thesis supervisor vs advisor

• Remember me Not recommended on shared computers

Forgot your password?

• Applications

Is a PhD ADVISOR same as a PhD SUPERVISOR?

By aditi123 February 20, 2010 in Applications

Recommended Posts

I am a bit confused about the usage of the terms PhD Supervisor , PhD Guide & PhD Advisor .Are these terms used synonymously or do they have different meanings and functions?

Please help.

Link to comment

Share on other sites.

I am a bit confused about the usage of the terms PhD Supervisor , PhD Guide & PhD Advisor .Are these terms used synonymously or do they have different meanings and functions? Please help.

I've heard the term "guide" being used in India and "adviser" in the US. Supervisor probably in the UK? In any case, I'm pretty sure they mean the same thing.

Thank you for the information.

Never heard of the term "guide" being used.

"Supervisor" usually means who responsible for your paycheck. "Advisor" is the one who is monitoring your degree progress,and usually part of your PhD dissertation committee. Usually for those who are pursuing PhD full-time and doing RA work these two terms are the same thing. It is only different for those who are being paid doing something else (i.e. janitorial work) and only pursue PhD part-time.

• hellopsy and repatriate

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Already have an account? Sign in here.

• Existing user? Sign In
• Online Users
• All Activity
• My Activity Streams
• Unread Content
• Content I Started
• Results Search
• Post Results
• Leaderboard
• Create New...

Important Information

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. See our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use

Study at Cambridge

About the university, research at cambridge.

• Undergraduate courses
• Events and open days
• Fees and finance
• Postgraduate courses
• How to apply
• Postgraduate events
• Fees and funding
• International students
• Continuing education
• Executive and professional education
• Courses in education
• How the University and Colleges work
• Term dates and calendars
• Visiting the University
• Annual reports
• Equality and diversity
• A global university
• Public engagement
• Give to Cambridge
• For Cambridge students
• For our researchers
• Business and enterprise
• Colleges & departments
• Email & phone search
• Museums & collections
• Student information
• PhD students' guide

Department of History and Philosophy of Science

• About the Department overview
• How to find the Department
• Annual Report
• HPS Discussion email list
• Becoming a Visiting Scholar or Visiting Student overview
• Visitor fee payment
• Becoming an Affiliate
• Applying for research grants and post-doctoral fellowships
• Administration overview
• Information for new staff
• Information for examiners and assessors overview
• Operation of the HPS plagiarism policy
• Information for supervisors overview
• Supervising Part IB and Part II students
• Supervising MPhil and Part III students
• Supervising PhD students
• People overview
• Teaching Officers
• Research Fellows and Teaching Associates
• Professional Services Staff
• PhD Students
• Research overview
• Research projects overview
• Digitising Philippine Flora
• Colonial Natures overview
• The Challenge of Conservation
• Natural History in the Age of Revolutions, 1776–1848
• In the Shadow of the Tree: The Diagrammatics of Relatedness as Scientific, Scholarly and Popular Practice
• The Many Births of the Test-Tube Baby
• Culture at the Macro-Scale: Boundaries, Barriers and Endogenous Change
• Making Climate History overview
• Project summary
• Workstreams
• Works cited and project literature
• Histories of Artificial Intelligence: A Genealogy of Power overview
• From Collection to Cultivation: Historical Perspectives on Crop Diversity and Food Security overview
• Call for papers
• How Collections End: Objects, Meaning and Loss in Laboratories and Museums
• Tools in Materials Research
• Epsilon: A Collaborative Digital Framework for Nineteenth-Century Letters of Science
• Contingency in the History and Philosophy of Science
• Industrial Patronage and the Cold War University
• FlyBase: Communicating Drosophila Genetics on Paper and Online, 1970–2000
• The Lost Museums of Cambridge Science, 1865–1936
• From Hansa to Lufthansa: Transportation Technologies and the Mobility of Knowledge in Germanic Lands and Beyond, 1300–2018
• Medical Publishers, Obscenity Law and the Business of Sexual Knowledge in Victorian Britain
• Kinds of Intelligence
• Varieties of Social Knowledge
• The Vesalius Census
• Histories of Biodiversity and Agriculture
• Investigating Fake Scientific Instruments in the Whipple Museum Collection
• Before HIV: Homosex and Venereal Disease, c.1939–1984
• The Casebooks Project
• Generation to Reproduction
• The Darwin Correspondence Project
• History of Medicine overview
• Events overview
• Past events
• Philosophy of Science overview
• Study HPS overview
• Undergraduate study overview
• Introducing History and Philosophy of Science
• Frequently asked questions
• Routes into History and Philosophy of Science
• Part II overview
• Distribution of Part II marks
• BBS options
• Postgraduate study overview
• Why study HPS at Cambridge?
• MPhil in History and Philosophy of Science and Medicine overview
• A typical day for an MPhil student
• MPhil in Health, Medicine and Society
• PhD in History and Philosophy of Science overview
• Part-time PhD

PhD placement record

• Funding for postgraduate students
• Student information overview
• Timetable overview
• Primary source seminars
• Research methods seminars
• Writing support seminars
• Dissertation seminars
• BBS Part II overview
• Early Medicine
• Modern Medicine and Biomedical Sciences
• Philosophy of Science and Medicine
• Ethics of Medicine
• Philosophy and Ethics of Medicine
• Part III and MPhil
• Single-paper options
• Part IB students' guide overview
• About the course
• Supervisions
• Libraries and readings
• Scheme of examination
• Part II students' guide overview
• Primary sources
• Dissertation
• Key dates and deadlines
• Advice overview
• Examination advice
• Learning strategies and exam skills
• Advice from students
• Part III students' guide overview
• Essays and dissertation
• Subject areas
• MPhil students' guide overview
• Essays and dissertation overview
• How to choose the topic of your essays and dissertation
• PhD students' guide overview
• Welcome to new PhDs
• Registration exercise and annual reviews
• Your supervisor and advisor
• Progress log
• Intermission and working away from Cambridge
• The PhD thesis
• Submitting your thesis
• Examination
• News and events overview
• Seminars and reading groups overview
• Departmental Seminars
• Coffee with Scientists
• Cabinet of Natural History overview
• Publications

History of Medicine

• Purpose and Progress in Science
• The Anthropocene
• Measurement Reading Group
• Teaching Global HPSTM
• Pragmatism Reading Group
• History of Science and Medicine in Southeast Asia
• Atmospheric Humanities Reading Group
• Science Fiction & HPS Reading Group
• Values in Science Reading Group
• Cambridge Reading Group on Reproduction
• HPS Workshop
• Postgraduate Seminars overview
• Images of Science
• Language Groups overview
• Latin Therapy overview
• Bibliography of Latin language resources
• Fun with Latin
• Archive overview
• Easter Term 2024
• Lent Term 2024
• Michaelmas Term 2023
• Easter Term 2023
• Lent Term 2023
• Michaelmas Term 2022
• Easter Term 2022
• Lent Term 2022
• Michaelmas Term 2021
• Easter Term 2021
• Lent Term 2021
• Michaelmas Term 2020
• Easter Term 2020
• Lent Term 2020
• Michaelmas Term 2019
• Easter Term 2019
• Lent Term 2019
• Michaelmas Term 2018
• Easter Term 2018
• Lent Term 2018
• Michaelmas Term 2017
• Easter Term 2017
• Lent Term 2017
• Michaelmas Term 2016
• Easter Term 2016
• Lent Term 2016
• Michaelmas Term 2015
• Postgraduate and postdoc training overview
• Induction sessions
• Academic skills and career development
• Print & Material Sources
• Other events and resources
• Part IB students' guide
• Part II students' guide
• Part III students' guide
• MPhil students' guide

As a new PhD student, you will be assigned a supervisor, who is responsible for guiding your studies. You are, however, expected to have the capacity and enthusiasm to organise your own research and to work on your own initiative. You are expected to submit written work at regular intervals for discussion with your supervisor.

