define thesis advisor

• Code of Ethics
• Dissertation Editing
• Dissertation Coaching
• Free Consultation

Choosing a Thesis Advisor: A Complete Guide

One of the most important choices that you will make about your dissertation or thesis happens before you write a single word. Choosing a thesis advisor or dissertation advisor (often referred to as a dissertation chair) will have a significant impact on your entire dissertation writing experience, and for many years to come. For many doctoral students, their thesis advisor is their single greatest influence in graduate school. 

Selecting a thesis advisor is a big decision with far-reaching implications. The stakes are very high, and it is imperative to choose your thesis advisor wisely. There are many factors to consider when choosing a thesis advisor, from expertise to personality, and it pays to think carefully and weigh your options before approaching a faculty member to chair your dissertation committee . While there are subtle differences between a dissertation chair and a thesis advisor, we’ll focus on the commonalities in this article.

These are commonly asked questions about selecting a thesis advisor: 

• What does a thesis advisor do? 
• How should I choose my thesis advisor?
• What makes a faculty member a good thesis advisor? 
• What if it doesn’t work out with my thesis advisor? 

Thesis Advisor Responsibilities

While writing a dissertation is a largely solitary pursuit, a good thesis advisor will be with you every step of the way. While you are very much in the driver’s seat, it is your thesis advisor’s job to keep you off the guardrails. And deploy the airbag, if necessary. There are a few purposes that your thesis advisor will serve during your time together. 

Guidance . While the dissertation process is new to you, your thesis advisor will know it very well. She will help you navigate the obstacles and pitfalls that have derailed many projects–department politics, university regulations, funding, research opportunities, etc. Your thesis advisor will also serve as a sounding board as you distill the nebulous concept of your research project into a fully-formed idea that you can move forward with. 

Organization . A good thesis advisor will run a tight ship and keep your dissertation project moving like clockwork. As a researcher, it’s very easy to get lost in the minutiae of the literature, and it’s not difficult to find yourself trapped down a rabbit hole of scholarship. Regular milestones set by your thesis advisor are a great way to stay on track and maintain forward momentum. 

Mentorship. While an effective thesis advisor will ensure that you see your project to fruition, a great one will be with you for decades. Though I graduated with my Ph.D. in 2012 and I’m now an associate professor myself, my thesis advisor remains a guiding light in my career. Your thesis advisor can be a cornerstone of your professional network. 

Choosing a Thesis Advisor

So, how do you select a faculty member to chair your dissertation committee? With extreme care. Once you have set your sights on a dissertation chair or thesis advisor, the next step is the Big Ask. I remember being very nervous to approach the faculty member who became my chair– it seemed like such an imposition, but, as a grad student in her department, I was already on her radar. Keep in mind, your faculty members are expecting to be asked to chair dissertation committees, and they may even be a little flattered that you chose them. 

While chairing and serving on dissertation committees is a requirement for the tenured and senior faculty members in your department, it’s a lot of work. Make no mistake: accepting the role of your dissertation chair makes them nervous, too. As a faculty member, I can say with absolute certainty that a good dissertation chair will be almost as invested in your dissertation as you are. 

What Makes a Strong Thesis Advisor?

There exists a gulf between what many students desire in a dissertation chair or thesis advisor and what they actually need. While there may be a temptation to approach one of your department’s superstar faculty members to chair your committee, this may not serve you in the long term. Faculty members who have made a name for themselves through an abundance of publications, grants, awards, and conference appearances typically have jam-packed schedules, and it may be difficult for them to make you and your dissertation a priority. 

A safer bet that is likely to have a more rewarding outcome is to work with a faculty member who has already shown enthusiasm for your work. Select a thesis advisor who makes time for you, and one who always responds to your emails. This is the person you want in your corner during the sometimes stressful journey of researching and writing a dissertation. Also, it never hurts to spend some time talking to potential dissertation chairs or dissertation advisors. Get all of your questions answered, and then make a decision. 

What If It Doesn’t Work Out?

The possibility that your thesis advisor is a bad fit for your project or is incompatible for some other reason is a worst-case scenario that lurks in the furthest reaches of every graduate student’s mind. There’s no way to sugarcoat it: this is not a good situation to be in, and it can derail dissertations. The soundest strategy for dealing with an internecine conflict with your thesis advisor is prevention. 

This is why it is vital to do your homework and put a lot of thought into choosing your thesis advisor. Find someone you are compatible with and make sure you’re on the same page. Check in with them regularly, and keep them updated. Clear communication is a great way to ensure a solid partnership with your dissertation chair. Don’t forget, your dissertation chair should also be making your success a priority. You should be comfortable enough to ask questions and let them know what’s on your mind. 

The good news is that a bad fit isn’t likely to happen. Most grad students have a completely workable relationship with their dissertation chairs, and for many it turns into a long friendship built on mutual respect and admiration. Personally, every time I serve on a doctoral student’s dissertation committee, I feel a tremendous amount of pride and satisfaction when they take their place in the academic world. It’s truly an honor to help them achieve such a major milestone in their academic career, and I’m delighted to be part of it. 

Related posts:

Courtney Watson, Ph.D.

Courtney Watson, Ph.D. is an Associate Professor of English at Radford University Carilion, in Roanoke, Virginia. Her areas of expertise include undergraduate and graduate curriculum development for writing courses in the health sciences and American literature with a focus on literary travel, tourism, and heritage economies. Her writing and academic scholarship has been widely published in places that include  Studies in American Culture ,  Dialogue , and  The Virginia Quarterly Review . Her research on the integration of humanities into STEM education will be published by Routledge in an upcoming collection. Dr. Watson has also been nominated by the State Council for Higher Education of Virginia’s Outstanding Faculty Rising Star Award, and she is a past winner of the National Society of Arts & Letters Regional Short Story Prize, as well as institutional awards for scholarly research and excellence in teaching. Throughout her career in higher education, Dr. Watson has served in faculty governance and administration as a frequent committee chair and program chair. As a higher education consultant, she has served as a subject matter expert, an evaluator, and a contributor to white papers exploring program development, enrollment research, and educational mergers and acquisitions.

Comments are closed.

How to Finish Your Dissertation in Half the Time

Learn how to avoid the pitfalls preventing you from finishing your dissertation faster.

Subscribe to Get the FREE eBook!

Dr. Courtney Watson In the News

“ See It for Yourself ” in With Good Reason: Beyond the Book July 22, 2022

“ I Thought You’d Never Ask: Consent in Contemporary Romance ” in New Frontiers in Popular Romance (McFarland) June 13, 2022

• Common Errors
• Dissertation Success
• Presentation
• Quantitative Analysis
• Surviving Grad School

“How to Finish Your Dissertation in Half the Time”

Subscribe to get the free eBook!

/images/cornell/logo35pt_cornell_white.svg" alt="define thesis advisor"> Cornell University --> Graduate School

Advising guide for research students.

Success as a graduate student is a shared responsibility between students and faculty. For research students, the relationship with your research advisor, also known as your special committee chair, is extremely important. 

Your responsibility to identify and choose an advisor is one of the most critical tasks you have early in your graduate school career. It’s an opportunity to meet and get to know faculty in your field, to assess your needs for support and supervision, and to collaboratively define your goals, values, and strategic plan for your academic and professional career.

Graduate School Requirement

At Cornell, the faculty advisor in research degree programs is referred to as the special committee chair.

Doctoral students have a special committee of at least three Cornell faculty, which includes the special committee chair and two minor committee members.

Master’s students have a special committee of at least two Cornell faculty, which includes the special committee chair and one minor member.

For both doctoral and master’s degree students, the special committee chair must be a graduate faculty member in the student’s own field.

Definition of an Advisor

Advising  and  mentoring  are often used interchangeably, but understanding the distinctions is important as you choose an advisor.

Advisor Responsibilities

• Guides you in meeting the requirements and expectations for your degree
• Required coursework
• Exams required by the graduate field or the Graduate School
• Research proposal/prospectus
• Research project
• Thesis or dissertation
• Writes informed letters of recommendation for your job applications
• May be a valued colleague or collaborator after you graduate

Mentor Responsibilities

• Provides support and guidance that extends beyond scope of advising
• Demystifies the structure, culture, and unstated expectations of graduate education
• Expands your professional network by introducing you to others
• Provides nominations for awards or other recognitions
• Brings job opportunities to your attention and writes letters of recommendation as you apply for jobs
• Advocates for you within the graduate program and discipline
• May serve as a role model and source of inspiration
• May become a colleague and peer in your discipline and may continue serving a mentoring role

Finding an Advisor

When do i select my first advisor.

At Cornell, the process for obtaining your first advisor varies by field.

Your faculty advisor may be assigned prior to your arrival or you may begin your program with a faculty member you met during the application process.

In some graduate fields, the faculty director of graduate studies (DGS) advises all incoming students. This provides you with time to get to know faculty in your field. By the end of the first semester or year (varying by field), it’s expected that you will have identified your own, long-term advisor. 

In fields where students apply to study with a specific faculty member (rather than do rotations and choose a lab or research group and advisor), you will have chosen an advisor prior to arriving on campus.

You can begin initial conversations about expectations and the advising relationship with your new advisor prior to the start of your program via email.

