Issue with the PhD student

[arcturus]

I had a chat with the student in person this morning. He says that he has recently involved in the Facebook group from middle east. He said in this activity, he spends only few hours of research, where he gives little output and the goal is to publish with a large set of authors. He told that since he joined only recently that group he has not published yet through that group yet.

If you are in the US, your grant support (RA) is probably only for 20 hours (max) per week on the project supported by the grant. You can expect an additional 20 hours per week in his role as a student, for a total of 40 hours per week on projects you support/advise. The remainder of his time is his own. If he chooses to spend some of that time continuing to work on his PhD project, he will finish sooner than if he spends that time working on possibly bad collaborative research projects with others. However, as long as he is not putting your name on such publications without your permission, he is free to spend his not-work hours as he wishes.

[jerseyjay]

I had a chat with the student in person this morning. He says that he has recently involved in the Facebook group from middle east. He said in this activity, he spends only few hours of research, where he gives little output and the goal is to publish with a large set of authors. He told that since he joined only recently that group he has not published yet through that group yet.

I have read this several times, and I am not sure I understand it, either what it means or if (or why) the OP finds it upsetting. I raise this because there might be some sort of failure of communication between the OP and their student. Also, the OP seems to assume at times that their displeasure is obviously rational, but it is possible that his student doesn't see it this away. Again, my point is not that the OP is wrong, but that they need to explain it to the student.

I am not sure whether it is a good idea for the student to spend so much time in a Facebook group--in general, I think social media is the enemy of actual work. That said, if the student is from the Middle East and the group comprises other students from the area, the student might find it useful to belong to the group, and in fact it might be useful for his future career, if some of the people in the group will be future colleagues. On a personal level the student might find it useful to counter the saudade of being a foreign student. 

But the post is written in such a way as to imply that participation in Facebook group is itself research, with the goal of publishing. Certainly Facebook can be a medium to facilitate collaboration between researchers, but is it itself research? When I was a grad student in history, I spent time on H-Net, and I found it useful for my own research--though it itself was not research.

Again, in history (and I think many fields), grad students are supposed to seek avenues to publish. I sometimes wish this were not the case, and that they had the luxury to focus on their PhD. But the reality is, no history PhD is going to get a job at a decent school without having at least one or two publications. The type of publications is of course important, which, again, is partially the job of the advisor as mentor. Is it possible that the student is being told by other students--in his or other fields--that he needs to publish as much as possible?

My advice is that the OP be clear in what they expect, and explain it as clearly as possible. And also to have patience because being a scientist, I assume, is more than just knowing the science. Part of the advisor's job is to mentor the student in this understanding.

[Ruralguy]

There are many very bright students who are lab klutzes, or don't know norms, etc. There are also great lab students who can't do algebra or write if their life depended on it. I don't have grad students, but I assume that the basic principle holds: you have to work with what you get. Of course, there are standards, and if at some point you feel like you have to boot someone, then do so. However, I think pulling funding in a couple of months based on what they can publish right now is perhaps bit too strict of a standard. However, at some point, maybe you would have to do that.

[Puget]

There are many very bright students who are lab klutzes, or don't know norms, etc. There are also great lab students who can't do algebra or write if their life depended on it. I don't have grad students, but I assume that the basic principle holds: you have to work with what you get. Of course, there are standards, and if at some point you feel like you have to boot someone, then do so. However, I think pulling funding in a couple of months based on what they can publish right now is perhaps bit too strict of a standard. However, at some point, maybe you would have to do that.

Besides being unrealistic, it is a great way to encourage research misconduct-- if you make funding product (publication) rather than process (doing good work) contingent, you incentivize them p-hacking or even fabricating their way to a publication. Bad science and bad mentoring!

[research_prof]

I had a chat with the student in person this morning. He says that he has recently involved in the Facebook group from middle east. He said in this activity, he spends only few hours of research, where he gives little output and the goal is to publish with a large set of authors. He told that since he joined only recently that group he has not published yet through that group yet.

I hate this kind of logic: "let me do a bit of work and let's publish a crappy paper all together".

I feel you should talk to your student and explain to him that quality matters and paper publishing is not about quantity. No one will take him seriously after graduation if he has published 10 crappy papers. Everyone will take him seriously if he has published 5 strong papers.

[fizzycist]

One of the most important aspects of graduate school is teaching the norms of the field as well as of academia in general (and also, to an extent, jobs outside of academia).

