Navigating a Difficult Mentor-Student Relationship

[unit_circle]

Here's my quandary:

I'm a math/physics major at an primarily undergraduate state school (United States). Since last summer I have been working with a newly hired assistant professor Dr. X doing scanning probe microscopy. This professor did good work as a graduate student and post doc, but his skills as a PI are severly lacking. Dr. X is very disorganized, and has about 10 different projects he wants completed, but is always in his office writing grant proposals, and who knows what else. Our physics department does not have a graduate program, so Dr. X's lab is run by 4 undergraduates, including me. We barely know how to run the equipment, let alone build experiments, and Dr. X never comes over to the lab to help us. Dr. X also has very poor English and communication skills.

I'm going into my junior year this fall, and I was accepted into the McNair scholars program, which grooms undergrads for graduate school. Part of the program is to complete a research project with the guidance of a faculty mentor. My problem is that I don't want my faculty mentor to be Dr. X, but I don't how to quit working for Dr. X without alienating some of the other professors in my small physics department, like the dept. chair, who originally recruited me to work for Dr. X the summer after my freshman year. If I make waves in the dept, then that might affect their view of me when it comes time to write recommendation letters. But I am afraid my McNair project will stink if Dr. X is my mentor.

This situation came to a head today, when Dr. X and I got into a disagreement about my academic plan for my final 2 years. I have always wanted to study mathematical physics or cosmology. Dr. X has known all along that I was double major in math and physics. Now that I am in the McNair program, which adds about an additional course's worth of work a semester, I informed Dr. X that I can't take his biophysics course in spring of 07. I'm taking 18 credits that semester, and they are all required, and biophysics is not. Dr. X sent me a condscending email explaining that the future of physics is biophysics, that mathematical physics is a waste of time, and to quote from the email (spelling and grammar left intact):

" You aret rying to go opposite way and you are trying to learn osolete physics
that was developed 300 years ago."

" I am not intersted in working with a student who likes math or physics developed 17-18 centry. I am more interested in working with a student who are more excited with current challenging biophysics."

I've pretty much had it with Dr. X as a supervisor but I don't know how to quit working with him without alienating the entire department. I don't want to go to the dept. chair and rat Dr. X out for being a lousy professor, but I don't see any other way to get out of this siutation and save face. I know I might sound like I'm whining but believe me Dr. X has serious problems with management and leadership. I also believe that he doesn't care about what I am interested in studying, he just wants to build his biophysics program so he can get more funding. I've always been clear with Dr. X about my long term career goals, but that I would do my best while I worked with him in biophysics as an undergrad. I'm starting to get really depressed about the whole situation. Any advice?

 

[Bystander]

Forward the e-mail to the chair.

 

[Quaoar]

If you want to be non-confrontational, I suggest talking to the chair about how you and the topic seem incompatible. You're right not to tell the chair how lousy Dr. X is, because he will almost certainly side with Dr. X unless you have lots of corroborating evidence (Asst. prof's opinion > undergraduate's opinion). Just focus on your disinterest in Dr. X's subject. You're not supposed to have specialized yet, so don't feel bad about "quitting." Even graduate students bounce around considerably before they know what they are going to do.

Unfortunately, you are playing on uneven ground here. I think if you just bring up the fact that the subject doesn't suit you, the dept. chair will be much more sympathetic. I don't believe such an action will alienate you in any way, except maybe with Dr. X.

 

[mathwonk]

be diplomatic, but tell the truth about your preferences. It is not necessary to attack Dr X to make it clear that your preferences differ from his and you want to work with someone who has more sympoathy with your intellectual inclinations.

You can even say something like, I realize Dr X highly qualified mentor in such and such area, but that is not what I see myself doing and I think this is the time to set my own course.

I am grateful to you for helping me find this position but I have come to realize it does not not suit my own taste.No one will really fault you for standing up like a man (or woman if that applies) for your own independence. rather they will respect you.

Be polite but make it clear what your wishes are. There is no need to criticize anyone here, but when asked you must say clearly what myour wishes are.

you can do it and you will be glad you did. if by any crazy chance you are in a loony bin of completely uncompromising egomaniacs, you should get out of there anyway.

 

[desA]

I would say that, judging from Dr.X's e-mail, that he has already resigned his services. You are now going to have to talk to the HOD so that a more suitable supervisor may be appointed. You have little option.