We very much hope you will not have any problems with supervision, but if a problem does arise – because, for example, your supervisor is on leave for an extended period or your research takes a new direction, or for personal reasons – you should contact, in the first instance, any of the following: the Director of Graduate Studies, your advisor, the Head of Department or your College tutor. With any of these, you may wish to discuss whether you want to continue along the more formal lines of complaint proposed by the Student Registry.

By the middle of the first term of your PhD the Degree Committee will appoint an advisor for you. You should be actively engaged in selecting your advisor. You are encouraged to submit written work to your advisor at any time, but the submission should not be so extensive that it would prevent the advisor acting as an internal examiner of your thesis. You should meet your advisor at least once a year.

Email search

Privacy and cookie policies

Study History and Philosophy of Science

Undergraduate study

Postgraduate study

Library and Museum

Whipple Library

Whipple Museum

Museum Collections Portal

Research projects

Philosophy of Science

© 2024 University of Cambridge

• Contact the University
• Accessibility
• Freedom of information
• Privacy policy and cookies
• Statement on Modern Slavery
• Terms and conditions
• University A-Z
• Undergraduate
• Postgraduate
• Research news
• About research at Cambridge
• Spotlight on...

• Thesis Action Plan New
• Academic Project Planner

Literature Navigator

Thesis dialogue blueprint, writing wizard's template, research proposal compass.

• Why students love us
• Rebels Blog
• Why we are different
• All Products
• Coming Soon

The Graduate Student's Roadmap: Choosing the Ideal Thesis Supervisor

Embarking on a graduate thesis can be a daunting task, filled with uncertainties and the potential for anxiety. The key to a successful thesis experience often lies in choosing the right thesis supervisor. A supervisor plays a pivotal role in guiding students through the complex process, offering expertise, support, and valuable feedback. This article provides a roadmap for graduate students to navigate the search for an ideal thesis supervisor, ensuring a good match and fostering a productive relationship that can make the thesis journey less intimidating and more rewarding.

Key Takeaways

• Evaluate potential supervisors based on their qualifications, expertise, and compatibility with your research interests to ensure a fruitful mentorship.
• Understand the supervisory styles and expectations to align your working habits and goals, and seek student feedback to gauge the supervisor's effectiveness.
• Approach your chosen supervisor with a clear and professional proposal, set mutual expectations from the start, and employ strategies for effective communication and conflict resolution.

Navigating the Search for a Thesis Supervisor

Assessing potential supervisors: qualifications and expertise.

When embarking on your thesis journey, the first step is to identify potential supervisors who have the qualifications and expertise relevant to your research interests. Begin by reviewing their academic credentials , publications, and research projects to gauge their standing in the field. It's essential to ensure that their expertise aligns with your thesis topic, as this will be crucial for providing you with the guidance and insight you need.

Consider creating a list of potential supervisors and evaluate each based on their academic achievements and contributions to the field. Here's an example of how you might structure your list:

• Dr. Jane Smith: Expert in renewable energy systems, 15+ years of research experience, multiple awards for innovation.
• Prof. John Doe: Renowned for work in cognitive neuroscience, author of a seminal textbook, leads a well-funded research lab.
• Dr. Emily White: Specializes in social psychology, known for groundbreaking studies on behavior, collaborator on international projects.

Remember, a supervisor's reputation and network within the academic community can also play a significant role in opening doors for your future career. Therefore, it's worth considering the broader impact of their work and how it may benefit your own academic and professional development.

Compatibility and Communication: Ensuring a Good Match

When embarking on your graduate journey, the importance of choosing a supervisor whose interests align with yours cannot be overstated. Compatibility with your thesis supervisor is crucial for a fruitful academic relationship. It's essential to consider not only their expertise but also their willingness to communicate effectively and support your research aspirations.

To ensure a good match, consider the following points:

• Assess the supervisor's communication style and availability.
• Determine their approach to supervision; some may be more hands-on, especially at the early stages of your PhD.
• Explore how they facilitate planning and time management for thesis work.
• Seek feedback from current or former students to gauge satisfaction levels.

Remember, a supervisor who offers a structured plan, like the [ Thesis Dialogue Blueprint ](#), can help you prepare for meetings with confidence. Tools for thesis writing, such as worksheets and templates, can also be indicative of a supervisor's commitment to student and professor satisfaction . Ultimately, the goal is to establish a relationship that fosters academic growth and meets mutual expectations.

Evaluating Supervisory Styles and Student Feedback

When you're on the brink of selecting a thesis supervisor, it's crucial to consider not just their academic credentials, but also their supervisory style and the experiences of their past students. A model for the supervisor-doctoral student relationship can be instrumental in understanding the dynamics you might expect. This model, as highlighted in the literature, provides insights into the interpersonal style of potential supervisors and how it may mesh with your expectations for guidance and feedback.

To gain a comprehensive view, seek out qualitative frameworks that analyze feedback within PhD supervision. Such frameworks synthesize rich qualitative data and can inform you about the feedback practices that characterize a supervisor's approach. Remember, the quality of feedback is pivotal to your growth as a researcher.

Lastly, consider the tools and resources that a supervisor might recommend or provide. Websites and platforms that offer tools for thesis writing underscore the importance of a master thesis in graduate programs. They emphasize independent research and the supervisor's role in facilitating this. By evaluating these aspects, you can make an informed decision that aligns with your academic goals and personal working style.

Understanding the Supervisor's Expectations and Commitment

When you embark on your graduate journey, understanding your supervisor's expectations and commitment level is crucial. Clear communication about these expectations will lay the foundation for a successful supervisory relationship. Discuss the specific requirements of your graduate program and align them with your thesis objectives. This discussion should include program-specific expectations and respective timelines, ensuring that both you and your supervisor are on the same page from the outset.

Consider creating a Thesis Dialogue Blueprint, which can serve as a structured plan for your interactions. This blueprint should detail the frequency of meetings, feedback mechanisms, and milestones. Here's an example of what such a blueprint might include:

• Frequency of meetings: Weekly/Bi-weekly/Monthly
• Feedback turnaround time: 5 working days
• Milestone 1: Literature review completion
• Milestone 2: Data collection
• Milestone 3: First draft submission

Remember, a confident supervisor will engage in open discussions about candidature time and progress to completion. It's also important to recognize that supervisor-student fit is crucial to your satisfaction with the learning experience and can influence retention or attrition. By managing feedback effectively and planning meetings strategically, you can navigate challenges and ensure a successful PhD journey.

Finalizing Your Choice and Fostering a Productive Relationship

Making the initial approach: tips and best practices.

Once you've identified a potential thesis supervisor, the initial approach is a critical step. Begin by conducting thorough research on their academic background and current research interests. Visit their webpage, review their publications , and understand their research trajectory. This will not only prepare you for a meaningful conversation but also show your genuine interest in their work.

