PhDSciNet Interview 17: Unusual Supervisors, Part One

Historical interview: the following preserves the research experiences and personal views expressed in the original manuscript.

A heavy sigh: ah…

My unusual supervisor and me

[Unusual supervisor level 1: ineffective academic guidance]

No guidance, no answers, and considerable arrogance

As a supervisor, he could not solve students’ problems. I began doing experiments with him as an undergraduate, starting as a complete outsider to research. But because I intended to pursue a PhD, he believed I should already be held to doctoral standards and possess doctoral-level qualities as an undergraduate. He therefore gave me no guidance on academic questions. When I asked him about research, he talked broadly about all sorts of subjects and cited many things, as though displaying his extensive knowledge. But when the discussion reached an actual research problem and I pressed him, he would say, “What supervisor would teach you these things?” That left me speechless.

I had to find my own research direction

Objectively speaking, my supervisor really did not give me a direction. He offered only a broad area, never explaining what specifically to do; I had to think it all through myself, read the literature, summarize it, and explore. Our normal discussions were largely meaningless, and he offered no suggestions. Eventually, I worked entirely on my own. I feel that having no guidance from him might not have greatly affected my publication output. Ultimately, though, I still used his experimental platform and resources, so I could not completely separate myself from him in that respect.

Delaying the thesis and graduation

I gave him my doctoral thesis three months in advance, but he kept refusing to revise it because he wanted to delay my graduation. When he could no longer delay and finally returned it after review, he said he had changed only two things: the use of the Chinese particles 的, 地, and 得, and journal abbreviations. That was his final guidance on my entire dissertation. I was speechless.

Was the lack of guidance due to insufficient academic ability?

I actually think his academic ability deserves recognition. By his own account, his supervisor had not helped him much either, yet he produced results through his own ability, so he must have some competence. He published many papers and had reasonably good recognition in the field. But after joining *** University, he almost completely changed fields. I think his understanding of the new field was insufficient, so perhaps he did not know how to provide specialist guidance. That may be one reason.

Was he not guiding you because he expected more of you, or did he treat everyone that way?

I think high demands came from high expectations. My undergraduate university background was the strongest in our group, so he assumed I would have strong research qualities and abilities. In reality, when I knew nothing about research, he gave no guidance. In his words, our group encouraged free exploration. He said this was to develop students’ creativity, but would not let senior students mentor me; if I asked, he told me to bring questions directly to him. When I did, however, he talked about everything under the sun. I would have been better off not being called over and simply working things out myself or asking senior students. Talking for two or three hours about irrelevant things wasted both our time.

According to him, whether studying for a degree or working as a visiting scholar, his own supervisors had not helped much either, and he worked things out alone. Perhaps he thought that because he had managed it that way, we could too.

[Unusual supervisor level 10: excluding and isolating me within the group]

Complaining about me to other students behind my back

At first glance, many people thought my supervisor seemed likable, kind, and approachable. Faculty at the school also thought he appeared respectable, but students’ evaluations were completely the opposite. If he had a problem with a student, he might not criticize them directly. Instead, he gathered all the other students for a three- or four-hour meeting complaining about that one person, excluding the person concerned.

Different treatment aimed at me

At the end of each year, our group gave various awards for things such as diligence, ability, unity, or friendliness, distributing a few hundred yuan under different labels. Almost everyone received something, except me. After distributing them, he would say, “Some students may not have received an award. They should reflect on whether they have fallen short in certain ways.” He did not name anyone, but everyone knew because I was the only one left out. For over a year, I was the only man working in the laboratory and did almost all the miscellaneous and physically demanding jobs. Initially I was angry, but later thought, never mind; I did not need those few hundred yuan.

[Unusual supervisor level 100: attacks on my character]

Toward the end of my PhD, once our conflict reached a certain level, there really were personal attacks and insults. A common feature was his strong desire for control. He did not force you to be in the laboratory at a particular time, but became very displeased if he learned you had gone out to look for work. He assigned routine laboratory tasks while prohibiting independent ideas, treating you merely as a tool for carrying out his thoughts. You had no right to express an opinion. Disagreement made him think you were disloyal, after which he belittled you as worthless.

“You joined for my laboratory’s benefits, not for research”

When I joined the laboratory in my final undergraduate year, my supervisor saw that I spent considerable time there, basically whenever I was not in class. I truly wanted to do research and was enthusiastic. Seeing an undergraduate stay longer and work harder than graduate students, he said that although I was in my fourth year, he would give me a monthly stipend at the graduate-student rate.

At first, I felt I was there to learn and accepting it was inappropriate, so I refused. Later, though, I did accept it. I could feel that initially he had expectations for me and cared about me. But as research progressed, I did not know how to proceed and asked some admittedly foolish questions. There were questions he could not answer; after repeated questioning, he became annoyed and said things like, “Why are you so stupid? Why do you know nothing?”

