This week, my field has a conference deadline & I'm deluged with papers from current & former students.
For many #phdstudents, a #conferencepaper is their first intellectual artifact. Writing one is an essential milestone in their #career.
Because it is essential, students often offer their advisors the opportunity to provide feedback or participate in the paper.
Sometimes, #students are disappointed by the quality of the feedback or participation.
Once in a while, the request for engagement in a paper is greeted with silence.
Most often, the #advisor will glance over the paper, direct the student to make changes, & tell them to feel free to submit.
In rare cases, the advisor will decline the opportunity & suggest that submitting the paper isn’t a good idea.
So why the variance in responses?
Reasons include your advisor isn’t interested (some ideas will not be good), your advisor forgot (a true stereotype), your advisor isn't very good (start looking for a new one), your advisor doesn’t like you (yes, this happens), your advisor doesn’t understand the ideas (this also happens) or your advisor thinks the paper needs too much work (so they won’t invest).
I could go on! Feel free to comment & add extra reasons - if you have an interesting one!
So how do you navigate unknown or uncomfortable reasons for your advisor not engaging with your #conference paper?
First, discuss the conference.
Make sure your advisor cares about it. Make sure there is a place for your paper. Make sure your advisor thinks it’s ok for you to submit.
If on-boarded, you are more likely to get swift feedback.
Second, schedule time.
Let your advisor know the paper is coming & ask them to make time.
Your advisor should not be surprised when a paper shows up in their inbox.
Third, set realistic expectations on your side.
Your advisor is not your copyeditor or citation manager. Expect bullet points or comments in the margins.
You will feel better if you understand that the feedback will be high level.
Fourth, understand expectations on their side.
Most advisors are happy to chat as you work on the paper. They like helping students unpack ideas.
Having helped shape ideas, they want to see a more developed, well-written paper when asked to review it for submission.
Meet that expectation.
Fifth, never title a document draft one.
Documents titled draft one signal disrespect. Your first version for your advisor should be well-developed.
Small things matter. So call it draft N+1.
Sixth, plan.
Finish the draft early.
Advisors like a few days to procrastinate before looking at papers.
Seventh, get a green light.
Make sure your advisor knows. If they don’t respond, don’t submit. There is always another conference.
If you build a relationship, expectations, & manage time well, you will have a better experience with your advisor.
Best of luck!
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/jason-thatcher-0329764_phdstudents-conferencepaper-career-activity-6926503051121864704-CVgQ?utm_source=linkedin_share&utm_medium=member_desktop_web
Comments