|
|
|
|
|
by shoyer
3634 days ago
|
|
> But it can be done, and if you succeed it becomes a major, major accomplishment on your CV. I agree with your advice except for this line. To be clear, a Ph.D does count as a "major, major accomplishment on your CV" (at least to the right audience). But you won't get any extra credit for putting up with a bad adviser. I am tempted to simply advise quitting, but switching to another adviser (or even sticking it out) could also make sense. It depends on how exactly your adviser is bad, and whether you could honestly expect another Ph.D. adviser to be significantly better. Actual abuse is one thing, but benign neglect and a "sink or swim" attitude are pretty typical attitudes. If the problem is that your adviser is just focused on raising funds and doesn't have much time or inclination to help you on your research, then you can't expect any better if you roll the dice another time. Also - what field are you in? What are your career goals? Most people with Ph.Ds don't end up in jobs that require them. If you think you'll be dropping out of academia in three years anyways (and there's no shame in that), then there really is little reason to stick it out for three more years of suffering, regardless of the whys. |
|
The value is in having proof that you can manage your resources and create a positive outcome.
Since several people are saying the same thing I'll add my response here:
Yes, absolutely, probably not actually the thing to put on your CV. Bu anyone who values a PhD in a candidate will appreciate the comment "As it happens I didn't get along with my supervisor, just personal chemistry as it happens, but I overcame that by taking control." I believe that for most people who knows about PhDs that is actually worth something.
To the original poster - people disagree with me, and that's worth considering. I could be wrong.