A copy of the e-mail would be useful to show proof of Dr.X's resignation.

This is now a pure 'business matter' & can be approached independantly of personality issues. Stay aloof & plead the 'poor student'.

desA

 

[unit_circle]

I forgot to mention that I'm meeting Dr. X in person tomorrow to discuss the situation. I'm pretty sure we can come to an understanding and I can retain my employment, if I want to. I'm interested in Dr. X's work, just not as interested as I am in other things, like cosmology. I took the job because I needed money, and it sounded a lot better than grilling steaks or jockeying a cash register. My biggest problem is with his management skills and his lack of help in his lab.

I don't think he was dismissing me from my job in his email, because he often has difficulty translating his ideas into English, since he is a non-native speaker. Obviously this is a chance to diplomatically assert myself and change tracks for my last two undergrad years. The problem is that our dept. is small (only ~10 full faculty members, including assistant profs, and not of all them doing active research) and that I might not be able to find new professor to do my McNair project with. The project includes a stipend so that the mentor does not have to pay me, but it still might be difficult to find someone.

Another possibility is to drop physics and concentrate strictly on maths, and then "back door" my way into physics later in life, if possible.

mathwonk, supposing that they were all egomaniacs, I don't have anywhere to go. My junior year starts in less than one month, it's a little late to think about transfering. My only option would be to drop physics and do only maths.

What's funny is that all the upper class EE's I knew laughed at me freshman year (when I was EE) when I said I was switching to physics. Our dept. doesn't have the best rep on campus. Maybe I should have listened.

 

[mathwonk]

well i just said that as a last resort. it is unlkikely everyone in your dept is insane.but after watching Dr Shirley on tv I am remided that no noe can make these decisions for anyone else. Yopu have to make the call, but I am testifying that from my experience you need to make your wishes clear, and secondly it is always helpful ,down the line to alienate as few people as necessary.

Indeed I have ahd very many tense encounters with poeople and it is usually possible to come away with a future with almost anyone, if you try to see it from their point of view, but insist on making your point of view clear as well.

good luck.

 

[Rach3]

The problem is that our dept. is small (only ~10 full faculty members, including assistant profs, and not of all them doing active research)

That's more than three times the size of our department here. You are very fortunate indeed.

 

[jtbell]

If your description of Dr. X's skills as a PI are accurate, the other faculty in the department are probably aware of his problems, too. It's hard to hide such things in a small department. I wouldn't be surprised if you got a sympathetic hearing from the department chair.

 

[unit_circle]

Thanks everyone for replying so quickly. mathwonk, sorry if I seemed testy in that last post. I'm just a nervous wreck over this situation. I have worked really hard my first 2 years (3.9 gpa, research exp.) and I don't want ruin that work by burning bridges.

I'm meeting Dr. X tomorrow, right now I am trying to decide if I should quit or not. I think I need to make the decision by the time we meet. I don't want to stay with his group and then quit 2 months later, if I'm going to do it, I should do it now. I won't be sleeping well.

Right now I am leaning towards quitting, working as a math tutor this next semester, and then hopefully hooking up with a new prof in the phys. dept. (or maybe math? My calc III teacher rides the same bus I do, and I know his research is related to physics) to do my McNair project next summer.

 

[desA]

You may consider it prudent to have someone sit in on the meeting as a neutral witness of what transpires. A dictaphone placed squarely in full view also helps to keep matters objective.

 

[unit_circle]

I postponed my meeting w/ Dr. X. unitl Monday, so I could think about my decision. If anyone else has advice on what to do or how to handle the meeting I would be grateful.

 

[arildno]

If Dr. X's actually believes biophysics is the "future" of physics, get the hell away from him.
He, most certainly, won't be the future of physics in general or biophysics in particular.

 

[matt grime]

Whilst I agee with mathwonk, yet again, about not alientating people, I must back up arildno on this one. Anyone physicist who thinks that biophysics is going to be 'the future' compared to theoretical physics/mathematics is just plain wrong on a scale almost uncomprehendrable to many of us. Unless he is using some bizarre definition of biophys then he is very off the mark. Mathematical biology is certainly a very active area of research, though it is essentially the amalgamation of dynamical systems and probability theory, but biophys, well, come on get a grip.