Start your graduate study and research with clear expectations and thoughtful communication about your plans for an effective advising relationship and success in graduate school.

How do I find an advisor? 

Meet and get to know faculty in your courses and in graduate field seminars and other events.

Talk to advanced students about their experiences and perceptions of the faculty in your programs and ask questions about possible advisors:

• How would you describe their approach to advising?
• What can you tell me about their work style?
• What can you tell me about their research interests?
• How good are their communication skills?
• How clear are their expectations for their graduate students?
• Do they use timeliness in reviewing their students’ writing and their approach to giving feedback?
• How available are they to meet with their graduate students?

After you have gathered information, make an appointment to meet with a potential advisor.

Possible Questions

• Is there a typical timeline you encourage your students to follow in completing their degree programs?
• How often do you meet with your students at different stages of their graduate program? (For example, during coursework, research, and writing stages)
• What are your expectations for students to make conference presentations and submit publications?
• What are your authorship policies? (This is especially relevant in fields where there is collaborative research and publishing involving the student and advisor or a group of students, postdocs, and faculty.)
• How soon should I identify my research project?
• How do you describe the degree of guidance and supervision you provide with regards to your students becoming more independent in their research and scholarship?
• If you are joining a lab or research group: What are the sources of funding for this research? Are there any new or pending research grants?
• How many of your students seek, and secure, external funding? What are your expectations for students to apply for external fellowships?
• Do you have a statement of advising you can share that lists our respective responsibilities and clarifies mutual expectations?
• What’s your advice on how students can manage what they find to be the biggest challenges in their graduate program?

Add other questions to your list based on your own needs and specifics of your program, such as questions about specialized equipment, lab safety, travel to field sites, support and accommodations for special health needs, communication during a faculty member’s sabbatical, funding in fields where there are fewer fellowships and research grants, etc.

Getting Other Mentoring Needs Met

How do i find other mentor(s) .

You may find one faculty member who can serve as both advisor and mentor, but that’s not always the case.

Consider identifying and cultivating additional mentors if that is the case. 

Suggestions on where to look for a mentor:

• The minor members of your special committee
• A faculty member who is not on your committee, and perhaps not even in your graduate field
• Peers and postdoctoral fellows who have knowledge and experience in pertinent issues

No one mentor can meet all your needs.

Good mentors have many protégés and many other demands on their time, such as teaching, research, and university or professional service. They also may not have all the expertise you need, for example, if you decide to search for jobs in multiple employment sectors.

Develop a broad network of mentors whose expertise varies and who provide different functions based on your changing needs as you progress from new student to independent scholar and researcher.

NCFDD offers a webinar, “ Cultivating Your Network of Mentors, Sponsors, and Collaborators “, which students can view after activating a free NCFDD membership through Cornell.

Maximizing the Advising Relationship

A successful relationship with your advisor depends on several different factors and varies with needs and working styles of the individuals. Some of these factors are under your control. But some are not. 

Suggestions for Building a Successful Advising Relationship

• Identify what you need from an advisor.
• Communicate clearly and frequently with your advisor to convey your questions, expectations, goals, challenges, and degree progress. Follow up verbal communication and meetings with an email detailing your understanding of what you both agreed to and next steps.
• Update your written academic plan each semester or whenever major changes or adjustments are needed.
• Consider including your plans to write competitive fellowship applications and co-authored grant proposals.
• Consider including  plans for professional development  that support your skill-building objectives and career goals.
• Recognize that you and your advisor have distinct perspectives, backgrounds, and interests. Share yours. Listen to your advisor’s. There is mutual benefit to sharing and learning from this diversity.
• Work with your advisor to define a regular meeting schedule. Prepare and send written materials in advance of each meeting. These could include: your questions, academic and research plan and timeline, and drafts of current writing projects, such as fellowship applications, manuscripts, or thesis/dissertation chapters.
• Be prepared to negotiate, show flexibility, and compromise, as is important for any successful relationship.
• Be as candid as you are comfortable with about your challenges and concerns. Seek guidance about campus and other resources that can help you manage and address any obstacles.
• Reach out to others for advice. Anticipate challenges and obstacles in your graduate degree program and their impact on the advising relationship.

Be proactive in finding resources and gathering information that can help you and your advisor arrive at solutions to any problems and optimize your time together.

Making Use of Meetings

First meetings.

Your first meeting sets the tone for a productive, satisfying, and enduring relationship with your advisor. Your first meeting is an opportunity to discuss expectations and to review a working draft of your academic plan.

Questions to ask about expectations

• What do your most successful students do to complete their degree on time?
• How often do you want us to meet?
• May I send you questions via email, or do you prefer I just come to your office?
• Would you like weekly (biweekly? monthly?) updates on my research progress?
• Do you prefer reviewing the complete draft of a manuscript or may I send you sections for feedback?
• After each meeting, I’ll make a list of what we each agreed to do before our next meeting, to help me keep moving forward with my research. Would you like a copy of that list, too, via email?

Draft Academic Plan

Prepare and bring a draft plan that outlines your “big picture” plans for your coursework, research, and writing, as well as an anticipated graduation date. (Or, email in advance with a message, such as, “I’m looking forward to meeting with you on [date] at [time], [location]. In advance, I’m sending a copy of my academic plan and proposed schedule for our discussion.”)

Contents of the plan

• Include the requirements and deadlines of your degree program. (This is information you should be able to find online or in your program’s graduate student handbook.)
• Include a general timeline indicating when you plan to meet requirements for courses or seminars, any required papers (such as a second-year paper), exams required by the graduate field (such as the Q exam) or by the Graduate School (the A exam and the B exam for research degree students).
• If your graduate field has a specific set of required courses, indicate the semester you may complete each of them, and be open to suggestions from your advisor.
• If your field does not have required courses, have some idea about the courses you are interested in taking and solicit input and suggestions from your faculty advisor.

Subsequent Meetings

Use each subsequent meeting as an opportunity to update your written academic plan and stay on track to complete your required papers and exams, your research proposal or prospectus, and the chapters or articles that comprise your thesis or dissertation.

In later meetings, you can elaborate on your general initial plan:

• Adding specific coursework or seminars
• Add professional development opportunities that interest you (workshops, dissertation writing boot camp, Summer Success Symposium, Colman Leadership Program, etc.)
• Include intentions to participate in external conferences and travel to research sites
• Identify a semester or summer when you would like to complete an internship.

Your written plan is also important to document what your advisor has agreed to, especially when the deadline to submit a manuscript or your thesis is looming and you are awaiting feedback or approval from your advisor. Use a combination of oral and written communications to stay in touch with your advisor, establish common expectations, and mark your progress toward degree completion.

Meeting Frequency

The frequency of meetings between advisors and advisees varies by field and individual. Assess your own needs and understand your advisor’s expectations for frequency of communication (in person and via email).

• Does your advisor like to provide guidance each step of the way so that he or she is aware of the details of everything you are doing?
• Does your advisor want you to launch your work more independently and report back at pre-determined or regular intervals?
• What do you need to be productive? Are you ready to work more independently?

Be proactive in seeking information. Explicitly ask how often your advisor usually meets with new students and how the advisor prefers to be updated on your progress in between meetings. Ask your peers how frequently they meet with their advisor and whether this has changed over time.

There will be disciplinary differences in meeting frequency.

• In humanities and in some social sciences, where library, archive, and field research take students away from campus, maintaining regular communication is essential, including through scheduled meetings, whether in-person or virtual.
• In life sciences and physical sciences and engineering, students often see their advisors daily in the lab or meet as a research group about externally funded projects; these regular check-ins and conversations may replace formal meetings. Make sure that you are also scheduling one-on-one times to talk about your broader goals and academic and career planning progress, however.

Some of your decisions about meeting frequency will be informed by talking to others, but much of it you learn through experience working together with your advisor. Even this will  change over time  as you become a more independent researcher and scholar. Communicate with your advisor regularly about your changing needs and expectations at each stage of your graduate career.

Resolving Conflict

In any relationship, there can be conflict. And, in the advisor-advisee relationship, the power dynamic created by the supervision, evaluation and, in some cases, funding role of your advisor can make conflicts with your advisor seem especially high.

You have options, however, including:

• Code of Legislation of the Graduate Faculty
• Campus Code of Conduct
• Policy on Academic Misconduct
• Research Misconduct
• Graduate School Grievance Policy
• Intellectual Property policies
• Graduate Student Assistantships (Policy 1.3)
• Talking with your advisor to clarify any miscommunication. Cornell University’s Office of the Ombudsman , one of the offices on campus that offers confidentiality, can also assist you by talking through the issue and helping you gather information you need before you speak directly with your advisor.
• Speaking with someone in the Graduate School, either the Associate Dean for Academics ( [email protected] ) for academic issues, or the Senior Assistant Dean for Graduate Student Life ( [email protected] ) for other issues. These deans will listen, offer advice and support, and coach you through any conversation you might want to have with your advisor. Together, you can brainstorm possible solutions and evaluate alternative plans for resolution.
• Touching base with your director of graduate studies (DGS) – if this person is not also your advisor – to talk to about policies and possible solutions to the conflict.
• Soliciting peer advice. Discuss strategies for managing and resolving conflict with your advisor. “Do you have any suggestions for me?” “Have you ever had an issue like this…?” can be effective questions.
• Identifying a new advisor if the conflict can not be resolved. Your DGS can help with this, and the Graduate School (as above) can help as well.

