research plan that is appropriate in breadth, depth and time to completion (see  Milestones in master's and doctoral programs ).

2.13    Arrange for regular (as agreed by the student and supervisor) meetings (which may involve the advisory committee) with students for consultation to ensure steady progress. The frequency of such meetings will depend on the discipline/field of study, type of program, and the student’s progress. At least two, preferably more, meetings should be arranged in each academic term. Supervisors should also be reasonably accessible for meetings requested by their students. The approach to these student meetings should be individualized to reflect the needs of the student. For example, some students may need more support while other may need less.

2.14    Communicate their evaluation of student progress to the department once a year or more often if required. The report should clearly indicate the status of the student’s progress (i.e., satisfactory or unsatisfactory).  In the latter case, the report must include a clearly articulated set of conditions that if satisfied will restore the student’s status to satisfactory. Where the supervisor feels that the student will have serious difficulties finishing the program, the supervisor, in consultation with the advisory committee as appropriate, will inform in writing, both the student and the graduate officer of the nature of the problem(s), suggested remedies and may recommend withdrawal from the program.  More information on  assessing students’ progress  can be found in the Graduate Studies Academic Calendar.

2.15    Thoroughly review and provide constructive feedback on all written materials relevant to the thesis or research paper submitted by their students. The supervisor and the student are encouraged to establish in writing expectations on what constitutes timely feedback; a timeframe of two to three weeks depending on the complexity of the document is commonly applied. However, this can vary depending on various circumstances such as travel or vacation.  These circumstances should be discussed between the supervisor and student.

2.16    Have knowledge of the  guidelines for evaluating students’ progress in a research program  (Graduate Studies Academic Calendar).

2.17   Inform students about the  broad spectrum of resources available  (Writing and Communication Centre) to facilitate development of oral communication and writing skills.

2.18    Be active and supportive in promoting students’ well-being.  This may include:

• Inquiring about a student’s well-being, as appropriate.
• Directing students to  appropriate support services , including  Mental Health and Wellness resources  (Campus Wellness).
• Displaying empathy towards the student.

2.19    Complete as appropriate the University requirements for  Sexual violence awareness, referral and support training  (Human Rights, Equity and Inclusion Office) to understand how to respond to disclosures of sexual violence and refer students to the appropriate supports.

The University recognizes that supervisors will be away from the University for extended periods of time (e.g., sabbatical, satellite campus, visiting professorship).  Being physically away from the University does not preclude a supervisor from remaining engaged with their graduate students.  In cases where the supervisor will not be available either in person or via electronic communications, the supervisor should:

2.20    Inform students, prospective students and the department of any anticipated extended period where communication will not be occurring. In cases when the absence is for a period of two months or more, supervisors should arrange for suitable communication methods. Interim supervision also must be arranged, for example, using members of advisory committees. Supervisors must inform the student’s department (chair/graduate officer) of the arrangements made for the period of absence, including supervision of laboratory or field work where graduate students continue to work during the absence.

2.21    Ensure students know that in situations where a supervisor works away from campus for two months or more and where their students can accompany the supervisor, the decision to remain on campus or to follow the supervisor rests entirely with the student. Students shall face no pressure (explicit or implicit) or consequences when making this choice and are not required to provide any reason.

As with the departmental representatives, supervisors have responsibility to advance safety.  More specifically, supervisors should:

2.22    Ensure a safe working environment both on and off campus (working alone, field work) by assessing hazards and implementing appropriate controls. This must be in accordance with the Occupational Health and Safety Act,  Policy 34  (Secretariat) and department and Faculty regulations.  All supervisors must complete mandatory  health and safety supervisor awareness training  (Safety Office) and must ensure that graduate students complete both mandatory and work-specific safety training.  More information can be found on the  Safety Office  website.

2.23    Ensure that students obtain additional training when new safety risks arise and ensure training is kept up to date.

Inherent to graduate education are the dissemination of knowledge and the participation in scholarly activities away from the University campus.  Travel (domestic and international) can include fieldwork, conferences, course work and other work related to the thesis. Supervisors are encouraged to support students’ travel to accomplish these important objectives.  Supervisors should:

2.24    Follow or encourage students to follow  Policy 31  (Secretariat) that governs University-sanctioned travel.

2.25    Categorize and report risk associated with travel.  Low risk  (Safety Office) are activities for which it is expected that participants will encounter hazards that are no greater than what they encounter in their everyday lives. Examples of  significant risk  (e.g. industrial sites, remote regions etc.) are noted on the  Safety Office website .  Travel or field work that involves significant risk must be documented using the  Fieldwork Risk Management Form  from the  Safety Office .  For low risk activities off campus, supervisors should:

• Provide advice on preparation for pre-departure orientation and planning for any travel and including associated risk, as they are able;

2.26    Document the student(s) location and duration of travel, including personal and emergency contact information. Review the material provided by  Waterloo International  to understand how to best mitigate risk and ensure safety for international travel.

2.27    Encourage students to register using the  Pre-departure Travel Form  at  Waterloo International .

2.28    Consult the  Government of Canada Travel Advice and Advisories web page  for the international destination and discuss the mitigation of risk with the students to the destination.

Financial assistance

Supervisors regularly provide financial support for their graduate students.  Both the supervisor and the student benefit when a clear understanding exists of the value of funding, and the academic outcomes that should occur from the supported activities.  Specifically, supervisors should:

2.29    Be informed about the spectrum of funding opportunities available through the department, Faculty and Graduate Studies and Postdoctoral Affairs (GSPA) for students in  financial need  and to communicate these sources to student.

2.30   Communicate clearly and in writing to their students the terms (e.g., amounts, length of time, conditions) of the financial commitment being made when financial assistance is to be provided from research grants or contracts under the supervisor’s direction.

2.31    Support students’ understanding of their funding, including a consideration of student expenses (primarily tuition and housing) and taxation, if appropriate.  

Intellectual property 

Increasingly, students and supervisors enter into their academic relationships with previously established intellectual property (IP).  Moreover, students and supervisors may have an expectation that their collective work may produce new IP.  Best practices include the articulation of students’ and supervisors’ understanding of IP relationships at regular intervals throughout the students’ academic program.  More specifically, supervisors should: 

2.32    Discuss issues related to intellectual property such as patents, software, copyright, and income from sales and royalties, and inform students of University policies about intellectual property and the conduct of research. It should be recognized that, in accordance with  Policy 73  (Secretariat), intellectual property normally is owned by the creators. However, the University retains a royalty-free right to use, for educational and research purposes, any intellectual property created by faculty, staff and students. Ideally, supervisors and students should enter into a written agreement that expresses IP owned by either party prior to beginning the research relationship and the default way in which IP created by the researchers’ joint activities will be owned.  A common example is an assumption in the absence of an explicit agreement of joint IP ownership, with each researcher owning an equal share.

2.33    Ensure that students are aware of implications and/or obligations regarding intellectual property of research conducted under contract. If appropriate, discuss with their students and any research partners the protection of intellectual property by patent or copyright. Any significant intellectual contribution by a student must be recognized in the form of co-authorship. Supervisors must convey to students, in advance of publication, whether they intend to recognize the student as co-author for work under contract.

Publications 

Academic outputs – in various forms – document and demonstrate ownership of creative research and other scholarly activities.  These outputs are important for advancing knowledge and catalyzing additional scholarly activity in these areas and should be encouraged.  When supervisors and graduate students work collectively on these academic works, it is important for both that their relative contributions are represented appropriately.  To achieve these goals, supervisors should:

2.34    Discuss with their students, at an early stage of their program, authorship practices within the discipline and University policies about publications ( Policy 73  on the Secretariat website). 

2.35    Discuss and reach agreement with students, well in advance of publication and ideally at the outset of collaboration, the way in which authorship will be shared, if appropriate, between the supervisor, the student and other contributors for work conducted under contract.

2.36    Encourage the dissemination of students’ research results by publication in scholarly and research journals, presentation at conferences (domestic or international) and seminars;

2.37    Motivate the dissemination of research through non-traditional or non-academic avenues (e.g. Open Access resources, public presentations, and popular media).

Withdrawal of supervisory duties 

In rare cases supervisors may determine that they are not prepared or able to continue in a supervisory capacity.  When this occurs, the supervisor is required to:

2.38    Follow the guidelines in the Graduate Studies Academic Calendar regarding  University Responsibilities Regarding Supervisory Relationships  that outlines the steps for dissolution of the supervisory relationship.

Accommodation 

The University is eager to establish conditions that maximize graduate students’ likelihood of success.  To this end, supervisors:

2.39    Have a duty to engage in accommodations processes with  AccessAbility Services , as requested, and to provide appropriate accommodation to the point of undue hardship.

2.40    Remain informed of their roles and responsibilities with respect to accommodations.

Guide for Graduate Research and Supervision

• Roles and responsibilities of departments, graduate officers and graduate co-ordinators
• Roles and responsibilities of graduate students
• Roles and responsibilities of advisory committees

How to supervise PhDs effectively

Six best practices for supervisors, students and supervisory committees

• Post a comment

Supervision only works when all participants are working together: supervisor, student, and supervisory committee.

We often see rights and responsibilities listed in calendars and handbooks for supervisors and students, but we are at the same time left without much of a clue about how to actually manage the supervision process to a successful conclusion.

The goals of the PhD supervision process are challenging and varied: high quality research, high-quality graduate experience, timely completion, development of new expertise and, finally, the creation of a new colleague.

Supervision is not an exact science and varies not only on an individual basis but also along disciplinary lines. Sometimes this relationship works out terrifically and sometimes not so!

Here are a few best practices based on our collective experience and discussions with colleagues. The process is not of course the sole responsibility of the supervisor, and so our remarks are addressed to all participants: supervisor, student, and supervisory committee members.

Share expectations early

All relationships benefit from a shared understanding of mutual expectation, and the supervisor-student one is no different. If it helps, use this article as a basis for that discussion. There are many other topics that deserve attention when establishing such expectations, depending on discipline, some as trivial as what time of day people work best and some as fundamental as respect for intellectual property.

Draw the Box

“Draw the Box” is a way to define the research topic. It is being clear about what problems will be addressed (i.e., in the box) and even clearer about what will not be addressed (i.e., outside the box). This short circuits well-meaning diversions along the way. This works best, of course, if the problems in the box are doable in three to four years! The limits to the proposed research shape the timetable and deliverables.

Meet early. Meet often

The most common cause of a supervisory malfunction is lack of meetings. Meetings are in many ways a bellwether of progress. Meeting the supervisory committee at least once or twice a year allows the student to demonstrate progress (or lack thereof); both the student and supervisor get a reality check. Regular scheduled one-on-one meetings of the supervisor and student drive the process forward with their odd mixture of guilt, pat on the back, and planning. Regular meetings, of course, increase the pressure to demonstrate actual progress!

Having structured meetings is useful. For example, sticking to an agenda, expecting a summary or presentation from the student at each meeting, keeping notes of meetings, providing documentation of the process, and keeping that timetable and those deliverables in sight provide tangible evidence of progress and prevent many unwanted surprises.

Have a Plan B

Attacking a research problem needs an understanding of the required resources. Not everyone gets to use the Cyclotron or rent an icebreaker for the summer! The resources must be affordable and they must be available in the time frame of the student’s program. Even best-laid plans have problems, and often unanticipated road blocks occur: software or hardware does not arrive, equipment breaks, manuscripts are delayed, datasets are incomplete or garbled, etc. A three-month delay can easily develop into a show stopper and the supervisor, student and perhaps the committee need to be proactive and be prepared to move to Plan B before the timeline of the thesis is completely destroyed.