 

[unit_circle]

Biophysics is currently a "hot topic," for instance, see the feature article in May 2006 Physics Today. But Dr. X seems to think that is the be all and end all of the future of physics, and I disagree. There are plenty of interesting problems in all areas of science and maths. I think our dept. is really pushing the this biophysics stuff because we don't have any physics students (4 or 5 in my junior class) and they think they can attract bio and chem students into the physics program. Also, my school is big on "interdisciplinary research," so we have tried to collaborate with a couple of biochem profs. These collaborations have been disasters because of Dr. X's management skills, and as a result these profs don't want to work with us anymore.

One problem I have had in working in my lab is that I have no background in biology (besides high school) and I have only take 1 general chemistry course. This makes it very difficult to understand the papers that my supervisor is interested in. Also, Dr. X never comes to the lab, so I end up stuck in the lab not knowing what to do, so I just surf the net all day, waiting for Dr X to email me back the answer to a question. This really a waste both of my time and his grant money.

I thought that someone might say that I was being weak and to just suck it up and deal with it, but the consensus seems to be that I need to get out now. Thanks everyone for letting me vent some more, I've had all of this built up for a long time.

 

[arildno]

Biophysics is currently a "hot topic," for instance, see the feature article in May 2006 Physics Today.

Yes, and in my opinion, a FAD.

But Dr. X seems to think that is the be all and end all of the future of physics, and I disagree.

Very good of you!

I think our dept. is really pushing the this biophysics stuff because we don't have any physics students (4 or 5 in my junior class) and they think they can attract bio and chem students into the physics program. Also, my school is big on "interdisciplinary research," so we have tried to collaborate with a couple of biochem profs. These collaborations have been disasters because of Dr. X's management skills, and as a result these profs don't want to work with us anymore.

One problem I have had in working in my lab is that I have no background in biology (besides high school) and I have only take 1 general chemistry course. This makes it very difficult to understand the papers that my supervisor is interested in. Also, Dr. X never comes to the lab, so I end up stuck in the lab not knowing what to do, so I just surf the net all day, waiting for Dr X to email me back the answer to a question. This really a waste both of my time and his grant money.

I thought that someone might say that I was being weak and to just suck it up and deal with it, but the consensus seems to be that I need to get out now. Thanks everyone for letting me vent some more, I've had all of this built up for a long time.

You have the right perceptions of this, I'm sure.
Don't waste years under an a**hole doing "research" that really amounts to very little.

 

[Igor_S]

Whoaaa LOOOOL ? Theoretical physics and MATHEMATICS are going to be the future of physics - WTF ?! "Theoretical physics" is such a general area (it could be anything from condensed matter to strings) but from I see, there is more work today (and more funding) in condensed matter and applied physics, even in biophysics. I can hardly imagine "theoretical physics" and mathematics going in front of, e.g. nanotechnology, quantum computing, particle physics (LHC, future experiments such as LISA), astrophysics, etc.

Of course, that doesn't make Dr.X right, either. I doubt that any specific area in physics will extinguish all others, since they are all advancing in parallel.

 

[matt grime]

Quantum computing is (mostly) theoretical physics (at the moment), as is particle physics, at least in my up-bringing. And so is astrophysics, but perhaps I had an odd schooling. Almost all of the subjects you mentioned would be studied at DAMTP in Cambridge.

(You can't say LOOOOL. LOL is an acronym. And you seemed to have missed the 'in comparison' part of my post. You also contradict yourself by implying there is more funding in things other than 'theoretical physics' such as 'condensed matter' yet you say 'condesed matter' could be theoretical physics.)

 

[unit_circle]

The reason I switched from EE to phys/math is because I was intrigued by so called "fundamental physics" (notice the quotes, I'm not trying to start a holy war between reductionist and emergence camps) problems like the cosmological constant, dark matter, etc. I know that many undergrads have wide eyed aspirations to work on these types of problems and in reality job opportunities are very slim.

I'm a "non traditional student" and didn't start college until age 25. Before that I worked as a gas station clerk or a line cook, which I was not happy doing. I love physics, and I don't see how I could not study physics for the rest of my life, no matter what I do to make a living. So it makes sense to me go to grad school. No matter where I end up after school, I know that I will be happier in my job than I was in my pre college life. I just don't dig biophysics, and if applied physics is where the jobs are, I would rather work in electrical and computer engineering than biophysics.