I tried communicating with him, but conversations produced conflict. He felt that a student should ask research questions rather than suddenly question his attitude. Eventually it became, “I do not think you came here to do research; you came to make money. You just want my stipend. Go to another supervisor and see who will give you one.” I found that deeply discouraging. Why could communication between supervisor and student end up there?

He told other students I had embezzled group money

After one laboratory project ended, we received something like bonus money for group activities. The supervisor said each student could receive some: because amounts above eight hundred would incur tax, everyone would receive eight hundred. I told him I already had work-study wages paid as service income, so I would still owe some tax even if paid eight hundred. He said that was fine; perhaps the accounts had already been prepared, and any tax deducted from my payment could come from this fund.

About a week afterward, a senior woman in the group privately told me that the supervisor had separately asked them why I had extra service income. Everyone said they did not know. He then told all the other laboratory members that I had embezzled his money.

He suspected that I and some other students might harm people

After alleging embezzlement, he told everyone else behind my back to guard against me. Perhaps he did not understand my experiments well, and I spent a lot of time in the laboratory. He said, “Look at him working there every day; we do not know what he is doing. Be careful—he might be making illegal drugs. If you leave your drinking cups in the laboratory, empty them and refill them when you return.”

Later, I also heard him complain about another junior student. He was suspicious of people and genuinely distrusted others. When discussing it, he was very serious, almost pounding the table and practically ready to call the police. A junior woman laughed, perhaps because she had never experienced this and could not imagine a teacher thinking that way. He said, “Do not laugh. You do not understand how serious this is; these things really can happen.” He then cited examples such as Ma Jiajue, saying we might not realize what people could do under extreme emotions. He said he was acting for our benefit and safety, and that we should report anything unusual to the police promptly.

Privately, the students were not exactly like family, but there were no particular conflicts and we got along reasonably well. It felt as though my supervisor was stirring up all our relationships. It was unbelievable.

Were there reasons behind it?

[Where did the supervisor’s problems lie?]

Always protecting his authority

As someone in a position of power, he may have felt he needed to protect things such as his authority. When I became angry in arguments and spoke more forcefully, that change may have made him feel offended.

I was not the only one

Most people in our group experienced this treatment. Although many problems have more than one side, if a supervisor has all kinds of problems with every student, the supervisor must have problems of his own. Most of us had unpleasant experiences with him to some degree.

But I was the most unusual member of the group: the only student who stayed for six years. Others stayed for shorter periods and left, so resentment did not accumulate as deeply.

Other students simply kept their heads down, worked, and ignored what he said and the negativity. They did relatively better. Without resistance, arguments, or conflict, he found them more agreeable and treated them slightly better.

[Where did my own problems lie?]

He singled me out: I did sometimes have problems with my attitude

Initially, I was rather hotheaded. Whenever something unpleasant happened, I tried communicating with him, but it usually ended even worse. Over time, most of his resentment and anger concentrated on me. Other people in the group had an easier time because he mainly directed his anger at me.

For example, whenever someone published a paper, my supervisor was generally delighted and treated them extremely well for two or three months, praising them in every possible way. But because my conflict with him had lasted so long, even publishing did not bring a pleasant attitude. He continued criticizing me publicly at group meetings, sometimes by name and sometimes without naming me. Perhaps we had clashed so often that neither of us wanted to maintain even outward mutual respect.

From the initial conflict through its escalation, I certainly contributed in some ways. My responses, expression, and tone could make him feel insufficiently respected; that was my shortcoming. But I still think the main reason was his way of looking at and thinking about problems. He was not trying to solve them but to release emotion, almost like a child. I found his response immature.

I decided to stop trying to salvage the situation

Initially, we had a few good days followed by a few bad ones. Later, we had openly fallen out. Asking him about experimental problems did not solve them and instead led to one- or two-hour conversations, so I mostly worked and thought things through myself. I gave routine progress reports at major group meetings and never approached him for discussion otherwise. As a supervisor, he may have felt that a student not consulting him was disrespectful.

Eventually, neither of us wanted to see the other or spend time alone together. He was a person too and perhaps did not want to keep upsetting himself. In the latter period, he remained dissatisfied with me, and I no longer wanted pointless exchanges that drained us both.

I did not want direct conflict or even to create an opportunity for it. I kept my head down, did experiments, wrote papers when I had data, and gave routine reports. I still followed laboratory rules but no longer spoke to him alone. He surely felt I had stopped respecting him, while I simply wanted to avoid conflict so both of us could be a little more comfortable.

After the experience, I changed

I became negative and less confident

Before joining, I was positive, enthusiastic, and liked taking responsibility. After six years with my supervisor, my personality, emotions, and way of thinking had clearly changed in a negative direction.