Show and Tell

Unless the thesis contains code for the next Google or a multi-gazillion dollar patent, ideas benefit from exposure. Supervisors should make opportunities for the student to speak about their work; students need to take them. Write about it. Give seminars on the question, the methodology, the results. Go to conferences and talk about it to people in the coffee line, around the posters, after your talk, after other people’s talks. Develop and practice an elevator pitch, the two minute spiel in English that covers the problem (so what), the idea (what), and the results (how good). Hopefully the student and supervisor have the same story!

It’s all about respect

Above all, a good supervisory experience is about respect. Respect of the student for the content knowledge and experience of the supervisor and the supervisory committee. Respect by the supervisor and committee of the needs and expectations of the student. This plays out in the manner that everyone (i.e., not just the student) accepts and acts on feedback, the collegiality of interactions, and the timeliness of feedback.

Fundamental, of course, to respect is good old fashioned honesty. Students are responsible for honesty in their effort to act on feedback, to be honestly interested in the topic. Supervisors are responsible for honesty in their interactions with the student especially when the student is falling behind or not performing at the level expected.

These six ideas are not new and they are not rocket science but they are good starting points and timely reminders for us all. At the end of the process, the newly minted PhD becomes a colleague, and whether the relationship grows or withers will depend on the mutual respect developed getting there.

If we could add a seventh point it would be to participate fully in the process: celebrate the successes, mourn the losses and the rejects, and laugh at the improbable. It is hard to think of a single researcher who does not treasure the time spent with his or her graduate students and certainly administrative researchers, to a person, call this the best part of their week. So it is our job to make sure this is also the best part of the student’s week as well.

Carolyn Watters, Dean, Sunny Marche, Associate Dean, and Dieter Pelzer, Associate Dean, are the dean team in the Faculty of Graduate Studies at Dalhousie University. They each contribute regularly to the Deans’ Blog , an intelligent and illuminating weekly take on issues affecting graduate students, post docs, and their supervisors at Dalhousie.

Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

You're viewing this site as a domestic an international student

You're a domestic student if you are:

• a citizen of Australia or New Zealand,
• an Australian permanent resident, or
• a holder of an Australian permanent humanitarian visa.

You're an international student if you are:

• intending to study on a student visa,
• not a citizen of Australia or New Zealand,
• not an Australian permanent resident, or
• a temporary resident (visa status) of Australia.

What makes a good PhD supervisor?

UQ people Published 5 Jan, 2023  ·  9-minute read

Your PhD advisor will play a key role in ensuring your Doctor of Philosophy is a rewarding and enjoyable experience.

Choosing a PhD supervisor can therefore be a daunting prospect. But we’ve enlisted the help of 2 UQ PhD advisors and researchers, Dr Loic Yengo and Professor Marina Reeves, to pinpoint exactly what you should be looking for. Better yet, they share their tips for maintaining a positive and fruitful working relationship with your PhD advisor throughout the typical 3-4 years of your candidature.

In this article, they'll cover:

• the role of a PhD supervisor
• how to choose a PhD supervisor
• the qualities of a good PhD supervisor
• tips for the first meeting with a PhD supervisor
• how to maintain a positive relationship with a PhD supervisor
• how to give and receive PhD supervisor feedback
• advice for ensuring a mutually beneficial relationship between candidate and advisor.

While the traditional and widely used term is ‘PhD supervisor’, here at UQ, we like to say ‘PhD advisor’ to emphasise the purpose of the role, which is to advise rather than manage. However, we use both titles interchangeably throughout this article.

Meet Professor Reeves: UQ PhD advisor and Deputy Associate Dean Research (Researcher Development), Faculty of Medicine

Professor Reeves’ research is focused on the role of diet, physical activity, and weight/body composition in improving outcomes and quality of life for women diagnosed with breast cancer. She is currently an advisor to 2 PhD candidates whose research concentrates on breast cancer survivorship.

“One of my candidate’s research is focused on understanding more about behaviours that disrupt circadian rhythm (our body clock), like when we sleep and eat, and the role these behaviours may play in improving the health and wellbeing of women after a breast cancer diagnosis,” says Professor Reeves.

"The other is focused on the subgroup of women with triple negative breast cancer, the most aggressive breast cancer subtype.”

This PhD project uses specific data to understand more about the incidence and survival of the different breast cancer subtypes.

“Her research is also exploring whether modifiable risk factors like body weight are associated with prognosis in women with triple negative breast cancer.”

Meet Dr Yengo: UQ PhD advisor and Group Leader of the Statistical Genomics Laboratory , Institute of Molecular Bioscience (IMB)

Doctor Yengo’s research involves matching genetic differences with particular character traits to help predict how societies will evolve. He is currently an advisor to 3 PhD candidates whose research topics are in a similar vein.

“PhD candidates in my lab work on a wide range of projects connected to the analysis of large-scale datasets containing DNA sequences of millions of individuals from across the world,” says Dr Yengo.

“One project is about using DNA patterns to understand how people choose their spouses; another one is about discovering genetic variations that cause disease in specific populations.”

The findings could help policymakers and health professionals better prepare for – and therefore reduce the burden of – genetic disorders and diseases. But how do Dr Yengo and his team draw meaning from such vast quantities of data?

“For each project, we often develop novel statistical techniques to analyse these large volumes of data to answer the fundamental questions that we are interested in,” he says.

“By ‘developing' novel statistical techniques, I mean deriving the maths underlying the algorithms, and also programming these algorithms into new software tools.”

“Our research is intrinsically multi-disciplinary but we do love maths and stats in the Lab!”

The role of a PhD supervisor

When it comes down to it, what exactly is the role of a PhD supervisor? And how will a good PhD advisor guide you with your research?

For Dr Yengo, it’s about achieving a balance between teaching practical skills and providing inspiration and support for the PhD candidate to pursue their passion.

“I believe that the role of a PhD supervisor is to help the candidate develop their own program of research, eventually,” he says.

“That includes teaching key skills such as reading a lot, asking the relevant questions, managing time and energy (this is a hard one) and not being afraid to dream big!”

Professor Reeves singles out 3 key roles:

• advising and guiding on the research process and research topic
• being an advocate for your PhD candidate – providing encouragement and opportunities, and helping them to open doors by introducing them to your networks
• being a role model – modelling integrity and championing others’ success.

Choosing a PhD supervisor

Choosing a PhD supervisor can be a tricky business. Undertaking your Doctor of Philosophy is a lengthy process , so you’re going to be in a professional relationship with your supervisor for a pretty long time. The pressure is on to find ‘the one’. But how do you know they’re going to be the right fit? Dr Yengo and Professor Reeves have a few tips to help you reach a conclusion.

The first step? Ironically, it’s doing your research on the researcher.

“I would suggest researching what the supervisor works on and what they have published before,” says Dr Yengo.

Professor Reeves acknowledges the importance of this step too.

“There needs to be a good alignment between their area of expertise and the PhD project so they can guide you appropriately.”

Step 2 is, according to both advisors, to not be afraid to shop around.

“Engage in informal chats with potential supervisors early in the process, especially when you are undecided,” says Dr Yengo.

“These discussions can help you form your own research questions and define a suitable direction for your research.”

Professor Reeves also encourages potential PhD candidates to seize opportunities to work with prospective advisors before locking them in.

“Whether that’s as an honours or other research coursework supervisor, summer research project, or research assistant work – it will allow you to see if their supervisory style and research is a good fit for you,” she says.

Read more tips on how to approach and choose a PhD supervisor , straight from UQ PhD candidates.

A clear discussion on expectations upfront is crucial - expectations around the working relationship and the project itself.

Qualities of a good PhD supervisor

A good PhD advisor requires a careful balance of traits and skills. You want them to provide guidance without being overbearing, and to offer advice while letting you figure things out yourself too. There's a lot to consider when choosing a PhD supervisor, so Dr Yengo and Professor Reeves have pinpointed a few of the most important qualities to look out for.

The first and arguably most critical is more of a requirement than a quality, and it’s that your potential PhD advisor is simply available . They need to have the time and energy to commit to you and your PhD.

A few other essential qualities of a good PhD supervisor are:

• clear communicator
• caring and approachable
• a leader in their field of research
• open to learning from others.

“By generous, I mean someone who is willing to share their wisdom and time to dedicate to your growth and development as a researcher,” says Professor Reeves.

She also advocates for finding an advisor who promotes a healthy work/life balance .

Dr Yengo explains that it’s important for a PhD advisor to be both a coach and a mentor , where as a coach they will help you find your own solution, and as a mentor they would share their experience and lead by example.

Tips for the first meeting with a PhD supervisor

Professor Reeves advises on using the first meeting with a PhD supervisor to outline expectations of both the advisor and candidate.

“A clear discussion on expectations up front is crucial – expectations around the working relationship and the project itself.”

“Find out how often they would meet with you, what resources and support would be available for you, what their research vision is or what they believe the impact of the PhD project will be.”

When Dr Yengo approaches the first meeting with his PhD candidates, he likes to find out:

• What is motivating the student to start a PhD?
• What are their technical skills and why are they interested in the topic?
• What are their career aspirations after completing their PhD? (Note that this can change in the process of doing a PhD.)

Heading into your first meeting prepared to outline your expectations and listen to theirs, and answer these questions, is a good way to create a solid foundation for the relationship between you and your PhD advisor.

Supervisors should create a culture that welcomes questions and mistakes, because that’s what it takes to learn.

The PhD supervisor relationship: keeping it positive

When it comes to maintaining a positive working relationship between PhD advisor and candidate, Dr Yengo and Professor Reeves both agree that the focus should be on the process, rather than the outcome.

“It’s important that the advisor takes an active interest in the candidate’s development as a researcher,” says Professor Reeves.

“A PhD is a research training process, so the focus shouldn’t just be on the outcome of the research project, but equally on the development of the candidate as a researcher.”

Dr Yengo says regular meetings are important for this reason. It encourages candidates to ask questions and share updates on their work.

“Candidates don’t have to wait until (they think) they have solved all the problems before discussing with their supervisor. This is often very counterproductive,” he says.

“Supervisors should create a culture that welcomes questions and mistakes, because that’s what it takes to learn.”

When considering the desired professional outcomes of a PhD, Professor Reeves encourages continued discussions around the candidate’s career plans, to ensure the research experience is always contributing to career goals.

“Regular conversations around the candidates’ career plans and development are important for maintaining a positive working relationship but also a successful outcome for the candidate post-PhD.”

Giving and receiving PhD supervisor feedback

A huge part of the PhD advisor and candidate relationship is giving and receiving feedback. And doing this effectively.

“The most important thing is to understand that feedback is part of the learning cycle,” says Dr Yengo.

“Feedback is never a definitive assessment or an exam; therefore, it should emphasise what can be improved in any given situation and towards a well-specified objective (e.g. a paper or a specific analysis).”

According to Professor Reeves, feedback should be:

• critically thought-out
• constructive, with clear guidance on what is needed to improve and what the next steps are
• positive – it should go beyond pinpointing constructive changes, to also identify what has been done well and what has improved from previous versions
• consistent – not changing from week to week

“If you aren’t getting this with your feedback, don’t be afraid to ask for more detail or guidance,” says Professor Reeves.

She also outlines the importance of acknowledging the receipt of feedback and voicing when you respectfully disagree with it.

“There will come a point in your candidature where you will be more of an expert on a topic than your advisor,” she says.