The National Center for Faculty Development and Diversity offers a webinar, “ How to Engage in Healthy Conflict “, which students can view after activating a free NCFDD membership through Cornell.

Changing Advisors

On occasion, students find that they need or want to change their advisor. An advisor can resign as the student’s special committee chair/faculty advisor. The  Code  of Legislation of the Graduate Faculty describes the rights and responsibilities of students and faculty in each of these situations.

Typical reasons to seek a new advisor include:

• Research interests that veer from the faculty’s expertise or ability to fund a certain project
• Your advisor retires or resigns from the university or takes an extended leave of absence for personal or professional reasons
• Differences in goals, values, or an approach to work or communication style that can’t be resolved
• Serious issues, involving suspected inappropriate behavior, questionable research conduct, or alleged bias, discrimination, or harassment

If you are considering changing advisors:

• Talk to a member of your committee, your director of graduate studies (DGS), or someone in the Graduate School about the proposed change. Some issues, such as funding, require timely attention.
• Identify other faculty members who could serve as your advisor, then meet with one or more of them. The goal is to decide together if you are a good fit with their program. Tips: Discuss or rehearse this conversation with a trusted person, especially if there were issues with your last advisor. Be transparent about these issues and address them going forward with a new advisor. Often prospective advisors are more willing to take on a new graduate student who conveys genuine enthusiasm for their area of study rather than a student who seems to be looking for a way out of a current advising relationship that has gone sour.
• Consider how and when to inform your advisor if you plan to change advisors. Be professional and respectful. Thank your advisor for past support and guidance. Don’t damage, or further damage, the relationship.
• Your DGS, if appropriate
• Office of the University Ombudsman
• Graduate School’s Senior Assistant Dean for Graduate Student Life ( [email protected] )
• Graduate School’s Associate Dean for Academics ( [email protected] )

Forms: 

• Use Student Center if you are changing your advisor before your A exam (for Ph.D. students).
• Use the Post A Committee Change Petition form for changes after the A exam. More information is available on the Graduate School’s Policy pages .

Challenges and Potential Solutions

All good relationships take work. To navigate an advising relationship successfully over time, you should familiarize yourself with some common challenges and possible actions to take.

Challenge: Mismatch in communication needs or style

One example of a communication challenge in an advising relationship is when you want input along the way during a writing project, but you have an advisor who prefers to wait to comment on a complete written draft.

Some possible steps to address this might be to talk to peers about they have handled this in their relationship with their advisor or to explain to your advisor how his or her input at this earlier stage will help speed you along toward having a complete draft for review. It’s important in communicating with your advisor to show that you understand what alternative they are proposing and why (e.g., “I understand that …”).

Challenge: Advisor unavailable or away

Your advisor might be away from campus for a semester or more to conduct research or take a sabbatical leave. Or when a grant proposal deadline or report is looming, your advisor might be less available. Maybe you’ve emailed your advisor several times with no response.

Planning and stating in advance what you need, such as feedback on a manuscript draft or signatures on a fellowship application, can help your advisor anticipate when you will have time-sensitive requests. Making plans in advance to communicate by email or video conference when either of you will be away from campus for a longer period of time is another useful strategy. Your director of graduate studies (DGS) and other faculty who serve as special committee members can also provide advice when your advisor is unavailable.

Challenge: Misaligned expectations

You are ready to submit a manuscript for publication. Your advisor says it needs much more work. Or you begin your job search, applying to liberal arts colleges with very high reputations, or schools in your preferred geographic location, but your advisor insists that you should apply for positions at top research universities.

Discussing your needs and expectations early, and often, in the advising relationship is essential. Get comfortable, and skilled, advocating for yourself with your advisor. Use the annual  Student Progress Review  as an opportunity to communicate your professional interests and goals with your advisor. Use multiple mentors beyond your advisor to get advice and expertise on topics where you need a different perspective or support.

Sometimes challenges can become opportunities for you to develop and refine new skills in communication, negotiation, self-advocacy, and management of conflict, time, and resources. For example, although you might feel abandoned if your advisor is unavailable for a time, even this potentially negative experience could become an opportunity to learn how to advocate for yourself and communicate about your needs and perceived difficulties in the relationship.

Advising Resources

Graduate School deans and directors  are available to answer academic and non-academic questions and provide referrals to useful resources.

Counseling and Psychological Services  (CAPS) staff offer confidential, professional support for students seeking help with stress, anxiety, depression, grief, adjustment challenges, relationship difficulties, questions about identity, and managing existing mental health conditions.

Let’s Talk Drop-in Consultations  are informal, confidential walk-in consultations at various locations around campus.

External Resources

University of Michigan Rackham, How to Get the Mentoring You Want  

Laura Gail Lunsford & Vicki L. Baker, 2016, Great Mentoring in Graduate School: A Quick Start Guide for Protégés

Michigan State University, Guidelines for Graduate Student Advising and Mentoring Relationships  

Michigan State University, Graduate Student Career and Professional Development  

Template for Meeting Notes

Adapted and expanded from Maria Gardiner, Flinders University © Flinders University 2007; used with permission and published in  The Productive Graduate Student Writer  (Allen, 2019). Used here with permission of the author and publisher.  

Use this template for making notes to help you plan for a productive meeting with your advisor, keep track of plans made, and clearly identify next steps that you’ll need to take to follow up on what you discussed.

Mentoring Resources

Graduate school programs focused on mentoring, building mentoring skills for an academic career.

Develop and enhance effective communication and mentorship skills that are broadly transferrable to all careers. Offered by Future Faculty and Academic Careers.

Graduate and Professional Students International (GPSI) Peer Mentoring Program

Share lessons learned as a new international student at Cornell as a peer mentor with new international student peer mentees. Offered by the GPSI in collaboration with the Graduate School Office of Inclusion and Student Engagement.

Graduate Students Mentoring Undergraduates (GSMU)

Share knowledge with and provide support to undergraduate students interested in pursuing further education. Offered in collaboration with the Office of Academic Diversity Initiatives (OADI).

Multicultural Academic Council (MAC) Peer Mentoring Program

Develop strategies to excel academically and personally at Cornell and beyond as a peer mentee or share strategies as a peer mentor. Offered by MAC in collaboration with the Graduate School Office of Inclusion and Student Engagement.

NextGen Professors Program

Learn from faculty in Power Mentoring Sessions and prepare for careers across institutional types. Offered by the Graduate School Office of Inclusion and Student Engagement and Future Faculty and Academic Careers.

Graduate School Programs with a Mentoring Component

Graduate school primer: navigating academia workshop series.

Program for new students on navigating graduate school with sessions on mentoring.

Perspectives: The Complete Graduate Student

Program for continuing students on common issues with some sessions on mentoring.

GPWomeN-PCCW Speaker Series

Series for all students featuring talks by Cornell alumnae with an occasional mentoring focus.

Future Professors Institute

One-day event featuring workshops and guest speakers with occasional mentoring focus.

Intergroup Dialogue Project (IDP)

Peer-led courses blending theory and experiential learning to facilitate meaningful communication with occasional mentoring focus.

Building Allyship Series

Series for the campus community featuring panels designed for productive dialogue with occasional mentoring focus.

Institutional Memberships

Center for the integration of research, teaching, and learning (cirtl) network.

Access to resources on teaching and research mentoring.

Access to career development and mentoring resources.

New York Academy of Sciences (NYAS)

Access to resources, including webinars and articles on mentoring.

Mentoring Programs Across Campus

Give and receive advice as part of a peer mentoring program for all College of Engineering students. Offered by Diversity Programs in Engineering.

Mi Comunidad/My Community

Peer mentoring program run by graduate and professional students affiliated with the Latin@ Graduate Student Coalition (LGSC) and supported by the Latina/o Studies Program (LSP) and Latina/o/x Student Success Office (LSSO) at Cornell University.

Additional Resources:

• Mentoring and Leadership Tips from Graduate School Programs
• Cornell University Office of Faculty Development and Diversity – Resources for Mentors and Mentees
• Careers Beyond Academia LibGuide
• National Research Mentoring Network

Graduate School Articles on Mentoring:

• Alumna Addresses Importance of Mentoring
• Becoming Better Mentors Through Workshop Series
• August Offers Mentoring Advice
• ‘A Better Chance of Providing Access’: Future Professors Institute Fosters Inclusivity

Virtual Training and External Resources

• How to Get the Mentoring You Want: A Guide for Graduate Students – University of Michigan, Rackham Graduate School
• The Science of Effective Mentorship in STEMM – National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, Medicine
• Mentor Training: Online Learning Modules – University of Minnesota Clinical and Translational Science Institute
• Mentor Curricula and Training: Entering Mentoring – Center for the Improvement of Mentored Experiences in Research

For other resources, view the Advising Guide for Research Students.

If there is anything not included on this list that we should consider, please send the information and a link to [email protected] .

Dissertation Advisor 101

How to get the most from the student-supervisor relationship

By: Derek Jansen (MBA) | Expert Reviewer: Dr Eunice Rautenbach | January 2024

Many students feel a little intimidated by the idea of having to work with a research advisor (or supervisor) to complete their dissertation or thesis. Similarly, many students struggle to “connect” with their advisor and feel that the relationship is somewhat strained or awkward. But this doesn’t need to be the case!