When crafting your initial contact email , be concise and articulate your research interests clearly. Highlight how your interests align with theirs and mention any relevant experience or skills you possess. Here's a simple structure to follow:

• Introduction: Briefly introduce yourself and your academic background.
• Research Interests: Clearly state your research interests and how they align with the supervisor's work.
• Experience: Mention any relevant experience or skills that make you a suitable candidate.
• Inquiry: Politely inquire about the possibility of them supervising your thesis.
• Closing: Thank them for their time and express your willingness to discuss further.

Remember, first impressions matter. Your initial approach should reflect your professionalism and commitment to your research. Be prepared to discuss your ideas in more depth if the supervisor shows interest. And most importantly, be respectful of their time; academics often have busy schedules, so a well-thought-out and respectful inquiry is more likely to receive a positive response.

Setting Clear Goals and Expectations from the Start

As you embark on your thesis journey, it is crucial to establish a clear roadmap from the outset. Set clear goals and expectations with your supervisor to ensure that both parties have a mutual understanding of the thesis objectives, timelines, and milestones. This clarity will serve as a foundation for a structured and focused research process.

Begin by discussing the scope of your research with your supervisor. Define the boundaries of your study and identify the key questions you aim to answer. It's important to be realistic about what can be achieved within the time and resources available. Use the following list to guide your initial goal-setting conversation:

• Outline the main objectives of your thesis
• Agree on a timeline with deadlines for each stage of the research
• Determine the frequency and format of supervisory meetings
• Establish criteria for evaluating progress
• Discuss any potential obstacles and strategies for overcoming them

By taking these steps, you will build a solid framework for your research and maintain a balance between your academic pursuits and personal well-being. Remember, setting boundaries and practicing self-discipline are essential for a successful thesis experience.

Strategies for Ongoing Communication and Feedback

Establishing a rhythm of regular and structured communication with your thesis supervisor is crucial for the success of your research journey. Schedule regular meetings to discuss your progress, challenges, and any concerns you may have. These meetings should be seen as an opportunity to receive constructive feedback and to ensure that your research is on track.

Effective communication goes beyond scheduled meetings. It's important to be proactive in seeking feedback and to be open to implementing it. Here's a list of strategies to enhance communication:

• Utilize various communication channels, such as email, video calls, or in-person meetings, to maintain a consistent dialogue.
• Prepare for each meeting with a clear agenda and specific questions to maximize the value of the time spent.
• Be receptive to feedback and critically assess the results you obtain, ensuring alignment with the study objectives.
• Document the feedback received and the outcomes of discussions to track your progress and any agreed-upon changes.

Remember, a productive supervisory relationship is a two-way street. Your supervisor's insights are invaluable, but your own reflections and self-assessment are equally important. Embrace the process of self-reflection, and be prepared to communicate complex information effectively.

Dealing with Challenges and Navigating Conflicts

When you encounter challenges or conflicts with your thesis supervisor, it's essential to address them proactively. Your first step is to talk it out , as direct communication can often resolve misunderstandings and align expectations. If the issue persists, consider the following steps:

• Reflect on the nature of the conflict and your own role in it.
• Prepare for the discussion by outlining your concerns and desired outcomes.
• Schedule a meeting with your supervisor to discuss the issues calmly and professionally.

Remember, the goal is to foster a collaborative environment where both parties feel heard and respected. If conflicts continue to impede your research, it may be necessary to seek advice from a departmental advisor or mediator. They can offer neutral perspectives and suggest strategies for resolution. Ultimately, maintaining a professional demeanor and focusing on your Thesis Action Plan will guide you through these challenges.

Making the right choice for your thesis can be a game-changer in your academic journey. At Research Rebels, we understand the importance of not only choosing wisely but also maintaining a productive relationship with your thesis. That's why we've developed a comprehensive Thesis Action Plan to guide you through every step of the process. Don't let anxiety and sleepless nights dictate your student life. Take control and visit our website to learn more about how we can help you transform your thesis experience. Embrace the clarity and confidence our guides and worksheets provide, and start your journey to academic success today!

In conclusion, the journey to selecting the ideal thesis supervisor is a critical step in a graduate student's academic path. It requires careful consideration of the supervisor's expertise, communication style, and mentorship approach, as well as alignment with the student's research interests and career aspirations. By engaging in structured discussions, utilizing resources like the Thesis Action Plan, and seeking guidance from platforms like Research Rebels, students can navigate this process with greater confidence and clarity. Ultimately, a well-chosen thesis supervisor not only enriches the research experience but also fosters professional growth and paves the way for future academic and career successes.

Frequently Asked Questions

How do i assess a potential thesis supervisor's qualifications and expertise.

Review their academic profile, including publications, research interests, and previous supervisory experience. Attend their lectures or seminars to gauge their expertise and reach out to current or former students for feedback.

What should I consider when evaluating a supervisor's communication style?

Consider whether their communication style is clear and responsive. Assess their availability for meetings and willingness to provide timely feedback. It's important that you feel comfortable discussing your ideas and concerns with them.

How can I approach a potential thesis supervisor and make a good impression?

Prepare a concise summary of your research interests and how they align with the supervisor's work. Be professional in your communication and show your enthusiasm for the subject. It's also beneficial to demonstrate your understanding of their research.

Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics: A Fun and Informative Guide

Unlocking the Power of Data: A Review of 'Essentials of Modern Business Statistics with Microsoft Excel'

Discovering Statistics Using SAS: A Comprehensive Review

Trending Topics for Your Thesis: What's Hot in 2024

How to Deal with a Total Lack of Motivation, Stress, and Anxiety When Finishing Your Master's Thesis

Mastering the First Step: How to Start Your Thesis with Confidence

Thesis Action Plan

• Blog Articles
• Affiliate Program
• Terms and Conditions
• Payment and Shipping Terms
• Privacy Policy
• Return Policy

© 2024 Research Rebels, All rights reserved.

Your cart is currently empty.

Loading metrics

Open Access

Ten simple rules for choosing a PhD supervisor

Contributed equally to this work with: Loay Jabre, Catherine Bannon, J. Scott P. McCain, Yana Eglit

* E-mail: [email protected]

Affiliation Department of Biology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

• Loay Jabre, 
• Catherine Bannon, 
• J. Scott P. McCain, 

Published: September 30, 2021

• https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009330
• Reader Comments

Citation: Jabre L, Bannon C, McCain JSP, Eglit Y (2021) Ten simple rules for choosing a PhD supervisor. PLoS Comput Biol 17(9): e1009330. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009330

Editor: Scott Markel, Dassault Systemes BIOVIA, UNITED STATES

Copyright: © 2021 Jabre et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Funding: The authors received no specific funding for this work.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

The PhD beckons. You thought long and hard about why you want to do it, you understand the sacrifices and commitments it entails, and you have decided that it is the right thing for you. Congratulations! Undertaking a doctoral degree can be an extremely rewarding experience, greatly enhancing your personal, intellectual, and professional development. If you are still on the fence about whether or not you want to pursue a PhD, see [ 1 , 2 ] and others to help you decide.

As a PhD student in the making, you will have many important decisions to consider. Several of them will depend on your chosen discipline and research topic, the institution you want to attend, and even the country where you will undertake your degree. However, one of the earliest and most critical decisions you will need to make transcends most other decisions: choosing your PhD thesis supervisor. Your PhD supervisor will strongly influence the success and quality of your degree as well as your general well-being throughout the program. It is therefore vital to choose the right supervisor for you. A wrong choice or poor fit can be disastrous on both a personal and professional levels—something you obviously want to avoid. Unfortunately, however, most PhD students go through the process of choosing a supervisor only once and thus do not get the opportunity to learn from previous experiences. Additionally, many prospective PhD students do not have access to resources and proper guidance to rely on when making important academic decisions such as those involved in choosing a PhD supervisor.