 

[arildno]

Engineering is definitely a good choice!
It seems to me that the physics department you are stuck at is no place for you to continue.

 

[Mute]

Yes, and in my opinion, [biophysics is] a FAD.

I fail to see how it could be a fad. Biological systems are, of course, physical systems and thus are subject to similar sorts of analyses as the other sorts of physical systems people are fond of studying. Sure, it might be considered a hot topic by some and thus some people might go into for that reason, but it's the same with other fields. Eventually people who aren't really excited by biophysics will stop working in it, but the rest will stay, and won't go away.

This isn't to say that biophysics is the "be all and end all of the future of physics", but then again, I wouldn't really make that claim about any field of physics.

But anyways, in regards to the actual topic at hand... well, I guess I don't have much to add to what's already been said. Play up the "not your topic of interest bit", I suppose. Experience is good, but I would think that past a certain point there's not much use working on something you're not interested in, as you won't think about it much and so won't come up with creative ideas about the problems at hand...

 

[Igor_S]

Quantum computing is (mostly) theoretical physics (at the moment)

I've seen many experiments while I was looking at research pages at various universities. So I disagree.

as is particle physics... And so is astrophysics, but perhaps I had an odd schooling. Almost all of the subjects you mentioned would be studied at DAMTP in Cambridge.

CERN's LHC, SLAC, Brookhaven, Kamiokande, AMANDA, WMAP, ... ?? There are surely more, these are the experiments and institutions I thought in a minute.

(You can't say LOOOOL. LOL is an acronym. And you seemed to have missed the 'in comparison' part of my post. You also contradict yourself by implying there is more funding in things other than 'theoretical physics' such as 'condensed matter' yet you say 'condesed matter' could be theoretical physics.)

I am well aware what LOL means. LOOOOOL is used online if you want to laugh more than LOL. I am saying THERE IS NO SUCH FIELD AS "THEORETICAL PHYSICS", because it's very poorly defined. You can say "theoretical condensed matter physics" because that narrows it down to less general area of research. Theoretical physics can mean bunch of things.

On the other hand there IS condensed matter physics, there is particle physics, astrophysics, biophysics and in many of those areas there is work being done which is in the "gray area" of being and theoretical and experimental. There is also work that overlaps between these areas (e.g. condensed matter and biophysics), but most of it can be roughly separated.

About funding, I'm pretty sure most of it goes into areas like condensed matter, for obvious reasons and less into stuff like astro, especially strings, quantum gravity, etc. And it makes more sense to me that the areas with more funding can remain in better position in the future, than the ones with less.

 

[ZapperZ]

This issue of funding can be easily solve by, for example, looking at the DOE and NSF budget and seeing the percentage of distribution of funds over the last, let's say, 10 years. Even with high ticket items in High Energy Physics, condensed matter physics/material sciences, as funded under the DOE's Basic Energy Science division, consistently gets the most money, for obvious reasons.

And Igor is correct. "Theoretical Physics" is a very vague term that means a lot of things. That's like saying "Experimental Physics". What is more commonly referred to is the FIELD of study, such as those defined by the divisions and sub-divisions under the APS and AIP, and adopted by many other professional physics organizations throughout the world. Then, within each of these field of studies, you then have the dichotomy of "experimental" and "theoretical" (except string etc), or even both, especially when one does phenomenology or computer modelling. Even in fields such as "mathematical physics", the mathematical methodology presented tends to be field specific. For example, one could be working on the solution to the N-body problem in classical E&M. So the mathematics has some degree of usefulness to a specific application or field.

As to the OP, all I can say is that the Prof. X has behaved in a totally unprofessional manner. While he can certainly try to sell his field of study to entice his students, he should have never dissed other fields of physics, and certainly not in those words. He needs to get over himself and realize that he is in an undergraduate institution that has the students who may not have yet decided on what specific area of physics they might want to go into. A small institution/department simply do not have the breath and the resources to expose a student to all the exciting areas of physics in the first place! The best that one can do (and this is true even if one is an undergraduate at a brand-name school) is to be fully equipped in the basic understanding of physics in general, go to a graduate school, and explore all the areas that one may not even know existed. One will be VERY surprised on how large and varied physics is.