First, I became very unconfident. After starting work, my manager even asked publicly why I never spoke in meetings and whether I was afraid to speak. Perhaps after repeatedly offering opinions during my PhD only to have them vehemently rejected, sometimes with personal attacks, I was no longer accustomed to expressing views in certain settings. I became less involved and proactive, rather than simply detached in a carefree way.

My thinking also changed. Facing a problem, I no longer focused on analyzing its causes and preventing it. My first response was discouragement, asking how things had become this way, followed by blaming myself or the outside world.

My relationships were greatly affected too

It also had a major effect on daily life. At the worst point, I often sought friends to talk to, which is not a bad response in itself. But if you repeatedly bring people negative emotions, they may not be able to accept it and may distance themselves. Everyone has difficulties and hopes that gathering together will bring mutual encouragement and positivity. Constantly spreading negativity is not good. My interpersonal relationships therefore moved in an unhealthy direction, and those emotions even affected family relationships, causing frequent conflicts at home.

My “positive changes”

There were some positive aspects too, like rebuilding after breaking down. Once my mindset had reached its lowest point, I learned to take certain things less seriously. Now, criticism or unreasonable accusations do not bother me, and I better understand where to focus my attention.

Overall, however, the negative effects of those six years with my supervisor far outweighed the positive ones.

Did you become more tactful?

No. I really do not like that approach. I either speak directly or give up communicating altogether. Personally, I do not want to spend mental effort finding a tactful way to say things, and I have made little progress in that respect even now.

Did your experience with this supervisor ignite or extinguish your enthusiasm for research?

It basically extinguished my enthusiasm completely. When I prepared to enter the laboratory in my final undergraduate year, I was genuinely full of enthusiasm. My career plan was to finish a PhD, join a university, and continue in research.

After six years with my supervisor, though, I could no longer summon any interest in research. Toward the end of the PhD, I was also producing some lightweight papers, publishing enough to meet the requirements and graduating as quickly as possible. I felt staying longer had no meaning.

Although my supervisor had essentially destroyed my idea of pursuing research, a little stubbornness remained. When job-hunting, I joined a company but still chose an R&D position. Perhaps that was my final small commitment to the research dream I once had.

I also tried seeking help and changing myself

No help from above

At that time, I really struggled to see a way forward and tried seeking help from faculty at the school. I found it largely ineffective. The replies were simply, “You must be overthinking; what teacher would treat students that way?” or “You are a student, so it must be your fault. How could it be the teacher’s?” The university basically took the position of protecting the supervisor.

After seeking help, things worsened

My supervisor later heard rumors about this and publicly criticized me more than once for damaging his reputation outside the group. The graduate teaching secretary and graduate school only handled routine administrative work. They did not intervene in supervisor–student relationships, perhaps because they did not know how.

A university policy that left me speechless

After reports of graduate student suicides in China a few years earlier, *** University introduced a measure I found baffling: ideological and political education for graduate students. The university still attributed the problem first to students’ immature thinking and limited resilience, requiring supervisors to provide that education. It issued a conversation handbook, instructed supervisors to speak with students at least monthly, and required students to record the conversation, with both student and supervisor signing it. That was the formality.

“Ideological education” became another weapon against me

Once my supervisor had this mandate, he became even less restrained in subjecting us to “ideological tempering.” It made things worse rather than achieving the intended effect. The university did not follow up, and nobody supervised actual implementation, so eventually the whole matter faded away.

Did you consider quitting?

I really did. But I worried that leaving would make my supervisor lose face, and also considered whether the cost of withdrawing would be too high.

If I had withdrawn and begun again then, I no longer had the courage to start over. Many people advised me to request another supervisor or withdraw and pursue a PhD elsewhere, but I lacked the spirit to begin again. I decided to stay, try to exclude the negativity, and work hard myself for another two or three years. I could meet the graduation requirements through my own experiments, writing, and publications. After weighing it up, graduating as quickly as possible from his group seemed the most acceptable approach.

A supervisor in a parallel universe

What would your ideal supervisor be like?

Both virtuous and capable.

A teacher is a role model; without sufficient character, I do not think someone deserves to be called a supervisor. In ability, they need deep expertise in their field, developing substantial understanding over time and providing effective help to students.

They should also teach according to each student’s needs. Some students only want a qualification and to meet graduation requirements, while others truly want a research career. A supervisor should set different goals according to those needs and offer guidance suited to individual personalities.

I also disagree with supervisors taking a self-centered position: “This is how I am. Accept it or leave.” Supervisors should build constructive interactions with students so the relationship can be more pleasant.

While interviewing Old Yogurt, what we heard most often was a long silence followed by a painful sigh. We cannot change what has happened. May the people he meets afterward be supportive, and may the Old Yogurt of a parallel universe find a supervisor of character and ability who teaches according to his needs and protects the small flame of his enthusiasm for research!

Speaker: Old Yogurt

Editor: Honey Peach Oolong

Interview: Fantuan, Calorie

Audio recording: Fantuan