“So, if you disagree with feedback, instead of just disregarding it, explain why you disagree. That’s also helpful for your development in terms of being able to justify and defend your thesis.”

When it comes down to it, feedback isn’t only for the advisor to give.

“Both candidate and supervisor should be patient and willing to learn from each other,” says Dr Yengo.

Making it mutually beneficial

Like all relationships, the one between a PhD advisor and candidate is a two-way street. Both must be invested in the working relationship for it to flourish. While the purpose of the process may be for the candidate to receive guidance and advice, you can also have a lot to offer your future advisor too.

“Interacting with PhD candidates can be extremely exciting as they often get a fresh perspective on problems,” says Dr Yengo.

“The professional relationship flourishes when we equally want to know the answer to the question. This can lead to fast and productive cycles of discussions, which often generate the most creative ideas.”

Professor Reeves believes mutual respect is key to a successful advisor/candidate relationship, as well as a shared vision.

Both advisors acknowledge the challenges of achieving a positive work/life balance while completing a PhD, and Professor Reeves points out how personal and professional respect can come into play here.

“I think it helps when they can see that you, as the advisor, care about the work and research, but also care about them as a person."

So, what makes a good PhD supervisor? Balance. Balance between professional and personal approaches to work and life, constructive and positive feedback, coaching and mentoring, leading and learning. Search for an advisor who can demonstrate balance in these areas, and you’re sure to have an enriching PhD experience.

Ready to pursue your passion for research with a Doctor of Philosophy?

Learn more about studying a PhD at UQ

Share this Facebook X LinkedIn Email

Related stories

How to get a PhD

4-minute read

What makes a good PhD student?

3-minute read

Why do a PhD at UQ?

7-minute read

What's it like to do a PhD at UQ?

8-minute read

Research management

Sponsored by

Ten platinum rules for PhD supervisors

Is it time to add PhD supervision to your skill set? Tara Brabazon explains the pitfalls, challenges and rewards of this key academic role for the rookie mentor

Tara Brabazon

Additional links.

• More on this topic

Elsevier helps researchers and healthcare professionals advance science and improve health outcomes for the benefit of society.

Discover elsevier.

You may also like

Popular resources

.css-1txxx8u{overflow:hidden;max-height:81px;text-indent:0px;} Change is coming, whether higher education likes it or not

Ai and assessment redesign: a four-step process, upgrade your teaching: four instant improvement tips, the cruel optimism of research careers: how to support contract workers, create an onboarding programme for neurodivergent students.

I receive strange emails. Some request money, sexual favours or a reference. Thousands, sent from students, have outlined the failures of PhD supervisors. From this dodgy digital pile, one message remains in my memory.

A young academic was outraged. He was so outraged that he used capital letters throughout the email. He was offended that I had written an article ,  aimed at prospective PhD students, that provided a guide to selecting a supervisor/adviser with care, ensuring that expectations, rights and responsibilities are assembled at the start of their enrolment. He was outraged – sorry, OUTRAGED – that I focused on students and their right to choose. I had supposedly displaced his capacity to supervise by suggesting that students check academic credentials and expertise.

• Want to get on in research? You need to manage people effectively
• Efficient communication that avoids overloading students or staff
• How to turn a PhD project into a commercial venture

This strange email captures the dense and difficult negotiations of power within PhD supervision. Students have choices. So do supervisors and advisers. The alignment of purpose and priorities is crucial. Too often, this relationship is toxic. Therefore, let’s park the outrage and provide 10 maxims to consider as we start – or continue – as a supervisor/adviser, so that we are authentic, credible and useful.

1. Just because you have completed a PhD does not mean you can supervise one

Very few academics hold teaching qualifications, particularly outside the education disciplines. Higher degree supervision – too often – is based on homology. We supervise as we were supervised. Or – more worryingly – we supervise how we think we were supervised. This strategy has never been effective – as confirmed by PhD attrition rates . As the PhD student cohort diversifies to include more women, Indigenous and First Nation students, rainbow students, scholars of colour, students with disabilities, and a wide span of ages, homology is not only inappropriate but destructive. My first 18 completions were all students under the age of 25. My next 30 were all over 40. Our students are changing . They will not put up with platitudes, excuses or comments about the good old days.

Experience is not enough. Expertise is required. Enrol in professional development courses. Learn how to supervise. Learn about doctoral studies. It is a burgeoning field of research. Do not assume that we know what we are doing because we graduated with a PhD. Simply because we drink milk does not mean we can run a dairy farm. In no other area of our scholarly lives would we generalise from a data set of one.

2. Any academic can meet a PhD student – the skill is enabling the completion and submission of a quality thesis

It is very pleasant to supervise PhD students. They are bright people who work hard and think deeply. Yet these meetings in and of themselves do not ensure completion or that the research will reach the intellectual level required of a PhD examination.

Do you know the intellectual standard required to pass a PhD in your discipline? In other words, can you read a student’s close-to-completed thesis and know that it will pass? Can you locate the line between major and minor corrections; major corrections and a revise and resubmit; and revise and resubmit and failure? Which disciplines encourage split decisions when examiners disagree? Do you know how the policies, procedures and regulations of your institution shape and frame the PhD thesis that is sent to examiners? How does the digital submission of the thesis transform its preparation and examination?

This knowledge is derived from learning about the doctoral policies and procedures in your institution, reading a large number of doctoral theses and examination reports, and volunteering to be a viva chair or milestone assessor as often as possible. 

Talking to students over coffee or in a lab is important. Understanding the standard required for a doctoral thesis to pass with minor corrections is crucial.

3. Beginnings matter, so work hard in the first year

While the focus of the candidature – from the first day – must be on the examination, a short and successful enrolment is based on a powerhouse first year. Some of the most dreadful – and longest – candidatures I have seen have emerged from supervisors allowing students to wander about, thinking about their honours, master’s or capstone projects, drinking coffee and ambling through conferences, while complaining about their lack of progress.

The best candidatures begin as if the student is driving in a Grand Prix. Start your engines. Hammer to the first corner. It is important that students do not simply redo earlier projects. Find a subject area quickly, and then render it discrete, manageable and viable. If students can rapidly determine research questions, even if they are clumsy, then they have a focus. A strong first year of enrolment gives students confidence; they can publish early in the project and start to gain meaningful feedback.

4. Assess the student’s information literacy in the first month of their enrolment

Two pathways connect a student and a supervisor. The first involves teaching a student through their undergraduate years, and they continue through to a PhD with you as their supervisor. The second pathway involves students selecting you to supervise their project from outside your courses, university or country. Both modes of admission hold dangers, mainly involving assumptions about information literacy, academic literacy and disciplinary literacy.

Before my students start their supervision – whether I have known them for years or just begun a teaching and learning relationship – I ensure that they complete a PhD set-up document . This pamphlet, which I have used for every student I have supervised over 24 years, incorporates all modes of the doctorate – including the PhD by prior publication and the artefact-and-exegesis thesis – and fulfils a diagnostic role. It ensures that the student is thinking about a topic, they verify methodological, epistemological and ontological considerations, and also log their information literacy. For the supervisor, the completed set-up document and the subsequent meeting – which I usually schedule for two hours – provides the initiation into the doctoral programme.

From this diagnostic tool, a suite of professional development programmes can be inserted into the candidature, particularly involving the library, librarians and information literacy. From this foundation, literature reviews, systematic reviews and scoping reviews can emerge, which enable a rapid narrowing of the project and the development of research questions. 

5. Assumptions kill doctorates

Students maintain assumptions about a PhD. So do supervisors. If these assumptions are not communicated and managed, students and supervisors move through the candidature misunderstanding each other. The resultant “conversations” are hooked into confusion, resentment, bitterness and anger. Statements such as: “It’s your PhD” and “Tell me what you want me to do next” pepper the enrolment. The set up document and initial meeting replace assumptions with talking points about the rights, responsibilities and roles of supervisors and students. A clear, honest discussion about meeting frequency, feedback, modes of communication and the management of challenges at the start of a candidature not only saves time but reduces the likelihood of changing supervisors through the programme and cuts student attrition.

6. The selection of examiners is the single most important moment in a doctoral programme

Examination matters to a PhD. Our last stand for quality assurance and excellence in our universities resides in doctoral programmes. If we “dial a mate” and bring in friends to examine, it is time to close our universities.  Standards matter. When I was dean of graduate research, it was amazing how often I had very senior colleagues attacking me with aggression only seen in extreme cage fighting about the importance of their research partner, grant collaborator, co-author or former student acting as an examiner. The mantra would progress as follows (yes, this is a direct quotation): “There are only three experts in this field in the world. I am one of them and I am friends with the other two.” In this case, the area with only three international experts was – wait for it – body image.

Select an examiner who is intensely research-active, aligned to the field of the thesis without being so close that the student would be viewed as a threat, and resolutely independent of the supervisor.

To ensure a strong selection of external examiners, enact a full digital evaluation to ensure that they are research-active and a decent person, rather than in need of a Snickers at the first critique or differing view. Finally – and this is sad to write – select experienced researchers, supervisors and examiners. The toughest examiners are – obviously – the most inexperienced. They have a data set of one: their own thesis. They are a genius (obviously). Any thesis they read in the early years after their own submission and examination must be substandard (to their own).

To shift to the Star Wars universe, find a Yoda examiner rather than one with the impetuous confidence of a young Obi Wan or Luke Skywalker.

7. Make sure the SOCK is obvious, clear and present in the abstract (and the introduction and conclusion)

The PhD has one characteristic: a significant, original contribution to knowledge (SOCK) . Without a SOCK, a PhD will not pass. Each word is important. Research can be a contribution but not original. It can be original but not significant. Supervisor and student must work together to ensure that the SOCK is the strong frame for the candidature and thesis. The earlier a student can ascertain their SOCK, the smoother the progression to completion.

The SOCK is presented in the second sentence of the abstract: “My significant, original contribution to knowledge is…” As supervisors, we need to move the student into the space where they can complete this sentence as early as possible in their enrolment.

Examiners are paid very little to assess a thesis. It is hard work. Think about an examiner reading a thesis while drinking a glass of chianti. Therefore, in every chapter, a student must remind the chianti-fuelled examiner about the purpose of this chapter and how it aligns with the SOCK of the thesis. Ensure that the abstract, introduction, conclusion and every single chapter hook into the SOCK.

8. PhD students are not your slaves, sexual partners, un(der)paid research assistants or writers of your articles

One of the saddest memories of my academic career emerged in a meeting (obviously) when I had started as a dean of graduate research. Senior scholars – research heavyweights – were assembled in the room. Very early in the meeting one of these Mike Tysons described their PhD students as “slaves.” That was appalling. What was chilling was the laughter that erupted in response to this nasty noun. 

PhD students do not exist to serve or service the supervisor. They are not drawing breath so that they can complete a supervisor’s research project or write a supervisor’s articles. We all know – personally and professionally – shocking stories about supervisors “appropriating” the work of their students or adding their name to papers in which they had minimal intellectual input. Research codes of conduct around the world – most stemming from the Vancouver protocol – are creating changes, with institutions and journals demanding transparency and integrity from all authors through the submission process.

PhD students need a supervisor to protect, guide, mentor and enable. It is an unequal relationship. Shocking cases have been revealed around the world of the sexual exploitation of students, from sexual harassment through to sexual assault. These cases demean all scholars. The standards we walk past are the standards we accept. A PhD candidate is a student, and therefore worthy of respect, care, guidance and clarity in the standards of a professional relationship.