In this short guide, we—a group of PhD students with varied backgrounds, research disciplines, and academic journeys—share our collective experiences with choosing our own PhD supervisors. We provide tips and advice to help prospective students in various disciplines, including computational biology, in their quest to find a suitable PhD supervisor. Despite procedural differences across countries, institutions, and programs, the following rules and discussions should remain helpful for guiding one’s approach to selecting their future PhD supervisor. These guidelines mostly address how to evaluate a potential PhD supervisor and do not include details on how you might find a supervisor. In brief, you can find a supervisor anywhere: seminars, a class you were taught, internet search of interesting research topics, departmental pages, etc. After reading about a group’s research and convincing yourself it seems interesting, get in touch! Make sure to craft an e-mail carefully, demonstrating you have thought about their research and what you might do in their group. After finding one or several supervisors of interest, we hope that the rules bellow will help you choose the right supervisor for you.

Rule 1: Align research interests

You need to make sure that a prospective supervisor studies, or at the very least, has an interest in what you want to study. A good starting point would be to browse their personal and research group websites (though those are often outdated), their publication profile, and their students’ theses, if possible. Keep in mind that the publication process can be slow, so recent publications may not necessarily reflect current research in that group. Pay special attention to publications where the supervisor is senior author—in life sciences, their name would typically be last. This would help you construct a mental map of where the group interests are going, in addition to where they have been.

Be proactive about pursuing your research interests, but also flexible: Your dream research topic might not currently be conducted in a particular group, but perhaps the supervisor is open to exploring new ideas and research avenues with you. Check that the group or institution of interest has the facilities and resources appropriate for your research, and/or be prepared to establish collaborations to access those resources elsewhere. Make sure you like not only the research topic, but also the “grunt work” it requires, as a topic you find interesting may not be suitable for you in terms of day-to-day work. You can look at the “Methods” sections of published papers to get a sense for what this is like—for example, if you do not like resolving cryptic error messages, programming is probably not for you, and you might want to consider a wet lab–based project. Lastly, any research can be made interesting, and interests change. Perhaps your favorite topic today is difficult to work with now, and you might cut your teeth on a different project.

Rule 2: Seek trusted sources

Discussing your plans with experienced and trustworthy people is a great way to learn more about the reputation of potential supervisors, their research group dynamics, and exciting projects in your field of interest. Your current supervisor, if you have one, could be aware of position openings that are compatible with your interests and time frame and is likely to know talented supervisors with good reputations in their fields. Professors you admire, reliable student advisors, and colleagues might also know your prospective supervisor on various professional or personal levels and could have additional insight about working with them. Listen carefully to what these trusted sources have to say, as they can provide a wealth of insider information (e.g., personality, reputation, interpersonal relationships, and supervisory styles) that might not be readily accessible to you.

Rule 3: Expectations, expectations, expectations

A considerable portion of PhD students feel that their program does not meet original expectations [ 3 ]. To avoid being part of this group, we stress the importance of aligning your expectations with the supervisor’s expectations before joining a research group or PhD program. Also, remember that one person’s dream supervisor can be another’s worst nightmare and vice versa—it is about a good fit for you. Identifying what a “good fit” looks like requires a serious self-appraisal of your goals (see Rule 1 ), working style (see Rule 5 ), and what you expect in a mentor (see Rule 4 ). One way to conduct this self-appraisal is to work in a research lab to get experiences similar to a PhD student (if this is possible).

Money!—Many people have been conditioned to avoid the subject of finances at all costs, but setting financial expectations early is crucial for maintaining your well-being inside and outside the lab. Inside the lab, funding will provide chemicals and equipment required for you to do cool research. It is also important to know if there will be sufficient funding for your potential projects to be completed. Outside the lab, you deserve to get paid a reasonable, livable stipend. What is the minimum required take-home stipend, or does that even exist at the institution you are interested in? Are there hard cutoffs for funding once your time runs out, or does the institution have support for students who take longer than anticipated? If the supervisor supplies the funding, do they end up cutting off students when funds run low, or do they have contingency plans? ( Fig 1 ).

• PPT PowerPoint slide
• PNG larger image
• TIFF original image

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009330.g001

Professional development opportunities—A key aspect of graduate school training is professional development. In some research groups, it is normal for PhD students to mentor undergraduate students or take a semester to work in industry to get more diverse experiences. Other research groups have clear links with government entities, which is helpful for going into policy or government-based research. These opportunities (and others) are critical for your career and next steps. What are the career development opportunities and expectations of a potential supervisor? Is a potential supervisor happy to send students to workshops to learn new skills? Are they supportive of public outreach activities? If you are looking at joining a newer group, these sorts of questions will have to be part of the larger set of conversations about expectations. Ask: “What sort of professional development opportunities are there at the institution?”

Publications—Some PhD programs have minimum requirements for finishing a thesis (i.e., you must publish a certain number of papers prior to defending), while other programs leave it up to the student and supervisor to decide on this. A simple and important topic to discuss is: How many publications are expected from your PhD and when will you publish them? If you are keen to publish in high-impact journals, does your prospective supervisor share that aim? (Although question why you are so keen to do so, see the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment ( www.sfdora.org ) to learn about the pitfalls of journal impact factor.)

Rule 4: It takes two to tango

Sooner or later, you will get to meet and interview with a prospective PhD supervisor. This should go both ways: Interview them just as much as they are interviewing you. Prepare questions and pay close attention to how they respond. For example, ask them about their “lab culture,” research interests (especially for the future/long term), and what they are looking for in a graduate student. Do you feel like you need to “put on an act” to go along with the supervisor (beyond just the standard interview mode)? Represent yourself, and not the person you think they are looking for. All of us will have some interviews go badly. Remember that discovering a poor fit during the interview has way fewer consequences than the incompatibility that could arise once you have committed to a position.

To come up with good questions for the prospective supervisor, first ask yourself questions. What are you looking for in a mentor? People differ in their optimal levels of supervision, and there is nothing wrong with wanting more or less than your peers. How much career guidance do you expect and does the potential supervisor respect your interests, particularly if your long-term goals do not include academia? What kind of student might not thrive in this research group?

Treat the PhD position like a partnership: What do you seek to get out of it? Keep in mind that a large portion of research is conducted by PhD students [ 4 ], so you are also an asset. Your supervisor will provide guidance, but the PhD is your work. Make sure you and your mentor are on the same page before committing to what is fundamentally a professional contract akin to an apprenticeship (see “ Rule 3 ”).

Rule 5: Workstyle compatibility

Sharing interests with a supervisor does not necessarily guarantee you would work well together, and just because you enjoyed a course by a certain professor does not mean they are the right PhD supervisor for you. Make sure your expectations for work and work–life approaches are compatible. Do you thrive on structure, or do you need freedom to proceed at your own pace? Do they expect you to be in the lab from 6:00 AM to midnight on a regular basis (red flag!)? Are they comfortable with you working from home when you can? Are they around the lab enough for it to work for you? Are they supportive of alternative work hours if you have other obligations (e.g., childcare, other employment, extracurriculars)? How is the group itself organized? Is there a lab manager or are the logistics shared (fairly?) between the group members? Discuss this before you commit!