In this post, we’ll share five tried and tested tips to help you get the most from this relationship and pave the way for a smoother dissertation writing process.

Overview: Working With Your Advisor

• Clarify everyone’s roles on day one
• Establish (and stick to) a regular communication cycle
• Develop a clear project plan upfront
• Be proactive in engaging with problems
• Navigate conflict like a diplomat

1. Clarify roles on day one

Each university will have slightly different expectations, rules and norms in terms of the research advisor’s role. Similarly, each advisor will have their own unique way of doing things. So, it’s always a good idea to begin the engagement process by clearly defining the roles and expectations in your relationship.

In practical terms, we suggest that you initiate a conversation at the very start of the engagement to discuss your goals, their expectations, and how they would like to work with you. Of course, you might not like what you hear in this conversation. However, this sort of candid conversation will help you get on the same page as early as possible and set the stage for a successful partnership.

To help you get started, here are some questions that you might consider asking in your initial conversation:

• How often would you like to meet and for how long?
• What should I do to prepare for each meeting?
• What aspects of my work will you comment on (and what won’t you cover)?
• Which key decisions should I seek your approval for beforehand?
• What common mistakes should I try to avoid from the outset?
• How can I help make this partnership as effective as possible?
• My academic goals are… Do you have any suggestions at this stage to help me achieve this?

As you can see, these types of questions help you get a clear idea of how you’ll work together and how to get the most from the relatively limited face time you’ll have.

Need a helping hand?

2. Establish a regular communication cycle

Just like in any relationship, effective communication is crucial to making the student-supervisor relationship work. So, you should aim to establish a regular meeting schedule and stick to it. Don’t cancel or reschedule appointments with your advisor at short notice, or do anything that suggests you don’t value their time. Fragile egos are not uncommon in the academic world, so it’s important to clearly demonstrate that you value and respect your supervisor’s time and effort .

Practically speaking, be sure to prepare for each meeting with a clear agenda , including your progress, challenges, and any questions you have. Be open and honest in your communication, but most importantly, be receptive to your supervisor’s feedback . Ultimately, part of their role is to tell you when you’re missing the mark. So, don’t become upset or defensive when they criticise a specific aspect of your work.

Always remember that your research advisor is criticising your work, not you personally . It’s never easy to take negative feedback, but this is all part of the learning journey that takes place alongside the research journey.

3. Have a clear project plan

Few things will impress your supervisor more than a well-articulated, realistic plan of action (aka, a project plan). Investing the time to develop this shows that you take your project (and by extension, the relationship) seriously. It also helps your supervisor understand your intended timeline, which allows the two of you to better align your schedules .

In practical terms, you need to develop a project plan with achievable goals . A detailed Gantt chart can be a great way to do this. Importantly, you’ll need to break down your thesis or dissertation into a collection of practical, manageable steps , and set clear timelines and milestones for each. Once you’ve done that, you should regularly review and adjust this plan with your supervisor to ensure that you remain on track.

Of course, it’s unlikely that you’ll stick to your plan 100% of the time (there are always unexpected twists and turns in a research project. However, this plan will lay a foundation for effective collaboration between yourself and your supervisor. An imperfect plan beats no plan at all.

4. Engage with problems proactively

One surefire way to quickly annoy your advisor is to pester them every time you run into a problem in your dissertation or thesis. Unexpected challenges are par for the course when it comes to research – how you deal with them is what makes the difference.

When you encounter a problem, resist the urge to immediately send a panicked email to your supervisor – no matter how massive the issue may seem (at the time). Instead, take a step back and assess the situation as holistically as possible. Force yourself to sit with the issue for at least a few hours to ensure that you have a clear, accurate assessment of the issue at hand. In most cases, a little time, distance and deep breathing will reveal that the problem is not the existential threat it initially seemed to be.

When contacting your supervisor, you should ideally present both the problem and one or two potential solutions . The latter is the most important part here. In other words, you need to show that you’ve engaged with the issue and applied your mind to finding potential solutions. Granted, your solutions may miss the mark. However, providing some sort of solution beats impulsively throwing the problem at your supervisor and hoping that they’ll save the day.

Simply put, mishaps and mini-crises in your research journey present an opportunity to demonstrate your initiative and problem-solving skills – not a reason to lose your cool and outsource the problem to your supervisor.

5. Navigate conflict like a diplomat 

As with any partnership, there’s always the possibility of some level of disagreement or conflict arising within the student-supervisor relationship. Of course, you can drastically reduce the likelihood of this happening by implementing some of the points we mentioned earlier. Neverthless, if a serious disagreement does arise between you and your supervisor, it’s absolutely essential that you approach it with professionalism and respect . Never let it escalate into a shouting contest.

In practical terms, it’s important to communicate your concerns as they arise (don’t let things simmer for too long). Simultaneously, it’s essential that you remain open to understanding your supervisor’s perspective – don’t become entrenched in your position. After all, you are the less experienced researcher within this duo.

Keep in mind that a lot of context is lost in text-based communication , so it can often be a good idea to schedule a short call to discuss your concerns or points of contention, rather than sending a 3000-word email essay. When going this route, be sure to take the time to prepare a clear, cohesive argument beforehand – don’t just “thought vomit” on your supervisor.

In the event that you do have a significant disagreement with your advisor, remember that the goal is to find a solution that serves your project (not your ego). This often requires compromise and flexibility. A “win at all costs” mindset is definitely not suitable here. Ultimately, you need to solve the problem, while still maintaining the relationship .

If you feel that you have already exhausted all possible avenues and still can’t find an acceptable middle ground, you can of course reach out to your university to ask for their assistance. However, this should be the very last resort . Running to your university every time there’s a small disagreement will not serve you well.

Recap: Key Takeaways

To sum up, a fruitful student-supervisor relationship hinges on clear role definition , effective and regular communication , strategic planning , proactive engagement , and professional conflict resolution .

Remember, your dissertation supervisor is there to help you, but you still need to put in the work . In many cases, they’ll also be the first marker of your work, so it really pays to put in the effort and build a strong, functional relationship with them.

Psst... there’s more!

This post was based on one of our popular Research Bootcamps . If you're working on a research project, you'll definitely want to check this out ...

You Might Also Like:

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Print Friendly

Social Sciences

This initial phase obviously revealed a stronger emphasis on familiarity among faculty. To further clarify this point, the faculty chosen were those that taught mainly the research methods courses during the first year. Relationships developed among the faculty as did preferences toward methodological choices for the dissertation. The area from these cohorts was the research background and publications of the faculty. Since this Instructional Management/Leadership Ph.D. program serves educators, administrators, health professionals, military, corporate trainers, etc., an administrator would select a faculty member with an administrative background, or a health professional would select a faculty member with a background in the health profession. The last category was a candidate talking to other prior cohort members relative to selecting an adviser. This represented a lesser number, but was also different from the other two categories since it relied primarily on the perception of other people in the selection process. There were a limited number of students in each cohort who chose their adviser after interacting at the evening buffet dinner with doctoral teaching faculty and students, as depicted in the category of Other . Mainly, the discussion at the dinner with doctoral faculty focused on the dissertation process and the work with the adviser. This individual meeting provided an opportunity for each cohort member to express his/her progress in the program. It was stated by the director of the program that in his experience, coursework is seldom the problem of students having trouble in the program. It is usually an issue with the capstone project, the dissertation, or the dissertation process. It is worth noting the connection the connection here to a finding by Knox, Burkard, Janecek, Pruitt, Fuller, and Hill (2011):

We cannot assert causality in either direction (effect of relationship on dissertation; effect of dissertation on relationship) but also cannot ignore the pattern: positive dissertation experiences were characterized by good relationships between adviser and student; problematic dissertations were often characterized by poor relationships. (p. 65)

By the conclusion of the second year of formal study, cohort members had two full semesters to work with their dissertation adviser. Hence, the researchers looked at the follow-up with these same cohorts but conducted, as previously noted, individual meetings with cohort members. The objective was to ascertain if the students were making progress in the dissertation process with their advisers. In this IML Ph.D. program, during the Fall of the 2 nd year, each semester correlates with the chapters of the dissertation which serves as a timeline. For instance, the Fall semester would correlate with Chapter 1 (Introduction) of the dissertation. Chapter 2 (Literature Review) would correlate with Spring, 2 nd year, then Summer of the 3 rd year would correlate with Chapter 3 (Methodology). Chapter 4 (Results) would be in the Fall of the 3 rd year while Chapter 5 (Findings and Conclusions) would be in the Spring of the 3 rd year in the program. It should be noted that this represents a completion schedule that is not representative of all candidates in the program.