9. Create a strong supervisory team

Most university systems around the world insist on a supervisory team. That change is welcome; we cannot guarantee that the scholars who start the supervision will remain in place until the examination. A team adds safety, and a safety net for the student.

Supervisory teams, composed of two or more colleagues, are important. Sometimes, the relationships are fraught or non-existent. Many co-supervisors are simply on paper for administrative purposes and not involved in the project. The best relationships involve one of the supervisors using their specific expertise – often in methodology – to enable the creation of a chapter. When that part of the project is completed, they step back from the supervision. 

Supervisors should meet before any student is involved in the process to discuss their expectations, hopes and concerns about the project and the student. How often are meetings held? Who is involved in those meetings? How is feedback to be organised? How are disagreements – scholarly or otherwise – to be resolved? These questions must be answered and agreed on before the student is involved in the process.

10. Do not confuse the production of refereed articles with the construction of a thesis

Every PhD should have a dissemination strategy. Research must be available to ensure citizens and fellow scholars can use it – and transform it. Examiners also recognise the value of peer-reviewed publications as part of the PhD. Experienced supervisors remember that  the best examiners differentiate between the processes of  peer reviewing and examination. 

I have published more than 250 refereed articles. I have graduated from only one PhD. The confusion between publishing articles and examination dumbs down our doctorates. Indeed, it is becoming customary to assume that three refereed articles are sufficient in scope, scale and quality to create a successful PhD examination.

Three articles in three years would not reach the level required to be “research-active” as a scholar. Many of us produce between five and 10 articles every year. Indeed, the PhD by prior publication , an unusual but burgeoning mode of doctorate, submits a long (20,000-40,000 words) contextual statement confirming the significant, original contribution to knowledge, followed by a large number of publications, often spanning from 12 to 25 articles. 

In terms of quality assurance, how could three articles be equivalent to an integrated research project of 100,000 words? Indeed, how could three articles be equivalent to the 12 or more publications submitted through a PhD by prior publication?

Fine PhDs have been passed without any publications emerging from them. Theses with refereed articles have been subjected to revision and re-examination. Publishing research during a PhD is valuable. It must not be assumed that peer review and examination are equivalent or converge.

A final note: supervising PhD students is a privilege. It is not a right. Doctoral studies and the scholarship of supervision (SoS) literature are revealing how supervisory quality is built through experience, expertise, professional development and research-led andragogy. Our responsibilities as supervisors are not only to our students but also to our disciplines, to research ethics and the maintenance of standards. Great PhD students are our future. Great PhD supervisors remain at their service.

Tara Brabazon is professor of cultural studies at Flinders University. Her most recent books are 12 rules for (Academic) Life: A Stroppy Feminist Guide to Teaching, Learning, Politics and Jordan Peterson (Springer, 2022) and Comma: How to Restart, Reclaim and Reboot your PhD (Author’s Republic, 2022).

If you found this interesting and want advice and insight from academics and university staff delivered direct to your inbox each week,  sign up for the THE Campus newsletter .

For more insights from Tara Brabazon:

How to get students through their PhD thesis

10 truths a PhD supervisor will never tell you

How not to write a PhD thesis

14 essential PhD questions answered

Change is coming, whether higher education likes it or not

The iscanner app supports the academic community in information sharing and management, support students with caring responsibilities in he, step up to support students with disabilities, emotions and learning: what role do emotions play in how and why students learn, the secret to timely, relevant, inclusive communication with students.

Register for free

and unlock a host of features on the THE site

• Interesting
• Scholarships
• UGC-CARE Journals

Choosing a PhD supervisor? 9 Key Factors to Consider

10 Tips to Select PhD Supervisor

PhD supervisor is the most powerful person in any PhD scholar’s academic career. From the beginning of the research to the end, a good supervisor plays different roles like mentor, advisor, and cheerleader. A scholar gains confidence in research only through his/her supervisor. Therefore, it’s important to make a wise choice in choosing a supervisor for the successful completion of your PhD program. In this article, iLovePhD listed the nine key factors when you choosing a PhD supervisor.

“A good teacher knows how to bring out the best in a student!!” Charles Kuralt

Selecting a PhD supervisor is one of the most crucial and difficult decisions for a young researcher to make. Your decision will be influenced by the subject area you wish to carry out your work. Remember, when you are pursuing your research, there will be extreme highs and extreme lows throughout your PhD, so you should try to choose a supervisor with whom you can collaborate effectively during challenging circumstances.

How will you choose your PhD supervisor depends on whether you’re applying for an R&D-funded project or putting forward your research proposal.

9 Key Factors to Choose a PhD Supervisor / Guide / Advisor

1. r&d funded project or own research proposal.

• If you’re applying for an R&D-funded project , the process of choosing a supervisor is simple.
• Usually, they will be the principal investigator of the project, you can join as a JRF ie., Junior Research Fellow in the project to do the project work, and at the same time you can use this data to get your PhD degree, provided the principal investigator of the project and your research supervisor should be the same.
• The advantages of working in the funded project are that you will get the complete roadmap of your work at the initial stage of your PhD and you will get the fellowship during the project period.
• On the other hand, if you’re proposing your research proposal, you have to do some groundwork to choose a supervisor whose research interests align with your interests.
• You have to be clear in your area of research and should have a rough idea of what you want your PhD topic to be.
• In this way, you can narrow down the potential supervisors by research interests and then focus on those who have expertise in your area of research.

2. Check Scientific Databases

It will give you lots of data with which you can refine your search.

• This allows you to look for the most cited articles and thus helps you to choose who the leading researchers are.

3. Career stage of your potential supervisor

• Then look for the career stage of your supervisor.
• A professor at the beginning of their career might have fewer professional commitments and therefore they find more time to supervise you.
• A senior professor may have a busy professional life – but this could be counter-balanced by their expertise and experience.

4. Check Recent Publications

Let us assume that you have short-listed 10 professors, now you need to check for their publications and give more importance to their recent publications so that you will get to know about the current research works going on under their supervision.

5. Prior Meeting

Once you’ve done your search for a supervisor and have a clear idea of your proposed research topic, you should make a shortlist of around three potential supervisors to contact.

Make sure that you understand their academic background and current projects so that you can make an excellent first impression when you get in touch with them.

6. During the meeting

If you’re able to meet your potential supervisor and discuss your research proposal, you need to have a good research plan of what you want to achieve with your PhD research.

Meeting them in person is a great way of gauging their personality and your chemistry.

You are going to work with them for a minimum of three years, so you can make sure you are going to get on with them.

Also, it’s good to know the other details like If they’re planning to retire or change institution, because that could affect your research later down the line.

You should have a supervisor who is going to stick around for the duration of your PhD.

7. Status of Current PhD Scholars

• Find out what sort of research work the supervisor is currently involved in.
• You can normally see a list of current research scholars on the department website.
• You can get feedback from them regarding the supervisor’s methodology of guidance.

8. Research Facilities and Funding

• Check for research facilities available in the department or Centre.
• Make sure that the laboratories are equipped with the state-of-the-art instrumentation and equipment facilities needed to carry out your research.
• Check whether the institution or the department has a well-established library facility to access reputed and peer-reviewed publications and e-journals.
• Check for any fellowships available in the department/University for PhD research .

9. Collaboration

• Depending on your preferences, you can decide whether you want to work within a small, specialized department or a larger team that allows more scope for interdisciplinary collaboration.

Some of you may want to carry out PhD program under the part-time category. In this case, you need to get NOC ie., a No Objection Certificate from the organization where you work. If your organization permits you, you can register your PhD in the University you want to do. You may have to choose a co-supervisor or a joint supervisor. And he/she may be your head of the organization. Also, ensure that your organization is registered as a research center under that University. Otherwise, they need to sign a MoU. These procedures depend on the University guidelines and it may vary from one University to another. So, you need to be aware of all these details too.

Now that you know how to choose a good supervisor for your PhD. You will be spending a lot of time with them during your PhD, so it pays to understand what to look for in-terms of personality traits, expertise, and experience. There are many supervisors out there, and it is always feasible to choose supervisor with whom you can work well and produce a good research. Ultimately, you need to get your PhD degree. So, it’s a decision that should be taken very seriously.

Happy Researching!

Bonus: Secret Tips in Choosing a PhD supervisor?

iLovePhD has stated some of the secret tips for choosing a good supervisor to do PhD:

• PhD supervisor should be an expert in your area of research. Check for the supervisor’s recent publications.
• Prepare a project proposal or some specific research ideas clearly before contacting your supervisor.
• Talk with the experts about your research interest in person before finalizing the one who is going to supervise you.
• Talk with the scholars who are working currently under the professor/expert.
• Check the research facilities (Library, Instrumentation, access to journals) available in the department.
• Also, check for fellowships/scholarships available in the department/University. Check for R&D project with supervisor to carry out Ph.D. with fellowship.
• Talk to other students who have already worked with the potential supervisor to get an honest review of their experience.
• Look for supervisors with an active research program that interests you.
• Consider the supervisor’s availability and how accessible they will be for guidance and support.
• Look for someone with the knowledge and experience relevant to your intended research field.
• Explore whether the supervisor has funding for new projects, as this may impact your ability to conduct research.
• Ask yourself if you think the supervisor is someone you can connect with and can trust.
• Find out if the supervisor is willing and able to attend conferences and workshops, as this could provide networking opportunities.
• Ask if the supervisor’s institution offers resources that may be beneficial to your research and development, such as a library, laboratories, or computing facilities.
• Make sure to understand the requirements of the supervisory team, and if applicable, any co-supervisors, before accepting an appointment.
• Learn about the expectations and requirements of the supervisor so that you can determine if you are comfortable working with them.

In conclusion, a PhD is not just a degree, it’s a process of understanding your research area. Therefore, it’s a scholar’s responsibility to choose a good supervisor for their research career.

All The Best!

Follow us on Pinterest: iLovePhD

Also, Read Top 38 Possible PhD Viva Questions How to Become an Academic Journal Reviewer?|Step by Step Guide

• Academic Research
• choosing a PhD supervisor
• how to be a good phd supervisor
• How to Choose a PhD Guide
• How to Choose a PhD Supervisor
• PhD Admission
• PhD Supervisor
• phd supervisor responsibilities

24 Best Online Plagiarism Checker Free – 2024

480 ugc care list of journals – science – 2024, 100 cutting-edge research ideas in civil engineering.

[…] How to Choose a PhD Supervisor? […]

LEAVE A REPLY Cancel reply

Most popular, indo-sri lanka joint research programme 2024, top 488 scopus indexed journals in computer science – open access, scopus indexed journals list 2024, what is a phd a comprehensive guide for indian scientists and aspiring researchers, the nippon foundation fellowship programme 2025, fellowships in india 2024 -comprehensive guide, agi in research: unraveling the future of artificial intelligence, best for you, popular posts, popular category.

• POSTDOC 317
• Interesting 257
• Journals 236
• Fellowship 134
• Research Methodology 102
• All Scopus Indexed Journals 94

Mail Subscription

iLovePhD is a research education website to know updated research-related information. It helps researchers to find top journals for publishing research articles and get an easy manual for research tools. The main aim of this website is to help Ph.D. scholars who are working in various domains to get more valuable ideas to carry out their research. Learn the current groundbreaking research activities around the world, love the process of getting a Ph.D.