Two key attributes of a research group are the supervisor’s career stage and number of people in the group. A supervisor in a later career stage may have more established research connections and protocols. An earlier career stage supervisor comes with more opportunities to shape the research direction of the lab, but less access to academic political power and less certainty in what their supervision style will be (even to themselves). Joining new research groups provides a great opportunity to learn how to build a lab if you are considering that career path but may take away time and energy from your thesis project. Similarly, be aware of pros and cons of different lab sizes. While big labs provide more opportunity for collaborations and learning from fellow lab members, their supervisors generally have less time available for each trainee. Smaller labs tend to have better access to the supervisor but may be more isolating [ 5 , 6 ]. Also note that large research groups tend to be better for developing extant research topics further, while small groups can conduct more disruptive research [ 7 ].

Rule 6: Be sure to meet current students

Meeting with current students is one of the most important steps prior to joining a lab. Current students will give you the most direct and complete sense of what working with a certain supervisor is actually like. They can also give you a valuable sense of departmental culture and nonacademic life. You could also ask to meet with other students in the department to get a broader sense of the latter. However, if current students are not happy with their current supervisor, they are unlikely to tell you directly. Try to ask specific questions: “How often do you meet with your supervisor?”, “What are the typical turnaround times for a paper draft?”, “How would you describe the lab culture?”, “How does your supervisor react to mistakes or unexpected results?”, “How does your supervisor react to interruptions to research from, e.g., personal life?”, and yes, even “What would you say is the biggest weakness of your supervisor?”

Rule 7: But also try to meet past students

While not always possible, meeting with past students can be very informative. Past students give you information on career outcomes (i.e., what are they doing now?) and can provide insight into what the lab was like when they were in it. Previous students will provide a unique perspective because they have gone through the entire process, from start to finish—and, in some cases, no longer feel obligated to speak well of their now former supervisor. It can also be helpful to look at previous students’ experiences by reading the acknowledgement section in their theses.

Rule 8: Consider the entire experience

Your PhD supervisor is only one—albeit large—piece of your PhD puzzle. It is therefore essential to consider your PhD experience as whole when deciding on a supervisor. One important aspect to contemplate is your mental health. Graduate students have disproportionately higher rates of depression and anxiety compared to the general population [ 8 ], so your mental health will be tested greatly throughout your PhD experience. We suggest taking the time to reflect on what factors would enable you to do your best work while maintaining a healthy work–life balance. Does your happiness depend on surfing regularly? Check out coastal areas. Do you despise being cold? Consider being closer to the equator. Do you have a deep-rooted phobia of koalas? Maybe avoid Australia. Consider these potentially even more important questions like: Do you want to be close to your friends and family? Will there be adequate childcare support? Are you comfortable with studying abroad? How does the potential university treat international or underrepresented students? When thinking about your next steps, keep in mind that although obtaining your PhD will come with many challenges, you will be at your most productive when you are well rested, financially stable, nourished, and enjoying your experience.

Rule 9: Trust your gut

You have made it to our most “hand-wavy” rule! As academics, we understand the desire for quantifiable data and some sort of statistic to make logical decisions. If this is more your style, consider every interaction with a prospective supervisor, from the first e-mail onwards, as a piece of data.

However, there is considerable value in trusting gut instincts. One way to trust your gut is to listen to your internal dialogue while making your decision on a PhD supervisor. For example, if your internal dialogue includes such phrases as “it will be different for me,” “I’ll just put my head down and work hard,” or “maybe their students were exaggerating,” you might want to proceed with caution. If you are saying “Wow! How are they so kind and intelligent?” or “I cannot wait to start!”, then you might have found a winner ( Fig 2 ).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009330.g002

Rule 10: Wash, rinse, repeat

The last piece of advice we give you is to do this lengthy process all over again. Comparing your options is a key step during the search for a PhD supervisor. By screening multiple different groups, you ultimately learn more about what red flags to look for, compatible work styles, your personal expectations, and group atmospheres. Repeat this entire process with another supervisor, another university, or even another country. We suggest you reject the notion that you would be “wasting someone’s time.” You deserve to take your time and inform yourself to choose a PhD supervisor wisely. The time and energy invested in a “failed” supervisor search would still be far less than what is consumed by a bad PhD experience ( Fig 3 ).

The more supervisors your interview and the more advice you get from peers, the more apparent these red flags will become.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009330.g003

Conclusions

Pursuing a PhD can be an extremely rewarding endeavor and a time of immense personal growth. The relationship you have with your PhD supervisor can make or break an entire experience, so make this choice carefully. Above, we have outlined some key points to think about while making this decision. Clarifying your own expectations is a particularly important step, as conflicts can arise when there are expectation mismatches. In outlining these topics, we hope to share pieces of advice that sometimes require “insider” knowledge and experience.

After thoroughly evaluating your options, go ahead and tackle the PhD! In our own experiences, carefully choosing a supervisor has led to relationships that morph from mentor to mentee into a collaborative partnership where we can pose new questions and construct novel approaches to answer them. Science is hard enough by itself. If you choose your supervisor well and end up developing a positive relationship with them and their group, you will be better suited for sound and enjoyable science.

• View Article
• Google Scholar
• PubMed/NCBI
• 5. Smith D. The big benefits of working in a small lab. University Affairs. 2013. Available from: https://www.universityaffairs.ca/career-advice/career-advice-article/the-big-benefits-of-working-in-a-small-lab/

We Trust in Human Precision

20,000+ Professional Language Experts Ready to Help. Expertise in a variety of Niches.

API Solutions

• API Pricing
• Cost estimate
• Customer loyalty program
• Educational Discount
• Non-Profit Discount
• Green Initiative Discount1

Value-Driven Pricing

Unmatched expertise at affordable rates tailored for your needs. Our services empower you to boost your productivity.

• Special Discounts
• Enterprise transcription solutions
• Enterprise translation solutions
• Transcription/Caption API
• AI Transcription Proofreading API

Trusted by Global Leaders

GoTranscript is the chosen service for top media organizations, universities, and Fortune 50 companies.

GoTranscript

One of the Largest Online Transcription and Translation Agencies in the World. Founded in 2005.