In the discussions with Cohort 8A/8B, the group who graduated in May of 2015, there was a common thread among the group. Even though over 40% had earlier comments in year two and year three about their work and relationships with their advisers, any concerns or issues were resolved when these students completed the dissertation enabling them to graduate. Almost 100% of the students recognized their adviser in the Acknowledgement page of the dissertation. So, any ill will or criticism that may have existed earlier in the relationship, dissipated when the students graduated. All the graduates felt that this was a learning experience and that they understood more about themselves and the process in general from this experience. In short, the importance of completion and subsequent graduation would overshadow any negative feelings between the student and adviser. This is shown in Table 2 below:

Table 2: Cohort 8A/8B

In Cohort 9, the group had completed their second year with one year into the dissertation process. Students in this cohort were at various stages of their dissertation. Using the same meeting procedures as with Cohorts 8A and 8B, a researcher met with members of Cohort 9. The responses from this cohort were as follows in Table 3:

Table 3: Cohort 9

Once again, students voiced similar comments on the role of their advisers. Although less negative comments were made by this cohort, the nature of these comments would indicate much different sentiments from the beginning of year 2 until the end of the same year, at least by 30% of the cohort. As noted earlier, issues such as meeting time, expected quick responses on submitted papers, and perceived relationship problems between adviser and candidate were not considered by students in cohorts 8A/8B and cohort 9.

Finally, Cohort 10 selected advisers during the summer of 2015 for the IML Ph.D. program. As noted there are a total of 18 students in this cohort. The same process of providing biographical information on faculty followed by a meet and greet buffet dinner was standard introductory procedure. Given the time frame of less than two months, these students responded in a typical manner by choosing faculty they were familiar with from their coursework or faculty who most impressed them at the dinner buffet. After meeting with each candidate to give faculty adviser/committee assignments, this group, as others, was pleased to hear that they were able to secure the adviser of choice. They, like others, were delighted to begin the process of starting the dissertation.

Discussion, Findings, and Conclusions

From a review of the three cohorts, it was clear that all three groups similar to earlier cohorts in this program, based their choice of adviser primarily on familiarity and first meeting impressions from the buffet dinner event. Familiarity could be explained in terms of selecting a faculty member based on past coursework with that faculty member. In many cases, it was first year doctoral faculty or, in some cases, doctoral faculty who had previously had a student in an undergraduate or graduate course. In should be noted that a percentage of our students pursue the doctoral degree after completing the Instructional Management/Leadership master’s degree at our university. A few students based decisions on the background of the faculty member and that person’s research area while some talked with previous cohort members. Despite preliminary discussions with the cohort in term of the process and shared past commentary from other students in the program, these students were still not focused on what might be considered the most important attributes and qualities of an adviser in the dissertation relationship. In traditional programs, students many times have the opportunity to work more closely with faculty or, at least, have the opportunity to have completed coursework with the majority of doctoral faculty who would serve as advisers.

While the doctoral faculty have a wide range of backgrounds in leadership including military, government, education, and health care, there are limitations on the director that relate directly to the faculty contract. By our contract, each faculty member should be assigned at least one doctoral student and subsequently, would serve on two committees. There is flexibility relative to faculty having more than one student. In the past the mix of students noted earlier in the description of makeup and background of the program participants provided a level of variety for student choice. To illustrate, a public school principal would probably lean toward working with a faculty member who was a former superintendent of schools. We have others who been a part of the corporate, military, higher education, or health professions. However, in some cases, if there was imbalance or over representation in one area (professional background), this might also hamper the ability of students to choose an adviser in their specific field.

The major finding of this brief study was that there was a disconnect between the entry selection criteria, which was somewhat superficial, and the reality of what many of the students really needed in an adviser. Although personal characteristics may be initially important, the complexity of the dissertation adviser role cannot be minimized. During the writing of the dissertation, some students may need more prodding than others. Some may need more encouragement. This relationship should be shaped into a mentoring role as in cognitive apprenticeship where learning occurs through guided experience. Since all faculty advisers completed a dissertation, this can be both a discovery process and a teaching process as in the Actor-Network theory which adviser and advisee are networked to the degree that both adviser and advisee learn from one another. Advisers not only learn new material but also gain new ideas and insights into their own future research agenda. Other criteria described in the literature such as common research interests, time factors, dissertation experience, etc. all have relevance that certainly go beyond familiarity, preliminary first time meetings, and the experience of others. This study’s researchers suggest that the title of adviser-mentor be applied to faculty supporting the work of doctoral students in the program, so as to emphasize the role of faculty in the success of doctoral students.

Also, based on the responses from candidates and the related research, this study’s researchers propose the following specific recommendations as a way of addressing the adviser selection process. These recommendations are aligned with Ghefali’s (2003) expansion of Collins, Holum, and Brown’s (1991) Methods section of the cognitive apprenticeship model:

These recommendations are ways of defining a more substantive and research-supported approach of selecting an adviser. The alignment of this study’s recommendations to Ghefali’s (2003) expanded Methods section of the cognitive apprenticeship model provides adviser-mentors with a rationale for implementing those recommendations and perhaps a framework that can be generalized to similar programs.

The goal is to develop a strong, nurturing relationship between the adviser-mentor and the student. It goes beyond the simple - pick who you know or pick who impresses you approach that is too often chosen by students. It enables doctoral students to engage more frequently and in a more professional, academic relationship with a possible adviser-mentor. Better informing students early on in the process is obviously a preferred first step. These doctoral students will be able to make more informed decisions relative to choice. Faculty, on the other hand, will also have a better opportunity to connect with these doctoral students, especially those faculty who traditional taught courses in the second and third years of the program.

As Joyce (2016) creatively suggests to those wrestling with the improvement of doctoral programs and dissertation advising, “create a space where both parties can exist together as actors who jointly create knowledge for their profession” (p. 412). If we can follow that simple suggestion, along with the recommendations of this brief study, then the choice of door number one, two, or three may be much easier with greater residual benefit, especially for doctoral students participating in today’s fast-track doctoral programs.

Adams, Howard G. and Ram, Ashwin (1992). How to choose an adviser . April, 13, 2015. Retrieved online at http://www.cc.gatech.edu/faculty/ashwin/wisdom/how-to-chose-an-adviser.html

Barnes, B. & Austin, A. (2009). The role of doctoral advisers: A look at advising from the adviser’s perspective. Innovative Higher Education, 33 , 297-315.

Bieber, J.P. and Worley, L.K. (2006, 2010). Conceptualizing the academic life: Graduate students’ perspectives . The Journal of Higher Education , 77 (6) 1009-1035.

Brabazon, T. (2016). Winter is coming: Doctoral supervision in the neoliberal university. International Journal of Social Sciences and Educational Studies, 3 (1).

Callon, M. (1982) Action Network Theory . http://www.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm- binaries/5222_Ritzer__Entries_beginning_with_A__[1].pdf

Collins, A., Holum, A., and Brown, J.S. (1991). Cognitive apprenticeship: Making thinking visible . May 15, 2015. Article retrieved online.

Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds.) (2013). The landscape of qualitative research . Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publishing.

Gardner, S. (2013). The challenges of first-generation doctoral students. New Directions for Higher Education , 162 , 43-54.  

Gearity, B. & Mertz, N. (2012). From “bitch” to “mentor”: A doctoral student’s story of self-change and mentoring. The Qualitative Report , 17 , 1-27.

Ghefaili, A. (2003). Cognitive apprenticeship, technology, and the contextualization of learning environments. Journal of Educational Computing, Design & Online Learning , 4 .

Halse, C. & Malfroy, J. (2010). Retheorizing doctoral supervision. Studies in Higher Education, 35 (1), 79-92.

Herzig, A. H.(2002). Where have all the students gone? Participation of doctoral students in authentic activity as a necessary condition for persistence toward the Ph.D. Educational Studies in Mathematics , 50: 177-212.

Hineman, J. and Semich, G. (2013). Cognitive apprenticeship and the support of students in non-traiditional cohort-based doctoral education programs. Proceedings for the Society for Information Technology in Education Conference , March 25-29, 2013, New Orleans, LA.

Holley, K. & Caldwell, M. (2012). The challenges of designing and implementing a doctoral student mentoring program. Innovative Higher Education, 37 , 243-253.

Holman, Zachary C. (2002). Selecting the right Ph.D. adviser: A guide . Article retrieved online August 5, 2015. http://faculty.engineering.asu.edu/holman/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Choosing-an-adviser-v2-ZH.pdf

Jaeger, A., Sandman, L. & Kim, J. (2011). Advising graduate students doing community-engaged dissertation research: The adviser-advisee relationship. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 15 (4), 5-25.

Joyce, P. (2016). “The thing itself”: Using literary criticism techniques in teaching qualitative research through dissertation advising. Qualitative Social Work, 15 (3), 407-413.

Killeya, Mathew (2008). The Ph.D. journey: How to choose a good supervisor. New Scientist . Issue 2644, February 2008.

Kim, Y. (2007). Difficulties in quality doctoral academic advising. Journal of Research in International Education, 6 (2), 171-193.

Knox, S., Burkard, A., Janecek, J., Pruitt, N., Fuller, S. & Hill, C. (2011). Positive and problematic dissertation experiences: The faculty perspective. Counseling in Psychology Quarterly, 24 (1), 55-69.

Knox, S., Sokol, J., Schlosser, L., Inman, A., Nilsson, J. & Wang, Y. (2013). International advisees’ perspectives in the advising relationship in counseling psychology doctoral programs. International Perspectives in Psychology; Research, Practice, Consultation, 2 (1), 45-61

Law, J. (2007). Actor neywork theory and material semiotics . Article retrieved online April 27, 2015. Retrieved from http://www.heterogeneities.net/publications/Law2007ANTandMaterialSemiotics.pdf

Linden, J., Ohlin, M. & Brodin, E. (2013). Mentorship, supervision and learning experience in Ph.D. education. Studies in Higher Education, 38 (5), 639-662.