Contact us: [email protected]

Google News

Copyright © 2024 iLovePhD. All rights reserved

• Artificial intelligence

Teaching & Learning

• Education Excellence
• Professional development
• Case studies
• Teaching toolkits
• MicroCPD-UCL
• Assessment resources
• Student partnership
• Generative AI Hub
• Community Engaged Learning
• UCL Student Success

The Good Supervision Guide for new and experienced research supervisors of PhDs

This guide, written by a PhD candidate, is based on interviews with UCL Faculty Graduate Tutors at UCL.

1 August 2019

Written by Alexandra Bulat (PhD Candidate, UCL School of Slavonic and East European Studies).

Whether you are  new to supervision or already have extensive experience , it is always possible to learn from others’ experiences. 

This guide was compiled based on interviews with Faculty Graduate Tutors from across the  disciplines:

• medical sciences
• arts and humanities
• mathematical and physical sciences
• life sciences
• population health sciences
• built environment
• engineering
• social and historical sciences. 

We asked them to give examples of what ‘good supervision practice’ means for them and developed a guide based on the themes which emerged from these conversations. 

Some supervision advice applies to some disciplines more than others, whereas other insights transcend disciplinary boundaries.

What good research supervision practice is

Even after years of experience, some naturally struggle to answer the question 'What is good supervision practice?' with precise examples. 

We identified three key principles, which, if applied, will likely improve the relationship between you and your PhD students. 

Each principle is divided into themes which include advice from the Faculty Graduate Tutors we interviewed.

1. Set expectations, but be aware of the changing reality

This section provides advice on: 

• setting expectations early in the PhD
• being flexible
• planning the PhD process
• managing your time spent on supervision.

2. Communicate well with students, peers and make use of institutional resources

• listening to students
• communicating with fellow supervisors and working well with the institutional structures in which supervision takes place
• making use of the resources available.

3. Think outside the (thesis) box

This section provides advice on:

• how to think beyond the thesis as a piece of research 
• how to consider your students’ career aspirations, which may not always be academic.

Download the full PDF guide to good research supervision

Where to find help and support

Research supervision web pages from the UCL Arena Centre, including details of the compulsory Research Supervision online course. 

Research and project supervision: an introduction  (Arena guide)

Appropriate Forms of Supervision Guide from the UCL Academic Manual

the PhD diaries

The UCL Doctoral School

Handbook and code of practice for graduate research degrees

Doctoral Skills Development programme

Student skills support (including academic writing)

Student Support and Wellbeing

UCL Students' Union (UCLU)  

UCL Careers

External resources

Vitae: supervising a docorate

UK Council for Graduate Education

Higher Education Academy – supervising international students (pdf)

Becoming a Successful Early Career Researcher , Adrian Eley, Jerry Wellington, Stephanie Pitts and Catherine Biggs (Routledge, 2012) - book available on Amazon

This guide has been produced by the UCL Arena Centre for Research-based Education . You are welcome to use this guide if you are from another educational facility, but you must credit the UCL Arena Centre. 

Further information

More teaching toolkits  - back to the toolkits menu

Research supervision at UCL

Research and project supervision (all levels): an introduction - UCL Arena Centre toolkit

[email protected] : contact the UCL Arena Centre 

UCL Education Strategy 2016–21  

Case studies : browse related stories from UCL staff and students.

Sign up to the monthly UCL education e-newsletter  to get the latest teaching news, events & resources.  

Education events

Funnelback feed: https://search2.ucl.ac.uk/s/search.json?collection=drupal-teaching-learn... Double click the feed URL above to edit

• Skip to primary navigation
• Skip to main content
• Skip to footer

Tress Academic

#10: Good PhD-supervision: What you can expect

May 14, 2019 by Tress Academic

Are you wondering what one might typically be able to expect from a good PhD supervisor? Are you uncertain if your own supervision ticks all the boxes? Are you having one issue or another with supervision and you’re not sure if this is normal? We’ve compiled this exposé of ‘Five pillars of good PhD-supervision’ to give you more clarity on what to expect, plus an added bonus self-check ‘How good is my PhD supervision?’

We often find that PhD students are uncertain as to what they might actually be able to expect from a PhD supervisor, and what actions a good supervisor would or wouldn’t take. We also often meet PhD students who are having issues with supervision, but do not know if what they’re experiencing is common, normal or actually an exception. 

There is evidence from a range of studies of how important good supervision is for the PhD experience, process and outcome ( Woolston, C. 2017 , Max Planck PhD-net 2018 ). It is quite clear, that the difficulties in undertaking a PhD study become easier with a great supervisor by your side. That is not to say that individual PhD students- who do not have good supervision won’t make it, but there is a significant difference between just ‘completing ’ or handing in a great dissertation with a fantastic learning experience behind them. Everyone can benefit from the expertise of a superb and experienced supervisor. 

The aim of this blog-post is to give you an idea about these five essential elements, which together constitute the pillars of good PhD-supervision. This can help you to make an informed judgement about your personal situation and eventually encourage you to start improving aspects of your supervision, if you feel it necessary. For those of you who are right at the beginning of a PhD and have not yet chosen a supervisor (or not appointed all your supervisors), our five features can give you some orientation of whom to pick. Ideally, you get a trusted supervisor who will meet all five features. If you’re curious how yours stack up, we’ve included a self-check ‘How good is my PhD-supervision?’ for you to take at the end of this post! 

However, there is no black and white standard of exactly what your supervisor should do, so it can be difficult to evaluate based on a formula of “if this does not happen, then they’re not a good supervisor”. The boundaries are rather grey and a good relationship to your supervisor does not hinge upon the fulfilment of a single aspect. There are many ways  for good supervision to express itself. 

Still, we believe there are a couple of features that are essential and constitute “good supervision” and we want to outline these for you. If your supervisor lacks several of these essential features, it can be tricky to get sufficient support for your PhD in the long run. 

Today in many countries and disciplines, it is common to have a supervisory team, so you are advised by multiple people. The responsibilities are often shared between one main supervisor and 1-3 (and eventually more) co-supervisors. Supervisors may also be called mentors or advisors(just so you know that this is the same thing unless your PhD regulations specify another meaning in your case). 

So here are our five pillars of good PhD supervision:

1. Guidance

Guidance is the no.1 pillar of good supervision. You should receive guidance from your supervisor for all matters – big and small – regarding your PhD study. Your supervisor should give guidance in particular, regarding:

• Your research and individual aspects hereof. What do you research and how?
• The planning of your project. That means guidance on how to design, set-up and carry out a project in the given time span. 
• The outcomes of your PhD in terms of publications, patents or potential applications.
• The educational part of your studies. How you acquire the necessary skills to succeed with your project, and in a broader sense, how to become an independent researcher. This also includes complementary skills courses like the ones from TRESS ACADEMIC .
• The administrative aspects around your PhD , such as: PhD regulations of your university, deadlines and documents that have to be handed in to your graduate programme , composition of a supervisory team, examination board, submission of your dissertation, etc… 

2. Expertise

Good supervision means to have a supervisor who has expertise in the very subject area in which you undertake your PhD project. So they should have excellent knowledge of the discipline, know the latest innovations and cutting-edge questions, can anticipate future trends, and are  recognised scholar in your scientific community. Their research interest is your research interest and vice versa. 

Ideally, your supervisor is also trained pedagogically on how to supervise PhD students. The pedagogic expertise is complementary to the research expertise. You won’t benefit much from a superstar from  your field who shows little interest in transferring their knowledge to you, or does not concern themselves with  how they can help you learn. 

Your supervisor should support you in pursuing your goal of getting the PhD degree. Having a supportive supervisor means you have a person you can trust and who will be on your side. Support should include mental support, but it also means having  a helping hand when needed – to make contact with other scientists, get help with data permits or ethical clearances, gaining you access to data, or financial support. Having a person you know you can rely on when things get tough is a big plus. 

A supportive supervisor maintains a positive attitude towards your project and displays empathy. They should display a keen interest in seeing you succeed, encourage you to broaden your horizons and try out new things. They offer sympathy when something goes wrong, show understanding for your situation, and motivate you when you’re feeling down. 

While guidance emphasises the procedure of successfully steering you through the 3-4 years of a PhD, support is your safety net, when you’re off track or when there’s something to handle that exceeds your power.   

4. Regular interaction

Although ‘having regular interaction with your PhD supervisor’ sounds almost too obvious, we know that many PhD students struggle with this aspect. We often hear comments like ‘my supervisor is difficult to get hold of’, ’my last meeting with my supervisor was months ago’, ‘my supervisor often cancels/postpones meetings’, ‘it takes ages for my supervisor to give me feedback on my work’ and so on. 

The problem with a lack of interaction is that it is key to the other pillars. If you have little interaction, most other features become problematic as well. If you lack interaction, you also lack support and guidance. You can have the ‘internationally-acknowledge-no.1-specialist’ in your field as supervisor, but if they hardly ever meet with you, you won’t get much out of their supervision. 

A good supervisor maintains interaction by way of regular supervisory meetings and spontaneous encounters. Here’s a short characteristic of both types: 

4.1. Supervisory meetings

In these meetings your supervisor and you meet regularly to discuss aspects of your project and PhD progress. This is the time when you get your supervisor’s full attention. You get input, can exchange ideas, you receive constructive feedback, and – as part of the package –  quite a lot of –  criticism as well. Through feedback in regular meetings you learn and grow. Your supervisory meetings are scholarly disputes about your work among the expert and the novice. Supervisory meetings are also necessary to administer and manage your project – setting targets, checking progress, and making sure that whatever you have to hand in to the university or grad school gets there on time and as required. 

4.2. Spontaneous encounters

You should also be able to approach your supervisor spontaneously with a question, a problem, or some great news you want to share and vice versa. Spontaneous interaction allows you to ‘be-in-touch’ and get to know each other in different ways and built a collegial relationship. It can help to clarify an urgent question so that you can proceed with your work without having to wait until the next meeting. 

But ad-hoc encounters are never a substitute for the regular meetings. If you have no meetings, and you receive all your supervision in form of spontaneous chats or advice, there’s something wrong. 

5. Advice on progress

You’ve got a limited time to complete your PhD of 3-4 years normally. Your supervisor should be keen to see you finish in this time-frame. A good supervisor is aware of your time-constraints right from the start, and supports you in getting through the entire process in a timely manner. But, apart from guidance and support, advice on your progress needs specific actions from your supervisor. It is conscious and deliberate checking of the adequateness of your progress in the different phases of your PhD that will make the difference. 

At the beginning of your PhD project, you should get advice on the adequateness of the project itself. Your supervisor should be checking if the project you want to work on is suitable for completion, with the expected outcome, in the given time-frame. A good supervisor will also warn you if that is not the case, and suggest changes to your project. 

After the onset of your PhD project and further into the process, you’ll need a supervisor who is regularly checking-in with you regarding the progress of your work and it’s quality. Towards this goal, many PhD programmes have included ‘TAC’ (Thesis Advisory Committee) meetings as a fixed requirement that has to be completed in order to progress with the PhD, or getting the necessary credits for the accompanying graduate programme. In case you’re not familiar with this: during the ‘TAC’ meetings, which take place 1-4 times a year (frequency depends on your programme), all of your supervisors formally meet with you. You present your recent progress and latest results to  get feedback on the adequateness of your advancement. ‘TAC’ meetings may also be called ‘PAC’ (PhD advisory committee) meetings, or ‘Supervisory Committee’ meetings.

