Anyway, the meeting made me realize that “real” PhD programs are HARD, man. I am slightly reconsidering transferring to this program just because I have already sunk so many years into my blah one (which will still get me a job at a law school, with luck). My doctor of juridical science degree has no requirements other than “take 24 credits, 8 of which are independent study, and write a long article within three years.” I do not envy students who have to assemble committes for their qualifying exams and dissertations. It’s hard to find even one person who will commit for those years.

Anyway, the prof at the meeting said repeatedly that it is OKAY to change advisors–pick one as soon as you can just to have someone to start talking to, but if they don’t seem to fit, change as soon as you can too, and don’t be afraid to change a third time, or have two chairs. He said that students tend to be too concerned about offending their advisor, when it should be about the student’s project and how well the advisor fits.

I can imagine it’s a more difficult discussion to have when the intellectual fit is fine, but the advisor just isn’t giving good feedback or has a personality conflict. I wish I had changed advisors in my masters of law program last year. I was all het up to do a thesis on bias crimes and the 14th amendment, and he had me change to the federal regulation of child pornography. Now I have a thesis of unpublishable crap that made me feel miserable and sick for a year as I read one terrible case after another.

My first advisor was great for starting me off, orienting me to how research and writing works, commenting on my MA paper, and generally getting me started in the whole sociological enterprise. Then, once I figured out what I really wanted to do, it was a natural shift to go with someone else whose interests lined up with what I planned to do in my dissertation and beyond. It just so happened that the most logical person for that was Advisor A’s partner. It was a smooth transition that just seemed to make sense for all involved.

I bring this up not because I think it actually adds advice for anyone reading, but because I’m amused by the potential ways to best fit my scenario into the accepted metaphorical terms. In case that wasn’t fun enough - I am now in a postdoc working with Advisor B’s advisor.

i had a similar situation in grad school where i picked an advisor who wasn’t *objectively* a good substantive fit over someone who was (for a variety of reasons that i won’t go into)… i know it caused problems but at the time, i was too green to know better and didn’t handle it well. i didn’t speak to the DGS before it was too late (so there wasn’t much she could do) and things had gotten very bad — i think it’s important to get others involved early if needed. that said, my situation was not typical. most of the time, if you are honest, respectful, and don’t make it out to be something huge, you should rarely have problems.

In addition to getting rid of the advisor/advisee relationship as romantic metaphor, could we get rid of the parent/child one as well?

I’ve also taken on advisees who were switching away from other advisors, sometimes because of a problem and other times because of interests. I’ve also agreed to be the advisor for students who were worried about a problem with their employer/mentor who ended up dropping me off again when what they were worried about got fixed.

Students usually find a new advisor before telling the old one about it, and that is understandable. But when you have made a decision, it is good form to tell the old advisor. I have never been upset about a student who wanted to change from me to another advisor, but it has definitely made me feel awkward to think someone was my advisee and find out otherwise only by seeing a change on the student review list. If the advisor is like most advisors, s/he won’t be upset about it, but it is nice to know. As far as I am concerned, it can be done by email, if you are worried that the in-person meeting will be awkward.

If you are worried about possible repercussions of an advisor change (i.e. funding), you should talk to the director of graduate studies.

Sounds like she was glad you finally quit.

if you are thinking about or talking about changing your advisor and using the metaphor of “breaking up” to do so, stop.

Stop with thinking about it as a “break up” or stop the relationship? I’d say both.

If you, student, feel that your interests are no longer closely aligned with your advisor, or finding meeting times is chronically difficult, or you wish to have more/less/different feedback on your work, then it is relatively easy to explain this, simply and clearly, and kindly. (One might, for example, thank the soon-to-be-former advisor for all their assistance to this point.) I’ve just had a student do this with me (it was a “my interests have transformed under the supervision of another professor and so I’d like him to take the lead on paper, since his is in practice” situation). It was extremely easy to wish him well and sign him over, and it increased the respect I have for him that he carried himself with such grace and dealt with it professionally and simply.

If you, student, feel that your advisor has become abrasive, abusive, is stealing your ideas, or other unprofessional, unethical, or just unkind actions have taken place, then you might be best served if another faculty member gets involved. This person might be your next advisor, and might provide you with advice on how to deal with the situation. They also might help ease you out of it, and they certainly can help you to protect yourself. Btw, if this sort of thing ever happens you really must immediately begin keeping records of interactions (save emails, write dated letters to yourself after each meeting) and consider bringing the issue to the chair of your department. If the actant is the chair of your department, you might appeal to a dean.