Keep in mind that you may still need letters of recommendation from Prof. X (I would suggest looking for alternatives right now). So do not burn your bridges. At this point, I'll repeat the advise you've been getting, which is let him know that while you would like to continue working for him, you do not find the area to be of your interest, and would probably major in a different field when you get into graduate school. If he does not find this to his liking, then tell him you'd be willing to resign so that he can find someone else.

Now, about this cosmology and mathematical physics disease that you have...

:)

Zz.

 

[Igor_S]

Unit circle, this is actually very good point:

Keep in mind that you may still need letters of recommendation from Prof. X (I would suggest looking for alternatives right now). So do not burn your bridges. At this point, I'll repeat the advise you've been getting, which is let him know that while you would like to continue working for him, you do not find the area to be of your interest, and would probably major in a different field when you get into graduate school.

If you didn't work for several different profs, you might try being polite and going easy with this guy. E.g. I wouldn't say exactly "biophysics isn't my area of interest", but rather "I found out that xxxxxxx interests me more than biophysics and would probably major in that..." (or something like that)

I found myself in a very similar situation like yours. My prof. Y was also like yours, maybe even worse because he even disliked some people who worked in the same area as he (he does experimental particle physics). He also had zero management skills, was never around, etc. I remember when I volunteered to construct small drift chamber for a particle physics lab (which he held) and never did anything, because he never showed up when we had arranged meetings (I ended up going to my uni and back home for about 20 times during the month I had several difficult exams; takes me 1hr to get there and 1hr back home). I was sooo pissed off because I didn't do ANYTHING except waiting for him each time, but I tried to stay cool and didn't complain.

A month or so after, I applied for CERN summer school and asked him if he could give me a recommendation (I worked on his project about 2 months in Germany). So, after he totally dissed CERN, he told me he can't give me a recommendation (he could, but didn't want). Afterwards he asked me what I plan after I graduate and I answered that I'm considering to go US for graduate study. After that he was completely upset, acting like I betrayed him or something and held 20 mins talk about how US is bad for our students and Croatia (our country) is good (this is a good place to again insert my long LOL, but instead I'll just use "ROFL"). ROFL !

Sorry for the length, but if prof. X. is like that and won't give you recommendation, I would suggest you find another project/advisor to work on, because you can find yourself in a difficult situation every time you will need letters of recommendation (and those from research advisor usually tend to be better than from only a teacher), e.g. applying into grad school. I was told from several independent sources that letters of recommendation are VERY important part of this application.

Hope some of this can help you, unit circle.

Best of luck !

 

[unit_circle]

Update: Dr. X. and I have been discussing via email this entire weekend. I think we have come to an understanding. He thought that it was implied that I would focus on biosphysics as a part of taking the job in his lab. I thought I was free to study what I wanted and I would be doing relatively simple supervised tasks in his lab, not conducting full literature reviews and building experiments from scratch. If I would have know that I was to commit my studies fully to biophysics, I would not have taken the job.

So Dr. X. said he was happy that I was finally honest with him. WTF? I've told him about this the whole time, what about him being honest with me? We came to the agreement that it would be better for him to employ a student who's interests were in the biological sciences. He said he was disappointed that he had invested a years worth of time and money to train me, only to have me leave, but that he understands how people's interests change. So it appears that I can resign w/o burning bridges. Looks like the next step is to find a new prof to do my McNair project w/ next summer.

I don't think Dr. X. realized how insulting his email was (at least to me). His English skills are severly lacking, and this is part of the problem with working for him. He will have an idea in his head, but he will translate his idea into English and I will think he means something else.

Now, about this cosmology and mathematical physics disease that you have...

:)

Zz.

I was waiting for ZapperZ to come yank my head out of the clouds :) I know it's hard to get jobs in these fields, but I'm going to give it my best. I think I can always fall back to an applied area of physics like EE or EC, if I can't hack it in cosmology or mathematical physics. When I say fall back, I don't intend to imply that applied physics is any less important than mathematical physics, I just meant "fall back" on my list of dream careers.