Martinsuo, M. and Turkulainen, V. (2011). Personal commitment, support and progress in doctoral studies, Studies in Higher Education , 36 (1), 103-120.

Murakami-Ramhalo, E., Militello, M. & Piert, J. (2013). A view form within: How doctoral students in educational administration develop research knowledge and identity. Studies in Higher Education, 38 (2), 256-271.

Noy, S. & Ray, R. (2012). Graduate students’ perceptions of their advisers: is there systematic disadavantage to mentorship? The Journal of Higher Education, 83 (6), 876-914.

Patterson, D. (2010). Your students are your legacy. Communication of the ACM, 52 (3), 30-33.

Phillips, E. and Pugh, D. (2000). How to get a Ph.D. : A handbook for students and their supervisors (3 rd ed.), Buckingham, UK; Open University Press.

Sangganjanavanich, V. & Magnuson, S. (2009). Counselor Education & Supervision, 48 , 194-203.

Schlosser, L. & Kahn, J. (2007). Dyadic perspectives on adviser-advisee relationships in counseling psychology doctoral programs. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54(2), 211-217.

Stark, Miriam (2013). Choosing a dissertation or thesis/adviser mentor . Article retrieved online August 3, 2015. http://www.anthropology.hawaii.edu/graduate/agsa/choosing-adviser-mentor.pdf

Titus, S. & Ballou, J. (2011). Faculty members’ perceptions of advising versus mentoring: Does the name matter? Science and Engineering Ethics, 19, 1267-1281.

Valian, V. (1999). Why so slow? The advancement of women . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Zhao, C., Golde, C., & McKormick, A. (2007) More than a signature How adviser choice and adviser behavior affect doctoral student satisfaction . Journal of Further and Higher Education , 31 (3), 263-281.

Save Citation »    (Works with EndNote, ProCite, & Reference Manager)

Hineman, J. M., & Semich, G. (2017). "Choosing a Dissertation Adviser: Challenges and Strategies for Doctoral Students." Inquiries Journal , 9 (03). Retrieved from http://www.inquiriesjournal.com/a?id=1588

Hineman, John M., and George Semich. "Choosing a Dissertation Adviser: Challenges and Strategies for Doctoral Students." Inquiries Journal 9.03 (2017). < http://www.inquiriesjournal.com/a?id=1588 >

Hineman, John M., and George Semich. 2017. Choosing a Dissertation Adviser: Challenges and Strategies for Doctoral Students. Inquiries Journal 9 (03), http://www.inquiriesjournal.com/a?id=1588

HINEMAN, J. M., & SEMICH, G. 2017. Choosing a Dissertation Adviser: Challenges and Strategies for Doctoral Students. Inquiries Journal [Online], 9. Available: http://www.inquiriesjournal.com/a?id=1588

John M. Hineman graduated in 2011 with a PhD in Education from Robert Morris University .

George Semich , Ed.D., is the Director of the IML PhD Program at Robert Morris University .

From the Inquiries Journal Blog

Related reading, monthly newsletter signup.

The newsletter highlights recent selections from the journal and useful tips from our blog.

Suggested Reading from Inquiries Journal

Inquiries Journal provides undergraduate and graduate students around the world a platform for the wide dissemination of academic work over a range of core disciplines.

Representing the work of students from hundreds of institutions around the globe, Inquiries Journal 's large database of academic articles is completely free. Learn more | Blog | Submit

Latest in Education

What are you looking for, from our blog.

Inquiries Journal

© 2024 Inquiries Journal/Student Pulse LLC . All rights reserved. ISSN: 2153-5760.

Disclaimer: content on this website is for informational purposes only. It is not intended to provide medical or other professional advice. Moreover, the views expressed here do not necessarily represent the views of Inquiries Journal or Student Pulse, its owners, staff, contributors, or affiliates.

Home | Current Issue | Blog | Archives | About The Journal | Submissions Terms of Use :: Privacy Policy :: Contact

Need an Account?

Forgot password? Reset your password »

Graduate School

• Make a Gift

Student and Advisor Responsibilities

Responsibility

A thesis is required for all programs leading to a Plan A master’s degree, and a dissertation is required for the doctor of philosophy degree. This manual was written by the Graduate School to help you and your committee members to prepare theses and dissertations. Its purpose is to define uniform format standards. The word “thesis” refers to both the thesis and the dissertation unless otherwise noted.

Advisor’s Responsibility

Your advisor serves as a mentor both while you are doing the thesis work and while the results of that work are prepared for the thesis. Although you have primary responsibility for the content, quality, and format of the thesis, the advisor and the Graduate Advisory Committee must be consulted frequently. They approve the final document before it is submitted to the Graduate School. Advisors are particularly asked to insure that the abstract summarizes clearly and concisely the major points of the thesis.

Student’s Responsibility

Your are responsible for making all arrangements for the preparation and submission of the thesis as well as any additional copies required by the department. you should also consider the following:

1. Consult a style manual approved by your department for correct format for quotations, footnotes, and bibliographical items. 2. Refer to the Graduate School Thesis and Dissertation Formatting Guide for guidelines regarding correct format for thesis presentation (including illustrative materials). 3. Edit draft for correct sentence structure, grammar, paragraphing, punctuation, and spelling. 4. Prepare tables in the form in which they are to be printed. 5. Furnish numbering and legends for all tables and illustrative materials. 6. Proofread final copy and check to see that corrections are made accurately. 7. Present a copy to the Graduate Advisory Committee for their review. 8. Submit the final committee approved version electronically.

Roles and Responsibilities of a Research Advisor

• First Online: 15 September 2021

Cite this chapter

• Robert S. Fleming 3 &
• Michelle Kowalsky 4  

Part of the book series: Springer Texts in Education ((SPTE))

1012 Accesses

Rather than taking a journey alone, many travelers will decide to have a companion accompany them on their trip. This is often the case when one is embarking on a long trip or traveling to a destination to which they had not traveled before.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Bibliography

Joyner, R. L., Rouse, W. A., & Glatthorn, A. A. (2013). Writing the Winning Thesis or Dissertation: A Step-by-Step Guide . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Google Scholar  

Nygaard, L. (2017). Writing your master’s thesis: From A to Zen . Sage.

Parija, S. C., & Kate, V. (2018). Thesis writing for Master's and Ph.D. program . Singapore: Springer.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Rohrer College of Business, Rowan University, Glassboro, NJ, USA

Robert S. Fleming

Campbell Library, Rowan University, Glassboro, NJ, USA

Michelle Kowalsky

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert S. Fleming .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Fleming, R.S., Kowalsky, M. (2021). Roles and Responsibilities of a Research Advisor. In: Survival Skills for Thesis and Dissertation Candidates. Springer Texts in Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80939-3_11

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80939-3_11

Published : 15 September 2021

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-80938-6

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-80939-3

eBook Packages : Education Education (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Lend Your Expertise Thesis Roles & Responsibilities

The thesis is the culmination of honors education at Penn State, so being part of a Scholar's thesis committee is a particularly important role. While some faculty have assisted Scholars with honors theses before and are familiar with the roles and responsibilities, others may not know that undergraduate theses even exist until a student asks them to participate. The following information has been prepared to assist you in serving on a student's thesis committee.

Thesis Supervisor

Thesis supervisors are selected by Scholars and judge the merits of a Scholar’s honors thesis. The relationship between supervisor and Scholar is integral to the ultimate success of the thesis.

Your Decision

Thesis expectations, other participants, writing quality, irb/iacuc approvals, publication embargoes.

As with the graduate thesis, honors thesis supervision may involve only intellectual and editorial mentoring, or it may bring the student into your scholarly work and its physical setting in the lab and/or in the field. The first scenario may be lower-impact for you as thesis supervisor, but it requires specific commitment (from both you and the student) to stay in touch throughout the project. When the student is part of your scholarly work, the challenge (as with graduate students and postdocs) is to integrate them while carving out a project that is sufficiently their own. While it is common in these cases to delegate daily supervisory responsibility over the student to an advanced graduate student or postdoc, please remember that actual thesis supervision should not be delegated. Any non-adjunct faculty member who has the thesis honors adviser's approval — on behalf of the department — is able to serve as a thesis supervisor.

Thesis supervision is time-intensive, especially at a time of the year (middle and end of spring semester) when faculty have many competing demands on their time. When deciding whether or not to accept the thesis supervisor role, please consider the entire timeline. You are entitled to require intermediate deadlines, and an earlier deadline for the final draft, to accommodate your schedule, but this should be agreed upon before any commitment about thesis supervision is finalized. There are four procedural deadlines set by the Honors College in the thesis process — thesis proposal, thesis check-in, thesis format review, and final submission — but these are not a substitute for deadlines set between thesis supervisor and student for progress along the way. In particular, you and the thesis honors adviser (see below) must receive the final draft well in advance of the submission deadline, so your required or suggested changes can be incorporated. You must be available to sign the thesis cover page prior to the submission deadline, or to otherwise convey your approval to the Schreyer Honors College pending your signature.