The crucial point here is that you have at least one supervisor (but ideally multiple) who give you candid feedback once in a while so you know if you are on track or not. If you have a main supervisor who regularly checks your progress, and you hold the required number of TAC-meetings, you’re minimising the chance that there will be problems with the acceptance of your PhD thesis and the potential for lengthy demands to make fundamental changes to your dissertation in the end. 

In the final year and months, a good supervisor will advise you on the completion of individual parts of your work and requirements for submitting your thesis and preparations for the defence and final examination. 

How good is your supervision?

Now, are you pondering how your supervision scores on the five mentioned pillars? Are you happy with your supervision? Do you get good guidance? Are you benefitting from your supervisors’ expertise? Does your supervisor meet regularly with you? Do you receive support when you’re feeling down and demotivated? And, is someone giving you frank feedback on your progress? 

If you’re curious, take our self-check ‘ How good is my PhD supervision?’  

So how were your results? Did you score super high and you have an amazing supervisor? Well great! You’ll get all the necessary support along the path to PhD completion. 

Or are you among those with quite modest scores and feeling  unhappy with your supervisory situation? Think about what you might do to improve it. Like in any other relationship you have a great deal of influence! Have you spoken to your supervisor about your requirements and made them explicit? Have you been honest about your struggles or difficulties? Your supervisor only has a chance to respond to your needs if you let them know what they are! Stay tuned to the SMART ACADEMICS blog for more supervision topics that give more detail on how to improve your relationship with your supervisor!

Related resources:

• Expert guide: 8 reasons why supervision can fail. 
• Self-check: ‘How good is my PhD supervision?’  
• Smart Academics Blog #12: PhD graduate school: Your game changer!
• Smart Academics Blog #57: Can’t get your message across to your supervisor?
• Smart Ac ademics Blog #68: PhD Support: Pick the perfect co-supervisor
• Smart Academics Blog #80: Do I have to include my supervisor as a co-author?
• Smart Academics Blog #81: Meet your PhD supervisor online!
• Smart Academics Blog #98: Should I replace my PhD supervisor?
• Smart Academics Blog #114: PhD-journey with obstacles and happy end!
• Woolston, C. 2017: A love-hurt relationship. Nature, vol. 550, pp. 549-552 .
• Max Planck PhD-net 2018: 2017 PhDnet report.  

More information: 

Do you want to complete your PhD successfully? If so, please sign up to receive our free guides.  

© 2019 Tress Academic

#PhDStudent, #PhDEducation, #Supervision, #PhDSatisfaction, #Doctorate 

Educational resources and simple solutions for your research journey

Bringing Out the Best in the PhD Student–Supervisor Relationship

Once you decide to embark on your PhD journey, one of the most important decisions is choosing a PhD thesis supervisor. Every research student grapples with the question of “How to find a PhD supervisor”, more so if they are dealing with physical disabilities or mental health issues. The final choice determines not only the success and quality of your research but also your well-being throughout the program.

Table of Contents

Qualities of a good PhD supervisor

Wondering how to choose a PhD supervisor or what to ask a potential PhD supervisor? Here are the key roles that your supervisor can (and should) play:

Bridging cultural differences

A good supervisor will do their best to make a student comfortable if they are in an unfamiliar geographical and/or cultural setting. They should help a student overcome barriers or biases faced if they’re part of a minority group. When finding a PhD supervisor, see if they make you feel at home and eager to start work.

Supporting students with physical or mental disabilities

When looking at how to choose a PhD supervisor, look for one who will advise how PhD students with disabilities can work effectively by suggesting suitable adjustments or flexibility. Awareness about neurodiversity is on the rise and it is one of the things that should be on your list of what to ask a potential PhD supervisor. Supervisors are becoming increasingly sensitive and more equipped to handle students’ emotional barriers such as lack of motivation, impostor syndrome, and fear of failure.

Navigating administrative and regulatory affairs

If you are new to the institute, system, or country, find a PhD supervisor who can guide you regarding university protocols and regulations, administrative and technical support, etc.

Choose a PhD supervisor who will help connect you with other researchers and forge collaborations and connections to further your research and career.

Being approachable and open to communication

When figuring out how to find a PhD supervisor, it is most important that you choose one who will be available and easy to contact.

Stimulating intellectual growth

An encouraging supervisor should throw challenges at you. They should encourage you to think out of the box and not follow the beaten path.

How to choose a good PhD supervisor

Now that you know the kind of support you can expect, here are some tips on how to choose a good PhD supervisor for your doctoral journey.

Read recent publications by potential supervisors

Check if their area of research is a match with yours and if their experience and expertise align with what you are looking for.

Talk to past and current students

Get an idea about the lab culture and ask about a potential PhD supervisor’s approach to students with disabilities and students from minority communities.

Meet in person if possible

Get to know the personality of your potential supervisor and understand their availability and commitment better. Inform them about any physical or mental health issues and ask your potential PhD supervisor about arrangements to manage these conditions.

Maximizing support and assistance from your supervisor

Your relationship with your PhD guide is not a one-way street. We just discussed the qualities of a good PhD supervisor and how to choose a good PhD supervisor. But how can  you  make sure that your guide will be happy to help you?

Identify specific needs

If you are managing a disability or chronic illness, here’s what you should do and what to ask a potential PhD supervisor:

• Be upfront with your supervisor and discuss any likely effects of your condition in advance.
• Ask a potential PhD supervisor about resources applicable to your particular condition (e.g., software to assist students with visual difficulties, communication aids, or additional financial support as a disabled student).
• Work with your supervisor to draw up a realistic plan for conducting and monitoring your project to help keep your research on track.

  Be honest

One key tip on how to find a PhD supervisor is to be transparent about your work and progress. Do not hide any inadvertent errors you may have made in your experiment or analyses. Always keep your supervisor “in the loop”! Honesty in every aspect of your work and working relationship will help build trust.

Be realistic

Ask your potential PhD supervisor about and align your expectations for work and a work-life balance with them. Set realistic expectations and targets; this will be even more important if health challenges are likely to affect your work pace. Your supervisor can then manage expectations and support your progress in the face of these challenges.

Be independent

No supervisor encourages hand holding. When choosing a PhD supervisor, you must demonstrate independence to inculcate your supervisor’s trust in you. Here are some ways you could to this:

• Meet agreed deadlines and responsibilities as best you can.
• Show that you have worked on feedback they have provided.
• Offer your help on projects, especially if it helps you learn a new skill. Inform your supervisor that you are open to providing assistance with peer review, for example.

Knowing what to ask a potential PhD supervisor combined with a demonstration of responsibility

When choosing a Phd supervisor, know that your supervisor may be simultaneously running many projects. Different students might be at different stages of their PhD, and it is up to the supervisor how to manage each student’s requirements. Trust their approach on this.

Have open conversations

Have regular meetings with your supervisor (every week or 10 days) to discuss your research progress, drafts of upcoming papers, and even emotional roadblocks if any. Understand their working and communication style and adapt accordingly.

Have open conversations about your state of mind; your supervisor is sure to hear you out and offer guidance and motivation.

To conclude

Answering the question of how to find a PhD supervisor may take some effort and time. Moreover, arriving at a comfortable working arrangement with your chosen supervisor may also take some fine-tuning. You should strive to streamline your working style to motivate your supervisor to help you.

Choose a good PhD supervisor who will offer support beyond academic aspects for your overall welfare. That being said, recognize that your supervisor is not your de facto counsellor. You may even leverage other support systems (support groups, online forums, or professional counsellors) to complement the guidance and motivation provided by your supervisor.

Related Posts

Research in Shorts: R Discovery’s New Feature Helps Academics Assess Relevant Papers in 2mins 

Research Paper Appendix: Format and Examples

Top 9 Responsibilities of a Good PhD Supervisor

The role of a good PhD supervisor always includes major responsibilities. Here are some doctoral guidelines of a good PhD supervisor.

• The first role of PhD supervisor is to guide a scholar.
• Another responsibility is to motivate doctoral scholar timely.
• Help PhD student to publish research papers in a reputed journals.
• Being a PhD supervisor, give creative Ideas to your scholars.
• Being responsible to look for new outcomes from PhD scholars.
• The another role of a PhD supervisor is to prepare a progress report.
• Meet your PhD doctorate student once a week.
• Encourage PhD scholar in times of depression and stress.
• PhD supervisor must set an example by his own lifestyle.

One of the top roles and responsibilities of good PhD supervisor is to ensure that doctoral scholars are capable of planning their research properly.

They have the mandate of assisting PhD scholars to come up with specific research topics that are relevant to their fields of study .

It is essential that the scholar should be able to identify the relevant literature texts where to collect content by ensuring that the texts have the required content.

A PhD supervisor must feel responsible to guide the scholar identify different databases where reliable information is accessible.

Each discipline has its professional standards that one is required to follow, and therefore it is the work of the PhD supervisor to aid the scholar in understanding the professional standards and ensuring that the study complies with the same.

The other responsibility of a PhD supervisor is to work together with the scholar design a research program that incorporates the scholar having written if not all, much of the thesis before completion of the course.

In some instances, it may be necessary for the student to enroll in courses that educate how to carry out research and therefore it is the role of the supervisor to advice on the way forward. Generally, the supervisor ensures that the scholar equips themselves with the knowledge on how to conduct effective research.

Responsibility of giving ideas

Although the supervisor guides the scholar on how to come up with appropriate research topics, it is one PhD supervisor’s role and responsibility to ensure that the latter is capable of coming up with their authentic ideas.

They are not supposed to give particular research topics for the doctoral scholar to work on rather they are supposed to give ideas related to the field of study and let the scholar choose their topics. By so doing, the supervisor refrains from directly influencing the topics.

Upon acting as guides, the scholar assumes the greatest responsibility of basing the research on their understanding of what they have learned in the course.

The supervisor should not encourage directing scholars on their research, but they should take the role of asking questions that enable the latter to articulate their ideas.

Although many recipients may feel that simply giving ideas is not the best way to go about it. Besides, it is a recommendation that scholars must be able to think for themselves. The ideas are given by the supervisor stimulate the mind of the scholar.

Also, it enables them to come up with research topics that they have chosen for themselves, and therefore they will be motivated to work on the same.

Currently, as it is, anyone is capable of publishing their work in any journal , and therefore there has to be a difference between the scholar and any other person who feel that they are capable of writing. The difference between the scholar and anybody else that wish to publish their writing is that there are academic journals.

These journals are reputable which means that authors that have their work published in them are held in high regard hence are credible.

In most cases, the PhD supervisor is known as the corresponding author which means that the database where the scholar publishes the research paper also affect their reputation.

Nonetheless, the supervisor has been in the field more than the scholar, and therefore they are capable of determining which publishers are reputable as well as advising the scholar which journals are the best.

Apart from academic journals, other reputable journals are useful in building the reputation of the researcher. When a researcher publishes a paper in good journals, the doctoral scholar becomes marketed which means that it becomes easier for them to notice them in the market.

Furthermore, such publications stand a good chance of being read many times compared to other writings that have been published in a less reputable journal.

Conduct Coursework and offer help to finish it

Before the scholar can complete their Ph.D. program, it is necessary to complete coursework because it enables them to prepare for their dissertation because it is necessary for them to acquire a proper understanding of their field.

The primary reason for this is that it enables the scholar to pose a research question that narrows down to their chosen field.

Therefore, the roles and responsibility of a PhD supervisor is  to prepare the doctoral scholar for their dissertation by guiding them through coursework.

There are different courses that the scholar may opt to take most of which include major subjects such as Business Management, Research Methodology and Fundamentals of Computer Application to mention a few.