Agree on this. And in my field, this student's behavior would fall outside the norm. But I've had something very similar happen to me before and genuinely think the student just didn't understand the norms, so I think OP should consider this part of the mentoring process.

If a student or postdoc is working on something from a previous lab they typically should share that info with the advisor. How are we supposed to mentor someone scientifically if we don't even know what they are working on?

It is then on the advisor to make reasonable accomodations, and there should be no expectation of authorship for the advisor. But also to be honest I would feel similar to OP if my student chose to work on low quality work. Our students are in some way a reflection of us, whether that's fair or not.

On the other hand, the suggestion from research_prof about playing mind games with funding sounds like abusive behavior and would earn one a bad rep and slim choice of trainees in my neck of the woods. Being a research advisor can be frustrating, but it can also be very rewarding. Don't let a few early bumps in the road turn you into a jerk.

[sambaprof]

I was talking to another  colleague in our Department about this situation with this student.

During the conversation that colleague told me that this particular student sent an email to another Professor in our Department six months earlier requesting that he would like to change the advisor and  if he can take that particular student as his advisor. But the other Professor rejected it telling that it would not look good and that he cannot take this particular student as the advisor. it looks like that other Professor told about this to the Colleague in the Department I was talking to today.

[arcturus]

I was talking to another  colleague in our Department about this situation with this student.

During the conversation that colleague told me that this particular student sent an email to another Professor in our Department six months earlier requesting that he would like to change the advisor and  if he can take that particular student as his advisor. But the other Professor rejected it telling that it would not look good and that he cannot take this particular student as the advisor. it looks like that other Professor told about this to the Colleague in the Department I was talking to today.

It sounds like both you and the student are questioning whether this is a good advisor-student match. At this point, I highly recommend consulting with the director of graduate studies or department chair (whomever is more appropriate/friendly) about the university/department process for dealing with issues like these. A bad student-advisor relationship is bad for both the student and advisor. Your school/department should have formal policies in place regarding how students can change advisors with the least negative impact on their prior project and best opportunity to start work with a different research group. These situations are always more fraught when they involve student funding (RAs). It is also important to create a paper trail when dealing with personnel issues (which this has now become). You will want to document what you have done in regards to advising/mentoring this student.

[MarathonRunner]

There are many very bright students who are lab klutzes, or don't know norms, etc. There are also great lab students who can't do algebra or write if their life depended on it. I don't have grad students, but I assume that the basic principle holds: you have to work with what you get. Of course, there are standards, and if at some point you feel like you have to boot someone, then do so. However, I think pulling funding in a couple of months based on what they can publish right now is perhaps bit too strict of a standard. However, at some point, maybe you would have to do that.

First gen here (as in first in my family to attend university, let alone pursue graduate studies). There are so many unspoken norms in academia that we first gens often make mistakes or faux pas, because no one has told us otherwise! I'm in STEM, and I've published non-dissertation work during my PhD, including 3 course papers I worked into papers good enough for publication, previous collaborations pre-PhD, and side projects I've worked on during my own time. If I shouldn't be doing those things, no one has ever told me so, but it may be one of those unwritten rules. It seems all my peers have academic, professional, or medical parents. My dad finished high school, my mom didn't. My grandparents, both sides, were farmers without even high school.

[jerseyjay]

There are so many unspoken norms in academia that we first gens often make mistakes or faux pas, because no one has told us otherwise!

I am not a first-generation university student; both my parents have graduate degrees (although neither is an academic). Nonetheless I think there are many things about graduate school that are not obvious to those for whom it is a new experience. For example, in history, we were supposed to read a monograph a week for each class; it took a while for me to figure out that "reading" a monograph for graduate school was different than "reading" a book in real life. Also, that our seminar papers should be part of the dissertation. Or that our coursework should be geared towards the reading list for the comps.

This all appears obvious to me now, but took some hard work (and luck) to figure out.

Thus I agree with MarathonRunner that these things should be explained. Again, part of an advisor's job is to socialize one's students into the norms of academia and one's specialization.

[Caracal]

There are so many unspoken norms in academia that we first gens often make mistakes or faux pas, because no one has told us otherwise!

