Replies

Results

• Li Kim Lee

  11 May 2007 | 15:04

  Hello Tony! I have been very fortunate to have had a really good PhD supervisor followed by an excellent postdoctoral PI. Amongst their characteristics which I valued, besides the ones you pointed out, were their approachability, generosity with their research knowledge and willingness to help out with career development. Good supervisors are also scientists and human beings whom one can respect.

• Anonymous

  11 May 2007 | 16:04

  Hmm, dangerous question for me. I’ve had supervisors at the extemes of the spectrum. The really good ones were reasonable – how do we move on from this conflict? – and led by example for both the human and intellectual side. The awful ones were egotistical, self-motivated and demeaning. The good ones are now known for high quality science. But the evil ones have tons of money and were promoted quickly…

  As an example of how not to supervise: I recently called back to a former lab and spoke with the current sucker, I mean post-doc. I mentioned that I didn’t miss the competition that our supervisor instilled in the group. She had just spoken with him on the very topic and his reply was: whoever brings me the data first will get credit. Imagine that! in a university research lab, pitting students and post-docs against each other.

  I also concur with Li Kim – her post-doc advisor is one of the truly good guys out there.

  Now I’m on the dark side figuring out how to motivate students…

• Anonymous

  11 May 2007 | 16:55

  My ideal supervisor would be someone whose knowledge and judgement I respected, who was good at getting funding, who told me what direction to go in and then left me alone to get on with things, and was willing to (energetically) deal with the occasional urgent problem.

  There are two types of good supervisor, in my opinion: those that give very clear direction / instructions, and those that are good cheerleaders. If neither of these criteria are met, the experience is very discouraging for me.

• Andrew Sun

  15 May 2007 | 16:52

  A supervisor that tells me the tips of how to finally become a supervisor myself one day, from a graduate student. I mean what a supervisor considers is totally different from what a graduate student does. He should tell me ‘think like me, if you can’.

• Saranya Sridhar

  08 October 2007 | 21:24

  Hi,
  I pretty much agree with all the qualities already mentioned here but, I suspect there are no criterion for good supervisors. Like all relationships, I suspect it depends entirely on what you need from your supervisor. I know friends who get on famously with tyrants and others who hate the most easy-going of supervisors.
  However, my general rule involves deciding whether I can converse with my supervisor in a capacity other than a junior or student on at least more than one occasion. Considering that I shall be spending the better part of my life working with them,I really need to know whether I feel comfortable in discussing science or life with them.

• Nicolau Werneck

  20 October 2007 | 01:23

  First of all, I like my supervisors to let me research whatever I feel like. I know a lot of people out there who just “follow orders”, as if they are secretaries doing other people’s research… But there are students who actually look for this, so it goes with the taste of each. Of course a supervisor can help a lot in defining the final shape of an article or thesis…

  Second, a supervisor must be very accessible. Answering fast to e-mails is paramount.

  And last, a supervisor must know the ins and outs of the school and institutions. This includes bureaucracy…

  I suspect the best supervisors are also the best teachers in class, but that is something I’m still researching.

• Massimo Pinto

  23 October 2007 | 09:22

  The latest issue of Seed magazine covers an article on scientific literacy and the importance of sustaining scientific discourse. The importance of encouraging evidence over prejudice is well explained there.
  It’s a great read and answers this question, at least in part.
  Massimo

• Markus Krupp

  23 October 2007 | 11:23

  Hi Toni,

  an interesting question and also interesting answers!

  However in my point of view not just the choice of supervisor is very important, the question where to research is essential, too.

  All faculties (industry, university, institute, etc.) have advantages and disadvantages!

  To find the right combination of supervisor and faculty for your person will be the aim :)

  BW Markus

• Paul Wicks

  23 October 2007 | 14:16

  Assuming we take “good scientist who won’t stab you in the front or back” as a given, something that’s important to me is:

  Someone who looks after the team; comes to social events / celebrations, pays for drinks at conferences, stands their round, is willing to look a bit silly if necessary.

• Matt Brown

  25 October 2007 | 09:25

  For anyone who hasn’t seen it already, there’s a perceptive cartoon about this over on the blogs section.

Results