Speaker 1: If I was starting my PhD today, I would be stalking the living shit out of all of the PhD supervisors that I was thinking about working with for my PhD. Here's the thing, is that they leave little leading indicators of success around the internet. And I'm gonna show you in this video which ones are the most important for you. Now, the first thing I would head over to is their academic profile on their website. So this is actually my PhD supervisor. And the first thing I would be doing is looking for this, supervision. I'd be clicking on supervision and the first thing I'm interested in is their group size, the number of PhD graduates they've recently graduated, and also any indication of culture in the lab. So the first one, PhD group size. So I'm looking down here and I'm seeing that, okay, they've commenced in one, two, three. So they've got three PhD students at the moment. Okay, so there's five, they're current PhD students. So that is a good number of PhD students. It's not too many, it's not too little, but it's just kind of that okay, nice Goldilocks zone. Because you want a PhD supervisor who has got some evidence that they've actually graduated PhD students and they're actively supervising students, but you don't want someone that's completely overrun by students, that has 20 or so students that are essentially fighting for their time. So that's the first thing I'm looking at. Look, here's another friend of mine, Dr. Cameron Shearer. And so he's a relatively new academic. He's recently got a permanent position, well done Cameron. But I'm heading over to the supervision tabs that all of these sort of like academic profiles have. And I can see that at the moment, he's got one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine PhD students that he's currently supervising or it's masters as well. Okay, so he's got nine masters and doctoral students that he's looking at at the moment. But remember, these people are either co-supervised or primarily supervised by him. So I'm really interested in primary supervision. One, two, three, four, five. There we are, there's another five primary supervised PhD students by Cameron. Once again, not too many, but I'd start to really worry if that started getting past, you know, eight or nine or 10 PhD students. That's far too many. And quite often a lab of that size, you always hear the same issues, which is I can't get in contact with my PhD supervisor. He's away, they're doing all these things. I can't sort of like pin them down to look over my thesis or my peer reviewed paper. That is all of the big issues. So make sure you're not in that boat. That's the first thing I'm looking for. The second thing is any evidence of recent PhD graduation. So I would be looking down here at past higher degree research supervision. So this is a co-supervisor of PhD. So that's good, Cameron. We've got some evidence. You're a new academic, but it's great you've seen what the process of a successful PhD means. And then for someone like Erica, you can see she's got loads and loads of past supervisions. I'm even in there at one point. Where am I? Here I am. Nanoparticle-based organic photovoltaic devices. That's me. Bing, here it is. Ooh, nice. Anyway, so I'm in that list and you can see she has got so, so much evidence that she can be a successful PhD supervisor. And importantly, we've got one this year and then it was a couple years ago she had the last bunch through. So there is evidence they can actually graduate PhD students, which is exactly what you're after. Now, here's the thing, is that you need to now look at evidence of any lab culture. And this is a tough one to kind of weigh up because you're looking for evidence that their lab culture is actually a nice one. If you're in person, you can go and ask their PhD students, but a lot of the time we're international PhD students, we don't know. So I'd be looking for their independently run web pages for their labs. And this is why I think every academic should have a website which is specifically for their lab. So this is a laboratory that I used to work nearby. I was never in this, but this is what I'm looking at. I'm looking for any evidence of culture. So yeah, we've got Colin Raston, who's the head of the group. We've got meet the group areas of interest. Let's say meet the group. So I'm going to meet the group and I'm going to look at the current members. This is 2023. This is about a year old, but this is a little bit of fun. Plan your work around your work of plan. Favorite TV program, Game of Thrones. It's all of these little things that are like, okay, well clearly they're having some sort of fun. Then I'm heading over to their social media, such as Twitter, their LinkedIn profile, wherever you can stalk from the bushes a little bit more. This is what's going on. And you're looking for evidence that they celebrate things. They celebrate things like birthdays. They celebrate things like papers being accepted. They celebrate Christmas things. Whatever kind of lab culture you can gain from this social media presence is always good. If there's nothing, I would just be a little bit wary that maybe this person or this lab doesn't necessarily sort of value that cultural aspect. And that can, over the many years of doing a PhD, really wear you down as a PhD student. So those are the top three things that I'd really be looking for, whatever I'm deciding to do, but there are plenty more and some of them are very, very important. All of the points in this video are covered in my course, which is the Ultimate PhD Kickstart. If you want to start your PhD strong, this course is for you. I look at the 12-point success system that I have seen every successful PhD student go through, and there's even a smart supervision sort of spreadsheet where you go through, and you can also also populate this with all of the information from the master sheet. I've created it for you, so go have a look at this course, because if you're starting a PhD, this will almost guarantee that you are starting off in the strongest light possible. Go check it out. The next big thing you need to look for is money. Is there any evidence that this person is able to bring in money? Because money changes the supervisor experience so much. If you've got a supervisor that doesn't have very much money, they are scrimping and saving, and it is a completely different experience to a supervisor who is just flush with cash. So you want some evidence that this supervisor, your principal or primary supervisor, can actually bring in money. And you go to their supervisor page, and you're looking for grants and funding, and you're looking for this number, and you're looking for recent grants that are sort of like being awarded to them, and then you need to sort of like make a decision, okay, in 2024, they got this grant, which is great. That's a significant grant. So will I be working on this project? If I am, it means that I'll be able to kind of like relax a little bit, because they're going to have some money to support my experiments, my ideas, send me to conferences, all that sort of stuff. So you want someone with money. The next thing I'd be looking at is thesis titles. Head over to their thesis titles, and actually have a look to see whether or not the thesis titles are interesting to you, because this is ultimately what you will be doing. You're producing a thesis around a project that they are an expert in. So if you're looking through their stuff, and none of them really take you, that tells you this shouldn't be your principal supervisor, and in fact, maybe not even your supervisor at all. So have a look, and look at what they're actually researching. So here's some more research topics. Photocatalytic generation of hydrogen under extreme conditions. Oh, that sounds good. I like the word extreme. What else have we got? And then this one, reduced graphene oxide supported, no, that's not really interesting to me as well. So this is what you've got to go through. Have a look at their past PhD thesis, and say, could I actually be part of this group? Because this is what this group is all about. This is what they love. And if you don't at least have a small interest in those thesis titles, maybe it's not the right group for you. The next thing that I would be doing is having a look to see what their past PhD graduates are currently doing. Are they in academia? Are they in industry? Are they doing something else that you would like to do? Because ultimately, when you are working with this person, you are also connected to their networks. You're also connected to the people that they've graduated in the past. And if you can't see yourself in a position that their recent PhD graduates are in, then maybe this isn't for you. If you are wanting to go into academia, you need to make sure that a lot of their PhD students actually end up in academia. If you want to go into industry, make sure that a lot of their PhD students go into industry. This is where you get a little bit sneaky. So what you can do is take these thesis titles, do a bit of a Google, and quite often you'll find a name related to that thesis title. And you have to make sure that you're absolutely okay with where they've ended up and whether or not it's something that you want to do. I would do that with maybe a handful of their recent PhD graduates and have a look to see, well, if I was to graduate under this person, these are the sorts of things that are, you know, the doors that are open to me. So does that excite me? Does that make me happy? Does that interest me? And it's just part of that kind of getting a sense for what you'll do after your PhD as well, which is so important and not enough people think about it. The last thing I'd be looking at is institutional reputation. Is this university actually useful to have on your resume? If you want to go into academia, that makes so much of a difference because people do judge you on where you went to university and also the principal supervisor that you had for your PhD. So if you had someone super famous from Oxford, you're in. That's like a guaranteed future as long as you don't sort of like screw it up. Whereas if you're from a lesser known university, it's a much harder sell on your CV to get someone to employ you in academia afterwards. So make sure that you take into account institutional reputation when you are deciding on a professor to work with for your PhD. If you like this video, go check out this one, which is an old school video about how to choose your PhD supervisor. It's got loads of valuable, timeless advice. Go check it out.

• Skip to Content
• Catalog Home
• Institution Home
• Graduate Catalog /
• Academic Resources /
• Advising & Mentoring PhD Students /

Choosing a Dissertation Advisor

Introduction.

While some graduate groups may assign an advisor to a student upon admission to the program, in many graduate groups the responsibility for finding a dissertation advisor rests with the student. The choice of a faculty member who will supervise the dissertation work required to fulfill degree requirements is one of the most critical decisions a graduate student will make. A student will spend several years working with the faculty member of choice, and that choice will significantly affect the direction of the student’s career. Choosing a dissertation advisor, therefore, is an extremely important decision for doctoral students, although it is not immutable, as will be discussed later.

A student undertaking dissertation work needs an advisor who will be not only academically competent in a particular area but also willing to act as the student’s advocate when necessary. It is important that the student be able to work and communicate effectively with the advisor and not feel overwhelmed or intimidated in the relationship. Dissertation work can be lonely and isolating, and support from an advisor can be a crucial connection.  Each student requires the guidance of someone who will stimulate thought, who has sufficient interest in the student’s topic to produce new insights jointly, and who will challenge the student to think in a novel manner about the research.