Once a graduate registers for a Ph.D. Program, it is a requirement that the scholar undertakes a Pre-coursework which usually takes six months or more.

Although different universities have different subjects for various fields according to their preference, it is the duty of the supervisor to advice the scholar on the most appropriate subjects for the doctorate program in concern.

After selecting the pre-course work, the supervisor should ensure that they support the scholar mostly mentally by explaining the importance of the coursework.

The PhD supervisor is not required to spend a lot of time with the scholar to guarantee that the latter will be successful in the doctorate program.

However, it is the biggest responsibility for a supervisor to ensure that they keep a close look at how the scholar is doing by submitting progress report semester wise and during doctoral committee meetings.

The primary function of the supervisor as the name suggests is supervising, and the best way to do this is by facilitating committee meetings regularly.

It is essential that the supervisor and the candidate make arrangements as to which is the best schedule for both of them to meet. It enables the supervisor to monitor how the candidate is faring in their studies.

After monitoring has, the supervisor has to inform the chairperson of the candidate’s committee how the scholar is progressing.

There are instances whereby it may be necessary to record information for later use by the administration. , and therefore it is the responsibility of the supervisor to inform the PGO which information is necessary for recording.

Before the candidate and the scholar meet, the latter submits rough drafts which the former checks thoroughly. Discussing changes and improvements during the meeting is necessary.

Check the progress time and again

The primary role of PhD supervisor is to assist and guide students during the duration that they are studying for their doctorate programs. In most cases, the role of the supervisor is often misunderstood with that of the examiner. Unlike the latter, the supervisor is not mandated with the responsibility of assessing the student’s thesis’ on the contrary, the supervisor is required to ensure that the candidate can access the necessary resources required for the Ph.D.

The supervisor should assist the doctoral student to select the most appropriate coursework before they begin their program. The scholar is required to complete their dissertation at the end of the postgraduate program. Before this happens, the scholar writes several drafts before the final copy. The supervisor has to monitor these drafts regularly and make recommendations to ensure that the scholar is on the right track.

During research, scholars may find it difficult to find reliable information, and therefore the supervisor must recommend suitable databases where such information can be accessed. The supervisor ensures that reliable sources are used to collect relevant information for use in the thesis. The supervisor is required to ensure that the scholar chooses a research topic relevant to their field.

Make time to meet up with your scholar

A PhD supervisor is required to closely monitor the welfare of the scholar to ensure that they not only complete their program as scheduled, but they should also perform well and meet the standards required by the discipline. The primary function of the supervisor is to monitor and give advice that may be useful to the school during the period they are registered for study. The best way to execute this duty is to keep in touch with the scholar on a regular basis. It enables the supervisor to keep track of how the candidate is faring regarding their thesis.

Constant communication ensures that the supervisor is capable of giving timely advice which in turn enable the scholar to have enough time to make necessary adjustments to their thesis. Not only does this enable corrections on time, but it also enables the supervisor to ensure that the scholar has completely understood how to conduct research.

PhD supervisor can determine whether the sources used are reliable and credible. Furthermore, regular communication between the two parties enables the PhD supervisor to assist the latter to allocate their time properly so that they can concentrate on their thesis. Also, they are able to offer advice regularly which minimizes errors in the dissertation since there is early detection of the same.

Keep up to be a Professor in the university

It is necessary to understand that a Ph.D. degree is not offered by an individual, rather, it is given by a university. It is necessary for the supervisor to be a professor in an institution of higher learning because this comes up as an added advantage since it means that they are in a position to offer proper advice.

Although different countries have different education systems, it is necessary for the PhD supervisor to be an instructor at a university. It ensures that they are capable of giving advice which may be motivated by past and present experiences. Furthermore, it is advisable for the supervisor to be an instructor because when the scholar is selecting their supervisor because they may find it easier to work with one that is teaching in their field of choice.

A supervisor who is also teaching in a university is in a position to assist the scholar to relate their studies to contemporary issues which makes the doctoral scholar understand the relevance of the doctorate program to the real world. Also, it ensures that the supervisor is active in the teaching process because this enables them to give effective advice compared to one who did their degree some time back and mainly concentrate on their jobs.

When the scholar is doing their pre-coursework, among the teachings they gain is identifying reliable information which is accessible in reputable databases. The scholar is required to publish their work of which in most cases the supervisor has a moral obligation to co-author research papers with the scholar.

When a registered scholar is identifying the best supervisor, they check whether the mentioned has made publications. Therefore, it is necessary for the PhD supervisor to have publications that have been accepted in renowned databases. The reason for this is that it stands out as a valuable qualification on the part of the supervisor. When they have publications in reputable databases, it means that they are capable of assisting other doctorate scholars in producing good work that can be recognized internationally rather than in the institutions where they work.

Another important thing is that it enables the supervisor to advise the scholar where to publish their work since there are many bad journals that the scholar be unaware and if they publish their work it ends up being owned by other people. Conclusively, the main n for the supervisor to have reputable publications is to recommend where to publish, and it also serves as a way of showing that they are qualified for the job.

In most cases, supervisors have more than one scholars under their care, and therefore it is recommended for the former to ensure that they do not have more than 9 scholars. Although professors are not required to meet their scholars on a daily basis, the job is still demanding since it takes time to read through the drafts in order to give effective advice. Also, PhD supervisors have other responsibilities such as teaching and also other jobs such as personal business.

In other cases, the supervisor may also be furthering their studies. This means that the supervisor has a lot in their hands and therefore if they have many scholars, they may be unable to have adequate time for individual scholars. Besides, supervisors are required to closely monitor the scholar’s progress so that errors can be detected early and corrections made in due time.

When they have many scholars, there is a high likelihood that they will not perform their duties effectively since they may not have enough time for the scholar. It is essential that the supervisor should work closely with the scholar to ensure that they are in a position to write good papers that can be published in reputable journals.

Guide 6 research scholars (If you are an associate professor) 

Although there is a slight difference between a professor and an associate professor, this is not the reason why an associate is required to handle a maximum of 6 scholars. The primary reason is that the associate professor is not a tenured faculty member. Due to this, many scholars feel that they may require a co-adviser who is a faculty member.

The responsibilities assumed by the two kinds of PhD supervisors are the same, and the only difference is that one is a professor is a tenured faculty member while an associate professor is not tenured. The implication is that the associate professor may opt to leave the university and choose to work in the industry.

Although it may not be entirely true, in most cases an associate professor does not have as much experience compared to the professor. All in all, the associate professor must ensure that all their scholars complete their thesis in good time. The candidates should not only complete the projects but should also deliver papers that can be published by reputable publishers as well as in reputable journals.

Do not be a supervisor for more than 4 (as assistant professor) 

An assistant professor also has the capabilities of the professor and the associate professor. However, the number of scholars is limited to a maximum of 4. While carrying out their teaching activities in the university, the assistant professor has a lot of responsibilities that make it impossible for them to have adequate time to monitor many scholars.

One should also remember that there is a high probability that they are also working on their doctorate program. This is because they also wish to attain the full professor title. Furthermore, they also have other obligations such as family matters and other personal interests.

It is customary for the PhD supervisor and the scholar to co-author a research paper but this at times fail to yield the real objective. There are cases where the supervisor may feel that the work is their idea and the scholar merely did the research. A lot of research has been conducted previously and therefore when the one in question happens to be a unique idea that has not been done before, the supervisor may be tempted to own the work or publish the same as the first author.

When the two parties start developing a negative attitude towards each other, their working relationship deteriorates thus effective communication is lost. If this happens, it means that the supervisor will not be able to monitor the scholar’s progress. Besides, advice from a jealous supervisor is certainly going to be incorrect, and therefore the results may not be desirable.

The relationship between the two parties should be strictly professional whereby they should be objective and stay true to the course. It is necessary for the supervisor to understand that scholars will always come and go and the greatest thing they can do is support others so that they can be better.

Be patient and benevolent with your scholar 

Undertaking a Ph.D. Program can be very tricky since it requires a lot of patience by both the scholar and the PhD supervisor. The first thing that the scholar does is choosing their supervisor apart from the university where they wish to do their learning. The fact that a scholar has selected a certain supervisor means that they have confidence in them. It is only fair that the latter reciprocate and treat the former in the same fashion.

The supervisor must be able to understand that earning a doctorate is not an easy task and there are many hurdles along the way. For this reason, many researchers have dropped out along the way while others have taken longer than the scheduled duration to complete their programmes.

The supervisor is required to be patient and keep in mind that scholars have to juggle through their daily lives. Many of them are in poorly paying jobs, and they need to get by apart from concentrating on their thesis. A Ph.D. is meant to test the patience, hard work and how focused one is; not forgetting stubbornness. Therefore, the supervisor should be calm and act as a mentor while at the same time reminding the scholar about the importance of concentrating on their studies.

Do not bully scholar for not doing personal works 

Never bully your Scholar for not doing your personal works. The challenges that come with earning a doctorate makes it impossible to concentrate on studies entirely. Scholars have to go ahead with their personal lives since some of them may have families that they have to care for and they also need to accomplish other personal dreams aside from furthering their studies.

Most PhD supervisors may be tempted to discourage scholars from concentrating on other works, but this is not the best way to go about it. They should keep in mind that there is more to life than just studying and for this reason, they are advised to encourage scholars to follow their ambitions. For this reason, there are cases where scholars may fail to provide personal works with regard to their thesis.

However, the important thing is that the supervisor should ensure that the scholar understands the concepts. It is facilitated by the regular meetings and continuous monitoring and reading of drafts. It is important because by so doing, the scholar is able to grasp the requirement of a doctorate.

Be always ready to proofread your scholar’s papers 

The scholar is not the only one that has a busy life but also the supervisor who has to balance a lot in their life. Supervisors have the responsibility of handling up those research papers. Give your tips for proofreading and editing properly. It comes out as a challenge because they are supposed to go through the works of individual scholar keenly and intently. Many scholars fail to do this, and instead, they peruse through scholar’s papers. Not only is it ethically wrong, but also the quickest way to assist the scholar to fail in their dissertation.

Thesis papers are naturally bulky and require a lot of time and patience. However, it should be noted that they should be handled with care and the supervisor must ensure that they allocate adequate time to go through the papers and ensure that they read all of it. It is important because it ensures that errors and areas that need improvement are identified.

By so doing, the supervisor is in a position to make appropriate recommendations and give proper advice that will assist the scholar to perfect the paper. Besides, the supervisor must realize that it is their obligation to read through the paper so that the end product can qualify for publishing in reputable journals. Doctorate studies needs to work tough in certain times.

Never disclose scholar’s research papers to others 

One of the problems encountered by researchers is theft of work and ideas, and one of the way that this happens is when a supervisor reveals a scholar’s work to other people. Worse still, there are supervisors who publish scholar’s work as their own. Not only is it illegal to steal someone’s ideas or research work, but it is also ethically wrong.

The supervisor is required to show a high degree of decorum by keeping their activities with the scholar private including discussions made during meetings. One of the requirements of a supervisor is to be discrete with the information they share with scholars. There are many cases whereby scholars have reported that their work has been stolen. What makes the matter worse is that sometimes it is difficult to prove that someone has stolen another person’s ideas.

When a supervisor shares a scholar’s work, someone may choose to steal the whole work or paraphrase or paraphrase it. Either way, the work has been stolen. For this reason, it is necessary for the supervisor to ensure that they do not share work with other people. Submitted papers must be kept in a safe place away from prying eyes. Papers should be handled securely between the supervisor and the candidate until submission. It is only when the scholar submits the paper to the faculty that it should be accessed by third parties.