 

[jtbell]

You mention Dr. X's poor English, so I suspect that he's not from the US. In that case, his experiences with his home-country's educational system may have given him unrealistic expectations of the degree to which undergraduates in the US are expected to specialize themselves. You started working for him during the summer after your freshman year, right? I don't think it's generally realistic for US undergraduates to commit themselves to a specific field right after their freshman year, when they've probably taken only an introductory general physics course and some calculus. Many students don't settle on a field until after they've started graduate school.

In other countries, students may be expected to specialize earlier, and that may be part of your problem with Dr. X.

 

[buddyholly9999]

I'm excited to hear about how you dealt with the situation. As today is the day you have to talk to him right?

Anyways, people like Dr. X, need to have their teeth knocked in. I hate the pompousness of the a-holes that seem to be in academia. In fact, I think that you should give him a good ol' fashioned a-whipping, the kind where you hit him a lot more times than he hits you.

As Igor S exemplifies, a situation like the one your in tends to go from bad to worse for you. So, don't give this guy a benefit of the doubt. I also hope you learn a lesson from this experience, that if your ever in his shoes...that you don't end up or even act like he did.

 

[unit_circle]

Update: Dr. X and I have decided that I will take the remaining of the summer and the fall semester off from his group, since my fall semester is going to be hectic, and I wouldn't have time to work in the lab anyway. Then I will discuss returning to his group this winter (I doubt I will). My hope is to find another professor to complete my McNair project with, but I guess I will have Dr. X to fall back on if I can't find anyone else. I have not talked w/ the dept. chair yet, but it appears that I was able to complete this eggshell walk without alienating my deptartment.

 

[J77]

Matt Grime's right in an earlier mail.

Applied mathematicians have been doing bio-maths for a long time now - ever couple of years it surfaces as the hot subject.

During a talk by David Gross the other week, he fielded questions about the future of physics.

Some of his later questions relating tot he future of physics were about bio-'physics'; fast-slow sytems; and neural networks.

Don't physicists ever talk to apllied mathematicians/dynamicists!

 

[J77]

" You aret rying to go opposite way and you are trying to learn osolete physics
that was developed 300 years ago."

" I am not intersted in working with a student who likes math or physics developed 17-18 centry. I am more interested in working with a student who are more excited with current challenging biophysics."

And if he speaks like he writes, you'd be better off with another supervisor anyway.

A massive part of being a researcher is being able to convey your ideas, and write about them, in a clear (and accurate) manner.

I guess you can't post the guy's web details, so we can have a look?

 

[desA]

If Dr.X comes from the Asian region, then I would fully understand his academic myopia. The prevailing thought process is generally one of completing the 'research process' towards post-grad qualifications, as distinct from searching for novel, original thought.

They tend to rope the folks into a straight-jacket without giving them space to explore before specialising. This is distinct from European/US models.

It becomes very, very difficult to unhitch from the clutches of such supervisors.

 

[unit_circle]

I guess you can't post the guy's web details, so we can have a look?

I'm not sure what you mean by this. Could you clarify?

If Dr.X comes from the Asian region, then I would fully understand his academic myopia. The prevailing thought process is generally one of completing the 'research process' towards post-grad qualifications, as distinct from searching for novel, original thought.

desA, good read! Dr. X is from S. Korea.

 

[J77]

I'm not sure what you mean by this. Could you clarify?

So we can see what his publications are like, eg. has he published papers in top-flight journals, or loads of papers in low impact factor/obscure journals/conferences.

desA, good read! Dr. X is from S. Korea.

That was clear from his use of English

 

[unit_circle]

So we can see what his publications are like, eg. has he published papers in top-flight journals, or loads of papers in low impact factor/obscure journals/conferences.

I don't know how I can post that info w/o revealing his identity. I'm pretty careful about making remarks about someone else's professional abilities in a archived public forum. I don't want my posts to haunt me sometime in the future. If you have an idea on how I can post Dr. X's CV w/o revealing Dr. X's identity let me know.

 

[TMFKAN64]

I don't know how I can post that info w/o revealing his identity. I'm pretty careful about making remarks about someone else's professional abilities in a archived public forum. I don't want my posts to haunt me sometime in the future. If you have an idea on how I can post Dr. X's CV w/o revealing Dr. X's identity let me know.

Don't even *think* about doing it. Really. Nothing good could possibly come out of it for you, and a world of hurt is quite possible.