Obtaining Information on Potential Advisors

Advisors generally serve as the dissertation supervisor. Students should be familiar with the University rules about who can supervise dissertation research and serve on a dissertation committee.  Several resources and strategies can help students identify an appropriate faculty advisor, as follows.

The graduate group website or handbook is a valuable source of information on potential advisors. Many graduate groups have developed websites that profile affiliated faculty members, including their areas of research, recent publications, and other academic activities. Literature searches can provide further information on the publications and preferred journals of particular faculty members. The graduate group chair can also provide valuable advice on potential advisors and can help students to become familiar with any specific graduate group policies on supervision.

Students can get to know potential advisors by taking a course, doing a lab rotation, acting as a teaching assistant, and/or attending seminars and other presentations by the faculty member.

Graduate students currently working with the potential advisor are an invaluable source of information. Students who are working or have worked with a particular advisor can be asked about their experience with that advisor and about the advisor’s expectations and working methods. Getting to know these students is also useful because anyone choosing to work with a faculty advisor would likely have close, future interactions with their students. Talking to multiple students is always encouraged given the possibly strong and differing opinions one might hear.

Students should make an appointment to meet potential advisors. Meeting a potential advisor is an essential step in determining whether a faculty member would be a good fit in terms of mentoring and interpersonal style and research interested. The following is a list of issues that might be covered in such a meeting: 

• How many graduate students do you advise? (Students may not want to pick a faculty member who has too many students already.)
• Typically, how often do you meet with your students?
• Typically, how much time do you expect students to take to complete their dissertation?
• How will we agree upon my research topic?
• Are there sufficient funds available for the research project?
• What will be the sources of my stipend/funding? What are ways you can provide assistance for finding additional funding if/when my stipend expires?
• What level of independence is expected of your graduate students?
• Is there any specific knowledge I need to have before starting to work with you?
• Will I have the opportunity to attend conferences? Publish papers? Present work at colloquia? Are there funds available for me to do so?
• Are you planning a sabbatical leave soon? If so, what arrangements for continued supervision will be made during your absence?
• What opportunities would I have in this area of research when I graduate?
• How do you typically assist students on the job market?
• Will guidelines be drawn up for working together?
• How will I receive feedback on my progress?

These questions are designed to help the student and the potential advisor determine whether a good match exists. Where appropriate, the student may also want to ask about the order of authorship on publications and intellectual property issues.

For students who are able to pick an advisor, the choice of a dissertation advisor is a decision to be made with a great deal of care and consideration. Discussion of the topics listed above will also give faculty members a sense of what students expect in terms of meetings, feedback, turn-around time on submitted work, etc. Taking time to explore these issues should result in a productive relationship for both student and advisor that culminates in a dissertation of original research, completed within a reasonable period of time.

Changing Advisors

There may be situations in which a student must change advisors. Some situations are beyond the student’s control; for example, when an advisor leaves the University or otherwise becomes unavailable. In other situations, the student may want to choose a different advisor; for example, if the focus of the research project changes to something outside of the current advisor’s expertise, or if work styles do not mesh well.

In these latter situations, students should understand that while there can be risks in changing advisors, it usually can be negotiated in a positive manner. Students deciding to change advisors should be sure to consult the graduate group for any specific policies and procedures that apply and be sure to ascertain if funding may change under a new advisor. Students should always be professional and respectful in interactions with the current advisor and potential new advisor and be certain that the proposed new advisor is willing and able to add them as a new advisee before discussing such a change with the current advisor. Students should focus discussions on interests and goals and not on negative incidents or difficulties. The potential new advisor, as well as leaders or other members of the graduate group, may have advice regarding how to broach this change with the current advisor.

Print Options

Print this page.

The PDF will include all information unique to this page.

A PDF of the entire 2024-25 catalog.

A PDF of the 2024-25 Undergraduate catalog.

A PDF of the 2024-25 Graduate catalog.

Our websites may use cookies to personalize and enhance your experience. By continuing without changing your cookie settings, you agree to this collection. For more information, please see our University Websites Privacy Notice .

Honors Program

• Thesis Supervisor
• Online Submission Instructions
• Online Approval Instructions
• Thesis Extensions
• Publishing in Open Commons

Your choice of Honors thesis supervisor shapes how you personalize the final stages of your academic studies at UConn and in Honors. You will select a thesis supervisor who will work closely with you and serve as a scholarly guide throughout the development, implementation, and conclusion of your thesis project.

What does the thesis supervisor do?

Your thesis supervisor is an expert on your thesis topic and will work closely with you in all stages of your project. Your supervisor is an important mentor for the process of completing your thesis as well as your specific topic, but they are not expected to be knowledgeable about other aspects of Honors.

Your Honors advisor is generally not your Thesis Supervisor; both are important toward your completion of your Honors thesis. Your advisor is knowledgeable about Honors requirements for your major, but they may not know as much about your specific topic. Keep them informed throughout your thesis work, because your Honors advisor must approve both your Thesis Plan and your final thesis . Your Honors advisor will continue to provide advice and support in your final semesters, including your choice of coursework.

Your Honors advisor and your thesis supervisor may be the same person if (a) your thesis topic aligns with your Honors advisor’s research, or (b) your department’s policy is to switch your Honors advisor to your thesis supervisor.

Who can be a thesis supervisor?

Your official thesis supervisor must be a faculty member at UConn (including UConn Health or regional campuses). Graduate students may not serve as official thesis supervisors, although they may be directly and actively involved in your thesis process. Your Honors advisor will need to approve your selection of thesis supervisor.

You should consult faculty members and advisors in your field to find the best person to help guide you through the thesis process. Select someone you can envision working with for multiple semesters; this relationship is critical to the success of your thesis!

Tips for securing, retaining, and managing the relationship with your thesis supervisor:

• Although your thesis timetable will differ based on your department, in general  you should have secured a thesis supervisor no later than the 2 nd semester of your junior year. For some majors, especially the sciences, thesis research arrangements should be made by the end of your sophomore year or very early in your junior year.
• Use the steps in the suggested timeline to learn what faculty members in your department or related departments are working on.
• Request a meeting to discuss shared interests and determine if the partnership is a fit. This in-person meeting is critical; don’t ask someone to be your thesis supervisor via email. Learn more about the best ways to connect with faculty .
• During or after the meeting, confirm with the faculty member that they are willing to serve as your thesis supervisor . A faculty member who agrees to work with you on “Honors research” has not necessarily agreed to supervise your thesis!
• Create a timeline with your thesis supervisor and set expectations for how often you will communicate and meet, as well as any internal deadlines.
• Stay in touch with your thesis supervisor throughout the process. Stick to deadlines, but communicate and seek help when you need it.
• Ask questions about your thesis, your field, and their journey in the field. Make the most of having this mentor.

Advisor vs. Supervisor: What Are the Differences?

Learn about the two careers and review some of the similarities and differences between them.

In any work environment, it’s important to have someone you can go to for help or advice. Depending on the company you work for, this person may be your supervisor or your advisor. Though these titles are often used interchangeably, there are some key differences between the two. In this article, we discuss the roles of an advisor and a supervisor, and we explain how they differ.

What is an Advisor?