In an age of electronic communication, it is tempting to commit to thesis supervision even if you won't be on campus for much of the time, because of sabbatical or other planned absence. Our experience is that these scenarios, while usually successful, present a higher risk of difficulties and even non-completion. While we appreciate the willingness of faculty to consider thesis supervision while on sabbatical or leave, please consider your best interests and those of the student before making the commitment.

If you are on the tenure track, please consult with your department before making a commitment to supervise an honors thesis. Again, we appreciate your willingness to consider thesis supervision, but by making a fully informed decision you are looking out for the student's interest and your own.

Following Graduate School guidelines, faculty who are retired or emeritus at the time of the thesis proposal may not supervise honors theses. Faculty who will move to retired or emeritus status over the course of the thesis process (after submission of the proposal) may supervise theses, with the approval of the department via the thesis honors adviser (see below), but this is a serious commitment that you should not make unless you are absolutely willing to fulfill the role with the same level of commitment as currently-employed faculty. The Honors College reserves the right to review any proposal along these lines.

Schreyer Scholars as a group are among the most capable undergraduates at Penn State or anywhere else, and may even be superior to many graduate students in terms of raw ability, but they are still undergraduates. This, and our expectation that Schreyer Scholars graduate on-time rather than staying on solely for thesis work, should be taken into account in determining whether the initial thesis proposal is appropriate, and whether the final submission is acceptable.

While the SHC is in no position to set standards about thesis quality or the pace of thesis work in most cases, we have encouraged colleges and individual departments to develop thesis guides that convey local expectations to students and thesis supervisors. More generally, we convey to students that the honors thesis is public and forever: it's in the Penn State Libraries online catalog, and housed in a special full-text database . We likewise tell students that while it’s useful to look at past theses in their area on that database, any given thesis might have been barely adequate and therefore not a good aspirational goal; they should instead look at several theses, and as thesis supervisor you may want to refer students to theses you consider examples of high-quality work.

While the thesis is primarily between the student and the thesis supervisor, there is one other significant formal role. The thesis honors adviser must approve the initial thesis proposal and the final thesis submission. Unlike the thesis supervisor, the thesis honors adviser has a pre-existing Schreyer Honors College role as honors adviser, someone who works with Schreyer Scholars on a regular basis to guide their overall academic progress. Sometimes a student proposes thesis work for honors outside his or her primary major; in these cases the student should contact the Academic Affairs Office for guidance.

The role of the thesis honors adviser, at the beginning and end of the process, is to serve as a “second set of eyes” to guarantee the adequacy of the student’s work. More specifically, the thesis honors adviser is the gatekeeper for the “area of honors” that all theses must have; a thesis might be impressive, but it might not have enough history or biomedical engineering or finance, in terms of content, sources, and methods, to justify the required “Honors in -----“ on the transcript and diploma. In general, this is a pro forma matter since as thesis supervisor you are mindful of disciplinary expectations, but in some cases you might be supervising a thesis to be submitted for an area of honors that isn’t quite your own. Note that a student may have more than one area of honors for a thesis, in which case the thesis proposal and final submission must be approved by one thesis honors adviser in each area (a thesis may have only one thesis supervisor). Also, it sometimes happens that you are both thesis supervisor and thesis honors adviser, especially in smaller departments. In that case, you and the student should agree upon a tenure-line faculty member in your department to serve as “Reader,” in effect an ad hoc thesis honors adviser.

Typically the thesis honors adviser does not work with the student throughout the process as the thesis supervisor does, but he or she should have ample time to review the final draft and suggest (or, if appropriate, demand) changes before approving the thesis. The SHC has recently asked thesis honors advisers to take a somewhat greater role in keeping tabs on thesis progress, but not to the point of diluting the all-important relationship between the student and thesis supervisor.

We expect Schreyer Scholars entering their final year to write well enough to make themselves understood according to disciplinary standards, and except for areas of honors where style is integral to overall value of the work (the clearest example would be a creative writing submission for honors in English), we suggest that you place a premium on content and clarity. You should require a relatively early installment of written work, most commonly the literature review, to get an early indication of any issues with the student’s writing. If you see problems but you’re not eager to work with them in that capacity — which we don’t consider a core responsibility of thesis supervision — please keep in mind that there are resources at Penn State starting with the Writing Center , so please refer students there. Campuses outside University Park should all have local resources for writing improvement.

While most theses proceed relatively smoothly, every year the SHC’s Academic Affairs Office is made aware of several cases where they don’t, and we assume there are other cases that we’re not aware of. Sometimes the student simply lacks the commitment (or, less commonly, the ability) to complete the project adequately, while sometimes the thesis supervisor has unreasonable expectations derived from graduate thesis supervision (see above, “Thesis Expectations”). Sometimes it’s just a personality conflict, which is why we remind students to look at compatibility and not just expertise when choosing to a thesis supervisor. Likewise, you should feel empowered to say no to a student if you have doubts about them, although we suggest that you consult with their honors adviser so you’re not making a snap decision.

If the final draft requires, in your opinion, significant revisions especially with regard to core chapters (as opposed to introduction and conclusion), this suggests insufficient communication throughout the process. There are no ideal solutions at this point — it’s unrealistic for the student to make significant changes with limited time, but a thesis that doesn’t meet legitimate quality standards can’t be approved — so our goal is to make these situations as rare as possible. While it is permissible for students to defer graduation, most commonly from May to August, solely to complete the thesis, that is not an option for many students. We present these scenarios to you to convey the importance of avoiding them!

The financial viability of honors thesis research and creative activity across the University depends on most students either not having significant expenses, or having those expenses met within their department or lab: either through actual funding (money to the student) or through the department or lab assuming the expenses. The SHC has very limited resources to fund students in their thesis work, and our preference is to devote those resources to truly independent projects that aren’t integrated into ongoing (and funded) labs. Please consider, jointly with the student, what kind of resources the proposed thesis will require, whether materials, testing, travel, compensation to survey respondents, or anything else; also consider what the funding options are, whether from your resources or elsewhere.

The Schreyer Honors College does ask, in the thesis proposal, whether the proposed work requires IRB or IACUC review and whether approval has been granted. However, we are not in a position to make those determinations, or to follow up about them. As thesis supervisor you have principal responsibility for your student’s adherence to the letter and spirit of Penn State and outside requirements in this regard.

As noted above, theses are “published” online with the University Libraries. The SHC is willing to delay that process by up to two years if there is a patent or publication pending; we will not delay for proprietary or classified material, which should not be included in the thesis.

Thesis Honors Adviser

The thesis is the culmination of honors education at Penn State, and while the thesis supervisor is the principal faculty role in the thesis process, the thesis honors adviser is very important at two key moments — the thesis proposal and the final thesis submission.

Permanent Role

Situational role, overall role, grading the thesis, different advisers, honors in a graduate area.

The permanent (i.e. in all cases) role of the thesis honors adviser is to review the thesis proposal and final thesis submission for:

• Overall quality
• Specific fulfillment of the disciplinary expectations for a thesis in the major

The thesis honors adviser is the gatekeeper, on behalf of the major, for what “With Honors in [major]” means. We distinguish between these two judgments, overall and specific, because a thesis might be an impressive piece of work but not sufficiently reflective of the field for which it’s submitted for honors. That is one reason why scrutiny of the thesis proposal is especially important.

Note: For purposes of this discussion, “major” is shorthand for “area of honors” which may be a major, a uniquely-named minor, or a uniquely-named graduate program. These situations are discussed below.

When reviewing the thesis proposal, you are also reviewing the appropriateness of the proposed thesis supervisor. Only tenure-line faculty, or equivalently credentialed and experienced non-tenure-line faculty, may supervise honors theses. If you have doubts or concerns, please contact the Academic Affairs Office .

Additionally, the thesis honors adviser is responsible for monitoring thesis progress by periodically consulting with the Scholar and the thesis supervisor. If the major does not have a uniform calendar for thesis progress, as part of its thesis guide, the thesis honors adviser should set expectations for each thesis writer in consultation with the thesis supervisor. As you can see, it is far preferable to establish a uniform calendar via a thesis guide available to all students! Early in the final semester, the thesis honors adviser should specifically consult with the Scholar and thesis supervisor about the timeline for submission of the final draft, and the thesis supervisor should be specifically asked about any travel plans, grant deadlines, or other issues that might complicate the successful culmination of the thesis. Likewise, the thesis honors adviser should look at his or her own commitments later in the semester.

The thesis honors adviser should exercise special vigilance in those cases where the Scholar’s day-to-day thesis work takes place under delegated rather than direct supervision, for instance in a lab where the student interacts more with graduate students and postdocs. On the other end of the spectrum, in humanities fields where the student is working independently for long periods, the thesis honors adviser should follow up to ensure that the student is in contact with the thesis supervisor.

Our website has important information about the thesis: what we tell our students about it, and what they say about it. In particular, our thesis guides are our official guidance about the thesis process. While it is written for students, we invite you to review it since it discusses what students can legitimately expect from their thesis experience.

The situational role of the thesis honors adviser is to mediate any conflicts between the Scholar and the thesis supervisor. While the Schreyer Honors College, specifically the Associate Dean, is willing to participate in these discussions and should be made aware of any problems, the thesis honors adviser as a faculty colleague is best-positioned to handle conflicts without escalating the situation further.