Be ready to respond about the scholar to administration 

Once a scholar has registered for a doctorate program, the closest person between them and the institution is the supervisor. The supervisor is the bridge between the two parties, and therefore it is the responsibility of the mentioned to ensure that the department is aware of the latter’s progress by providing updates concerning the thesis.

The supervisor is required to keep a supervision record that involves records of 6-10 meetings or as may be required by the university. When the supervisor facilitates meetings with the scholar, they gather useful information that enables the faculty to determine whether the scholar is on the right track or whether there are adjustments that should be made. The supervisor ensures that the scholar completes the project on time.

In case the scholar feels that they cannot be able to complete the project on time, the supervisor should communicate the same to the administration. Every institution has rules and policies that should be adhered to by the scholar and therefore when the mentioned fail to comply, the supervisor must report the same to the administration for appropriate action to be taken. It is the role of the supervisor to ensure that other members of the supervisory team are informed of the candidate’s progress especially those that are involved with any matter that has an impact on the program.

Try to be punctual in checking your scholar’s progress 

One of the challenges that scholars face is the completion of their program on time. Worse still, there are others that do not see the end of it and instead drop out halfway. One of the reasons why the supervisor should monitor the latter’s progress is to ensure that they complete their project on time. It requires that the former constantly monitor progress by reading drafts and recommending changes.

However, simply reading through the drafts is not enough. It is necessary that drafts are checked as soon as they are handed in. the main reason why this is necessary is that it gives ample time to make corrections where necessary on time. Punctuality is a virtue that should be possessed by the supervisor since overall, the scholar has enough time to work on their project.

In case the supervisor delays to check drafts, useful time is lost and therefore the paper may be submitted late or may not even be completed. It should be noted that regular checking allows for errors to be noted in good time, changes made effectively. Consequently, the scholar ends up writing a good thesis that meets standards and enables the mentioned to score a good grade.

Talk somehow with scholar when you are away 

Apart from carrying out supervisory duties and teaching, the supervisor has other things to attend to such as personal matters that may require the mentioned to be away. At times, supervisors may be required to travel or even transfer to other universities for teaching purposes. Regardless, it is important that the supervisor ensures that they communicate with the scholar about their departure and let them know for how long they will be away.

In the event that the absence is temporary like a few days or weeks, the two parties can meet and agree to have the scholar continue working on the thesis, and the supervisor will check the draft when they are back. However, in cases where the supervisor will be away permanently such as institutional transfer, the two may have to find a way of keeping in touch.

Fortunately, technology has advanced, and people do not have to meet face to face. The two can agree to make use of platforms such as Skype and Whats App which allow people to share files via the internet. Most importantly, these applications have a video calling feature capable of facilitating meetings between the two parties regardless of which part of the globe they are located.

Do not change your supervision once accepted to be a good PhD supervisor

Supervisory duties are a commitment that once accepted one is ethically obliged to ensure that they see to it that the scholar completes the program. One of the reasons why it is not advisable to cancel accepted supervision is that it would not be correct to start telling the scholar to look for another supervisor yet work has already started.

The relationship between the two parties is similar to a marriage considering the level of commitment required. However, there is a significant difference because divorce is not an option. If a scholar requests a supervisor to work with them, they should consider if they have the time or if they have other scholars. It means that before the supervisor accepts, they should be sure that they are in a position to work with the scholar until the doctorate programme is completed.

In the case of a transfer or the supervisor has to travel to a distant location where a physical meeting is impossible, the supervisor must find a way of communicating with the latter. As mentioned in another section, a Ph.D. Program has a lot of challenges that test the patience of not only the scholar and in the process the supervisor also has to exhibit the same.

Agree and consent with scholar’s ideas to be a good PhD supervisor

Some of the functions of the supervisor are to monitor and assist the scholar in completing the project on time. However, the first thing that they do when the scholar is ready to start working on their thesis is to help them select a suitable topic relevant to their program. It should be noted that the supervisor should not at any time choose a topic for the scholar. Instead, they are supposed to give ideas that will stimulate the researcher to come up with their ideas.

Once the candidate has selected their topic, the supervisor determines whether it is satisfactory. If it is, they start working on the thesis, and the scholar is required to submit drafts for checking by the supervisor. At this point, the supervisor must ensure that they check for errors and areas that require correction or improvement.

Just as they dealt with generating the topic, the supervisor should not disagree with the scholar on what they have written. Instead, they are required to give ideas to the scholar how the ideas discussed in the thesis may be improved. The supervisor should not dismiss the candidate’s ideas but should work towards how best to make them better.

Do not be partial with some scholars 

It is a valuable recommendation that a supervisor at the professor level should not have more than nine scholars. The reason for this is to ensure that they are able to allocate adequate time to an individual scholar. A supervisor-scholar relationship should be strictly ethical guided by professional standards.

One of the responsibilities of the supervisor is to ensure that all their scholars not only complete their projects but also produce high-quality research papers that will make them attain high performance. Furthermore, a supervisor must ensure that their candidates come up with papers that can be published in reputable journals. That said, the supervisor must ensure that they do not discriminate their scholars. One way of being partial is allocating more time to certain scholars and neglecting others.

Supervisors may also be partial when it comes to reading the drafts whereby they may be keen on some and choose to leave out or peruse others. Every university has a policy that requires supervisors to be impartial and treat all candidates fairly. This includes when it comes to offering advice which should be equal. The supervisor must ensure that they are objective even if the scholar has selected a topic that they might not like.

Try to acquire new knowledge for the sake of the scholar 

Although there is a great deal of information acquired from previous research that cannot be changed, it does not mean that things are not changing. What the supervisor learned during their doctorate program may still remain the same but times are changing, and new information is arising on a daily basis. As a matter of fact, the reason why research papers are written is to shed light on new happenings, and that is why scholars are encouraged to come up with new ideas.

Whatever knowledge the supervisor has should serve as a foundation for the scholar . To make themselves more relevant, the supervisor should ensure that they acquire new information. Such new knowledge makes it possible for the PhD supervisor to assist the scholar to relate what they have learned to contemporary issues. It is vital since it enables the candidate to relate their thesis with what is currently happening in real life rather making it historical.

Besides, life during the time when the supervisor did the doctorate may be completely different with the time when the scholar is doing theirs. For instance, there are PhD supervisors that completed their projects at a time when technology had not advanced and they were required to submit everything on paper. Currently, drafts can be submitted in soft copy and the two do not even have to meet.

• Research, Partnerships and Innovation
• Postgraduate Research Hub
• Supervision: The Code of Practice

Responsibilities of the supervisor

An outline of supervisors' responsibilities towards PGR students and the wider University.

• At the outset of the research, the supervisor should explore in detail the student's academic background to identify any areas in which further training (including English language training) is required. In particular, the supervisor should advise the student in the choice of subject-specific knowledge and skills training required. 
• The supervisor will give guidance on the nature of the research and the standard expected; the selection of a research programme and the topic to be covered; the planning and timing of the successive stages of the research programme; literature and sources; research methods and instrumental techniques; attendance at appropriate courses; data management, avoidance of unfair means and respect for copyright.
• The supervisor should ensure that they have a thorough understanding of the DDP and its benefits, to ensure students make the most appropriate choice of modules and other training and development opportunities.
• The supervisor should ensure that the student has a clear understanding in general terms of the main aspects of graduate research: the concept of originality; the different kinds of research; the form and structure of the thesis (including the appropriate forms of referencing); the necessary standards to be achieved; the importance of planning and time management; the procedures for monitoring and reporting progress.
• The supervisor should ensure that the student is aware of the University's Good Research and Innovation Practices (GRIP) Policy. In addition, the supervisor should ensure that the student has a clear understanding in general terms of good academic practice and, where relevant, ethics approval and research governance. 
• The supervisor should work with the student to establish an effective supervisory relationship, thereby supporting the student. This should include an agreement on the frequency of progress meetings and the arrangements for keeping records.
• The supervisor should set a target date for Confirmation Review and and regular progress milestones at induction, to ensure that all parties acknowledge the length of time available for each stage of the project.

Supervision

• The supervisor should ensure that the research project can be completed fully, including preparation and submission of the thesis, within the student's tuition fee-paying period, and should advise the student accordingly.
• The supervisor must ensure that a clear agreement is made with the student on the frequency and nature of the supervisory contact required at any particular stage of the project. Supervisory sessions should be uninterrupted as far as possible by telephone calls, visitors and other departmental/school business. The frequency of such sessions should be every four weeks as a minimum (pro-rata for part-time); the frequency may depend on the nature of the research (e.g. whether laboratory work is involved) and the specific research project. The length of sessions will also vary, from student to student, across time and between disciplines.
• The supervisor should comply with the attendance and engagement monitoring requirements of the department/school/University and raise any attendance or engagement concerns at an early stage.
• Written records of formal supervisory meetings should be made and retained by both the student and supervisor for at least the duration of the student's registration. 
• Both the supervisor and student should keep any relevant or significant correspondence, including emails, which relate to the student's degree.  This is especially important for students who are studying via the Remote Location programme or who are spending a significant amount of time off-campus.
• The student and supervisor must have an agreed procedure for dealing with urgent problems (e.g. by telephone, e-mail and/or the arrangement of additional meetings at short notice).
• The supervisor should, in discussion with the student, establish and maintain a satisfactory timetable for the research, including the necessary completion dates for each stage, so that the thesis may be submitted on time. This planning should take into account the requirements of the relevant funding body in relation to submission.
• The supervisor should read promptly all the written work submitted in accordance with the agreed timetable and provide constructive and timely feedback.  The supervisor should advise the student of any obstacles to providing timely feedback, e.g. planned periods of time away from the University, particularly when the student is approaching submission.
• The supervisor should arrange, as appropriate, for the student to present work to staff or graduate seminars and should take an active part in introducing the student to meetings of learned societies and to other researchers in the field. The supervisor should provide advice, where appropriate, on publication of any of the research.
• The supervisor should advise the student, in advance, of any planned periods of absence from the University. If the period of absence is significant (more than the length of time between supervisory meetings), the supervisor should ensure that appropriate arrangements for alternative supervision are made and that the student is informed of them.
• The supervisor should take note of feedback from the student.
• The supervisor should engage with mandatory Continuing Professional Development appropriate to their level of supervisory experience, in line with University requirements.

Academic progress

• The supervisor should ensure that the student is informed of any inadequacy of standards of work below that generally expected from research students and should suggest remedial action, or training, as appropriate.
• The supervisor should comply with all departmental/school, faculty and/or sponsor requirements concerning the monitoring of progress and submission of progress reports. 

The final stages

• The supervisor should nominate appropriate examiners well in advance of the thesis being submitted, bearing in mind that all nominations require faculty approval before they can be appointed.  Failure to do so will lead to delays in dispatching the student’s thesis and arranging the viva examination.
• The supervisor should read and comment on drafts of the thesis before submission.
• The supervisor should ensure that the student understands the procedures for the submission and examination of the thesis and should assist the student in preparing for the oral examination, including offering a mock viva.
• Should the student be asked to resubmit their thesis, the supervisor will be responsible for continuing to provide support and supervision throughout the resubmission period.
• The supervisor should discuss and agree with the student if there is a need to embargo the thesis and should sign off on the Access to Thesis form which specifies any embargo requirements.

Related information

Contact the Research Degree Support Team

Workshops for Research Supervisors

Responsibilities of the student

Responsibilities of the department