I am not a first-generation university student; both my parents have graduate degrees (although neither is an academic). Nonetheless I think there are many things about graduate school that are not obvious to those for whom it is a new experience. For example, in history, we were supposed to read a monograph a week for each class; it took a while for me to figure out that "reading" a monograph for graduate school was different than "reading" a book in real life. Also, that our seminar papers should be part of the dissertation. Or that our coursework should be geared towards the reading list for the comps.

This all appears obvious to me now, but took some hard work (and luck) to figure out.

Thus I agree with MarathonRunner that these things should be explained. Again, part of an advisor's job is to socialize one's students into the norms of academia and one's specialization.

Yeah, and we're in the same field and a number of those things you described actually wouldn't have applied, or worked differently in my grad program. There are often all these program specific rules, some of which are formal, and others that are unstated. There were also all kinds of other things that were specific to my advisor in terms of the way he wanted us to operate and the kind of things he wanted us to involve him in and the the things he wanted us to do on our own-some of this stuff was field norms, but there were other professors in the department who expected very different things of their grad students. It is really important that when students seem to not be picking up on these norms, an advisor explains the issue. It's likely to be an awkward conversation, because nobody likes to hear that they've been doing things wrong, but it's one of those cases where the best thing to do is to be clear and direct. You need to explain to the student why publishing this article in that journal without telling you about was a bad idea.

I also wonder whether you could be seeing some of the aftereffects of covid. I learned most of this stuff from hanging out with other grad students-sometimes in the workroom, but also at various bars. Grad students talk way too much about their work and their advisors, but you do just pick up a lot of things through osmosis, especially if there are more advanced grad students around. Covid might have really disrupted some of this transmission of institutional knowledge. There's obviously nothing wrong with students having a Facebook group where they talk to students at other schools, but it seems like your student might be absorbing norms and practices from various randos in this group rather than from other grad students in the department.

[Ruralguy]

This has probably died down in recent years, but in the 80's and 90's, a number of advisers and other professors had a habit of chiding when you asked a question that they deemed to be stupid, which was all of them! Nine times of ten, they weren't even correct with how they'd answer the question (with the chiding). This led to a lot of lying low, which probably led to certain things being missed because you didn't want to ask, or point out to the adviser that they got some detail about how to compose the dissertation committee wrong. I bailed slightly early because I couldn't take the atmosphere any longer. My dissertation probably suffered, though I got several publications, and likely my current job (and others), out of it.

[Puget]

This discussion is a good example of why it is important to have a "lab standards and expectations" document (not just a lab manual on procedures, though that's good too). Every lab here was required to create one this past summer, and at first I was skeptical (thought we didn't really need one already made expectations clear through discussions and IEPs, etc.), but it turned out (a) when talking to my grad students about what to include, it turned out that I wasn't nearly as clear and comprehensive as I thought I was when they were each starting out, and (b) it was a really good opportunity to think through some things and make some changes.

[larryc]

Take a deep breath.

This student needs guidance, not chastisement, at least not yet. Have another chat.

"Let's talk about publication expectations while you are studying here. A lot of people think any publication on the vita is a plus, at least a little one, but that is not true. When you publish in a predatory journal it sends a signal that you are not serious about the discipline and don't understand the norms of our profession. It makes you look bad. It hurts your chances for future grants and fellowships and even publications with legitimate journals. And it does not look great for our department either."

"I realize you probably did not know this. So here is what we are going to do..."

Then set out a procedure where the student will talk to you about any publications before they are submitted. Follow the meeting with an email outlining what has been agreed to.

[sambaprof]

The fact that this PhD student tried to publish in junk journals on his own is not the only issue.

I closely observed this particular PhD student for last two months and from my observation,  his activities such as
a. blatant lies for example - telling other PhD student in the group  that I told this particular student to do term project by himself instead of group work...
related to the course he is taking; b) Did not feel sorry a bit for gross mistake in grading - which I  had to catch etc., is making me think it is better for both to break the advisor-advisee relationship. Also this particular student is on an early stage of PhD... not completed the candidacy... proposal
defense etc.,  Also as I mentioned earlier he reached out to other faculty last year by email in regards to switching the advisor (ie from me to other faculty) and is hanging out only because the other faculty did not want to support him citing that it will cause unnecessary friction among the Department faculty.


I am also advising three other PhD students, with whom I believe things are going well. I am also wondering what/how to
communicate that I will not be the advisor for this particular PhD student with these other students, so that the rest of the PhD students in the team are
still motivated to do research work with me and complete the PhD. Please advise.