For both of these roles, it is important that the thesis honors adviser possess a solid understanding of the expectations for an undergraduate honors thesis in the major. In some cases the thesis supervisor, because of a lack of experience working with undergraduates or because of excessive expectations about honors students, has graduate-level expectations for the thesis; while this is a legitimate aspirational goal in many areas, it is by definition an inappropriate standard for approving or rejecting a completed thesis. At the other end of the spectrum, the thesis supervisor might have unacceptably lax standards, or might wish to get out of a bad situation by approving a substandard final product. In both cases the thesis honors adviser’s role is to enforce appropriate standards, although we recognize that there is no way to require a thesis supervisor to sign something that he or she refuses to sign.

The best and only way to minimize all of these problems, whether substantive (about thesis progress or quality) or logistical (availability to review and approve), is for the thesis honors adviser to enforce clear expectations from the outset (thesis proposal), and throughout the process. This is much easier when there is a departmental or college thesis guide, so if your unit doesn’t yet have one, please consider writing one in consultation with your departmental colleagues and (if desired) the SHC.

Note: Many majors assign professional advisers as lower-division honors advisers, and many majors assign non-tenure-line faculty as upper-division honors advisers. Thesis honors advising is, by rule and by common sense, always a faculty role. Scholars must be reassigned from professional to faculty honors advisers no later than the start of third year. Non-tenure-line faculty may serve as upper-division honors advisers, and therefore as thesis honors advisers, only with the approval of the SHC Associate Dean for Academic Affairs. Because the thesis honors adviser must deal with the thesis supervisor from a position of equal authority and without fear of repercussions (beyond the inevitable awkwardness), only the most senior and research-accomplished non-tenure-line faculty will be approved for upper-division honors advising.

The thesis itself is not graded, but the SHC would like all theses to carry between 3 and 6 graded credits of honors independent research credits (typically 494H though there is still some variation across departments). In most departments the instructor of record for thesis credits is the thesis supervisor, but in some departments there is a single instructor of record for all thesis credits and that person consults with thesis supervisors to determine the grade. As with any other course, this is a departmental rather than SHC function.

There are times when a Scholar's thesis honors adviser is not the same as their regular honors adviser. This can happen when the student:

• Has concurrent majors and seeks honors in a major that's not where they receive honors advising
• Seeks honors in their minor
• Seeks honors in an area in which they're neither majoring nor minoring

What all three scenarios have in common is that the thesis honors adviser may have no prior association with the student, so it is the student’s responsibility to consult with the would-be thesis honors adviser before submitting the thesis proposal. This is both a professional courtesy and a practical necessity, because there are limits to the student’s right to pursue honors in any area:

First-Year Entering Scholars

First-year entering Scholars may pursue honors in any area they’re majoring in, as long as they follow the major’s prescribed preparation for thesis writers.

Scholars Enrolling After the First Year

Scholars who join the Honors College in their second or third year may only pursue honors in the major for which they were admitted to the Honors College, unless they secure the permission of the honors adviser (in multi-adviser majors, the designated lead honors adviser) in the would-be area. The Honors College knows from experience that some majors are willing to grant this change while others are not, but we always direct student inquiries to the appropriate honors adviser. If the change is granted, this must be communicated directly from the appropriate honors adviser to the College’s advising coordinator so the change can be made in our system before the student files the thesis proposal.

Regardless of how they entered the Honors College, Scholars proposing a thesis for honors in a major that’s not their own, or a minor (whether their own or not), should consult with the appropriate honors adviser before committing to the thesis project with a thesis supervisor. Local policies about non-majors pursuing honors vary by department, and while the Honors College claims no role in these policies, we believe that “unique minors” (those without a matching major, like Global Health) should offer honors to Scholars pursuing that minor. For minors that are reduced versions of majors (like Economics or Physics), it should depend on the individual student and on the “carrying capacity” of the department’s faculty and facilities.

The SHC recognizes “majors, minors, and graduate programs” as valid areas of honors for the thesis, and there are a handful of graduate programs that may come up, because they have no similarly-named major or minor. For students pursuing an Integrated Undergraduate-Graduate degree (IUG) and who submit a single thesis at the master’s level to satisfy both graduate degree and undergraduate honors requirements, the undergraduate area of honors can be either the undergraduate major or the graduate program, if differently named and more appropriate. (After all, the student is concurrently receiving the graduate degree.) For non-IUG students pursuing solely an undergraduate degree, the SHC encourages graduate program directors to permit honors and act as thesis honors advisers (or to designate one) only if there is no appropriate undergraduate area and the student has some degree of appropriate coursework (though not necessarily at the 500 level) in the field. Sometimes students seek out the graduate area because it is slightly more specific or impressive-sounding, but we remind them that the title of the thesis conveys that.

I want to be able to find something through research that can help the rest of the world. If you find this one thing, that could change the course of everything afterward. Ananda Rankin ' 20 Microbiology

• More from M-W
• To save this word, you'll need to log in. Log In

Definition of adviser

Did you know.

What's the difference between adviser and advisor ?

Adviser or advisor ? It doesn't matter what your computer's spellcheck tells you, adviser and advisor are both correct. Although there is enough overlap between these two words that they are generally considered simply to be different ways to spell the same word, there are some cases in which one tends to be used more often than the other. Some people feel that advisor is more formal, and it tends to be found more often when applied to official positions, such as an advisor to a president. When referring to someone who is serving in a military role, especially when using the term as a euphemism (as when claiming that troops are actually military advisers), then adviser is somewhat more common.

• consigliere
• counsellor

Examples of adviser in a Sentence

These examples are programmatically compiled from various online sources to illustrate current usage of the word 'adviser.' Any opinions expressed in the examples do not represent those of Merriam-Webster or its editors. Send us feedback about these examples.

Word History

advise + -er entry 2 , -or entry 1

circa 1536, in the meaning defined above

Articles Related to adviser

'Advisor' vs. 'Adviser': Who Will Win?

Going head-to-head in a centuries-old rivalry

Dictionary Entries Near adviser

advise one against

advisership

Cite this Entry

“Adviser.” Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary , Merriam-Webster, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/adviser. Accessed 1 Jun. 2024.

More from Merriam-Webster on adviser

Nglish: Translation of adviser for Spanish Speakers

Britannica English: Translation of adviser for Arabic Speakers

Subscribe to America's largest dictionary and get thousands more definitions and advanced search—ad free!

Can you solve 4 words at once?

Word of the day.

See Definitions and Examples »

Get Word of the Day daily email!

Popular in Grammar & Usage

More commonly misspelled words, commonly misspelled words, how to use em dashes (—), en dashes (–) , and hyphens (-), absent letters that are heard anyway, how to use accents and diacritical marks, popular in wordplay, the words of the week - may 31, pilfer: how to play and win, 9 superb owl words, 10 words for lesser-known games and sports, your favorite band is in the dictionary, games & quizzes.

• ABBREVIATIONS
• BIOGRAPHIES
• CALCULATORS
• CONVERSIONS
• DEFINITIONS

  Vocabulary      

What does thesis advisor mean?

Definitions for thesis advisor the·sis advi·sor, this dictionary definitions page includes all the possible meanings, example usage and translations of the word thesis advisor ., how to pronounce thesis advisor.

Alex US English David US English Mark US English Daniel British Libby British Mia British Karen Australian Hayley Australian Natasha Australian Veena Indian Priya Indian Neerja Indian Zira US English Oliver British Wendy British Fred US English Tessa South African

How to say thesis advisor in sign language?

Chaldean Numerology

The numerical value of thesis advisor in Chaldean Numerology is: 9

Pythagorean Numerology

The numerical value of thesis advisor in Pythagorean Numerology is: 6

Translations for thesis advisor

From our multilingual translation dictionary.

• asesor de tesis Spanish

Word of the Day

Would you like us to send you a free new word definition delivered to your inbox daily.

Please enter your email address:

Citation

Use the citation below to add this definition to your bibliography:.

Style: MLA Chicago APA

"thesis advisor." Definitions.net. STANDS4 LLC, 2024. Web. 1 Jun 2024. < https://www.definitions.net/definition/thesis+advisor >.

Discuss these thesis advisor definitions with the community:

Report Comment

We're doing our best to make sure our content is useful, accurate and safe. If by any chance you spot an inappropriate comment while navigating through our website please use this form to let us know, and we'll take care of it shortly.

You need to be logged in to favorite .

Create a new account.

Your name: * Required

Your email address: * Required

Pick a user name: * Required

Username: * Required

Password: * Required

Forgot your password?    Retrieve it

Are we missing a good definition for thesis advisor ? Don't keep it to yourself...

Image credit, the web's largest resource for, definitions & translations, a member of the stands4 network, free, no signup required :, add to chrome, add to firefox, browse definitions.net, are you a words master, marked by sudden changes in subject and sharp transitions, Nearby & related entries:.

• theseus noun
• thesis noun
• thesis advisor
• thesis statement
• thesixtyone
• Thesmophoria
• thesmophoriazusae
• thesmorphonis

Alternative searches for thesis advisor :

• Search for thesis advisor on Amazon