|
|
|
|
|
|
by RMarcus
2667 days ago
|
|
|
This would be considered absolutely batshit at all three of the R1 research universities I've been around, which spans a significant range of prestige. I think it goes to show how much variance there are in PhD programs. I frequently advise undergrads to find the right lab (i.e., a lab that doesn't have such a competitive environment) instead of picking a school based on some other criteria like prestige, but this is far easier in hindsight. I got super lucky -- a small lab with a good advisor. Maybe (in addition to a strong union) we need a "Yelp for labs" where advisors can be penalized (or recognized) for their behavior. If it were publicly available and student testimonial could be somehow verified and anonymous (potentially impossible), I bet administrators would put at least some pressure on problematic PIs... |
|
|
I think ‘yelp for academic groups’ is an interesting idea, but I really doubt the administration would step in unless it got really bad. But giving prospective students better information could disrupt the flow of good students to toxic labs, which might actually create some incentive for change.
I’m not sure I would actually post to such a service though, even though I have a pretty good relationship with my Ph.D. advisor. Too many bridges to potentially burn in such a small community.
For any prospective students who might read this, in the meantime you might try briefly emailing a few current and former group members asking for their perspective.