Advisors provide guidance and support to clients in a specific area of expertise. They offer advice and recommendations on topics such as financial planning, career development, relationship counselling and more. Advisors typically have extensive experience and knowledge in their field, and they use this to help clients reach their goals. Advisors may work with individuals, families or groups, and they may be self-employed or work for a company. Some Advisors may also provide training or give lectures on their area of expertise.

What is a Supervisor?

Supervisors help manage a team of employees by assigning tasks, conducting performance reviews and dealing with employee issues. They develop work schedules to ensure that the team has adequate coverage and that projects are completed in a timely manner. Supervisors also serve as a point of contact between employees and upper management. They relay information between the two groups and ensure that employees understand company policies and procedures. In some cases, supervisors may also be responsible for training new employees.

Advisor vs. Supervisor

Here are the main differences between an advisor and a supervisor.

Advisors and supervisors share some job duties, such as leading a team, providing guidance and feedback and setting goals. However, advisors typically have more responsibilities because they work with higher-level employees. For example, an advisor might help executive leadership develop strategies for achieving departmental goals. Supervisors typically provide day-to-day guidance to their teams to ensure they complete tasks, such as ensuring employees adhere to safety regulations while completing assignments and monitoring employee performance.

Job Requirements

Advisors and supervisors typically need at least a bachelor’s degree to enter the field. However, some employers may prefer candidates with a master’s degree or higher. Additionally, many professionals in these roles pursue certifications through organizations like the National Association of Advisors for the Health Professions (NAAHP) or the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC). These certifications can demonstrate that an advisor or supervisor has the necessary skills and knowledge to perform their job duties effectively.

Work Environment

Supervisors typically work in an office setting, but they may also travel to different locations. They often spend their days at a desk or on the job site and interact with employees and clients. Advisors usually work in an office environment, but they may also visit clients’ homes or other locations. They may spend time interacting with clients and providing support for them.

The main difference between an advisor and a supervisor is that an advisor provides guidance and support, while a supervisor manages and oversees work. Both roles require excellent communication skills, as they need to be able to explain tasks clearly and give instructions effectively. They also both need good people skills, as they will be working with employees on a daily basis.

Advisors typically need to have strong problem-solving skills, as they need to be able to find creative solutions to challenges their employees are facing. Supervisors usually need to have strong decision-making skills, as they need to be able to make quick decisions about how to solve problems and handle issues that arise. Both roles also require good organizational skills, as they need to be able to keep track of multiple projects and deadlines.

The average salary for an advisor is $66,768 per year, while the average salary for a supervisor is $62,225 per year. The salary for both positions may vary depending on the industry, the size of the company, the location of the job and the level of experience the employee has.

Quality Engineer vs. Manufacturing Engineer: What Are the Differences?

Hotel manager vs. general manager: what are the differences, you may also be interested in..., housekeeper vs. house manager: what are the differences, software engineer vs. application engineer: what are the differences, locomotive engineer vs. conductor: what are the differences, clinician vs. therapist: what are the differences.

Roles and responsibilities of supervisors

Introduction.

Effective graduate student supervision requires complex interactions between graduate students and their supervisors. The role of a supervisor is threefold: to advise graduate students, monitor their academic progress, and act as a mentor. Supervisors not only provide guidance, instruction and encouragement in the research activities of their students, but also take part in the evaluation and examination of their students’ progress, performance and navigation through the requirements of their academic program with the goal to ensure that their students are successful.

Supervisors are responsible for fostering the intellectual and scholarly development of their students. They also play an important role in providing advice about professional development and both academic and non-academic career opportunities, as they are able, and based upon the student’s career interests. 

While these expectations apply to all graduate students, supervising PhD students reflects a longer-term, more substantive commitment.  The privilege to supervise PhD students requires that the supervisor hold  Approved Doctoral Dissertation Supervisor (ADDS)  status. The intent of ADDS policy is to ensure that faculty have the appropriate knowledge to facilitate excellence in PhD supervision.

Knowledge of regulations, policies and procedures

Effective graduate student supervision requires a knowledge and understanding of the University’s requirements and expectations.  To this end, supervisors should:

2.1    Be knowledgeable and remain updated on department, Faculty and University regulations, policies and procedures, and have these protocols guide the supervisors’ decision-making and behaviour as they interact with graduate students. Supervisors are encouraged to take the necessary steps to be well-informed with those Policies identified in  section 1.2 .

2.2    Be familiar with the support services available to students and faculty at the University including those articulated in  section 1.2 . This information is normally available through department graduate co-ordinators, Faculty Graduate Studies Offices, Graduate Studies and Postdoctoral Affairs (GSPA), the Graduate Student Association (GSA) or the University Secretariat.

2.3   Be informed about University of Waterloo policies and procedures that  inform academic integrity  (Office of Research).

2.4    Be aware of the University of Waterloo and Tri-Agency policies and procedures associated with the conduct of research.   Where appropriate, supervisors should be prepared to provide guidance to students on:

• The responsible conduct of research, with particular emphasis on the Tri-Agency Framework as defined in the  Faculty Association of University of Waterloo (FAUW) /University of Waterloo memorandum of Agreement (Section 14).
• The  ethical conduct of research  (Office of Research) involving animals, animal or human tissues, and human participants

2.5    Have knowledge of the  policies and procedures that govern international travel and security  that can be found at Waterloo International.

Advice on program of study, research and professional development

As noted above, supervisors are expected to serve as mentors to their graduate students.  To this end, supervisors should be prepared to provide well-informed advice on academics and professional development.  More specifically, supervisors should be prepared to advise students on:

2.6    An academic program that is challenging, at the appropriate level for the degree being sought, and that can be accomplished within commonly understood and desirable time and resource expectations of the student and the supervisor.

2.7    The choice of courses and seminars needed to fulfil the degree requirements.

2.8    The development and construct of a research topic and proposal.

2.9    The development of a communication plan with the supervisory/advisory committee as to how the student’s progress will be assessed (including during thesis writing and completion), and the role of advisory committee members in the assessment.

2.10    The availability of internships, practica, co-op or other experiential learning opportunities as part of the program.

2.11    The availability of professional development resources for Waterloo graduate students to help advance the students’ career objectives.

Meetings/consultation 

The establishment and communication of common expectations are critical elements to positive experiences for both graduate students and their supervisors.  Achieving these outcomes can be facilitated by regular meetings and/or consultation between students, their supervisors, and where appropriate advisory committees. Especially important is timely feedback on students’ written submissions. 

The University encourages supervisors to:

2.12    Ensure, especially important in the case of doctoral students, that the student has:

• An advisory committee as required.
• A program of study consistent with department and Faculty requirements that has been approved by the advisory committee as required.
• A research plan that is appropriate in breadth, depth and time to completion (see  Milestones in master's and doctoral programs ).

2.13    Arrange for regular (as agreed by the student and supervisor) meetings (which may involve the advisory committee) with students for consultation to ensure steady progress. The frequency of such meetings will depend on the discipline/field of study, type of program, and the student’s progress. At least two, preferably more, meetings should be arranged in each academic term. Supervisors should also be reasonably accessible for meetings requested by their students. The approach to these student meetings should be individualized to reflect the needs of the student. For example, some students may need more support while other may need less.

2.14    Communicate their evaluation of student progress to the department once a year or more often if required. The report should clearly indicate the status of the student’s progress (i.e., satisfactory or unsatisfactory).  In the latter case, the report must include a clearly articulated set of conditions that if satisfied will restore the student’s status to satisfactory. Where the supervisor feels that the student will have serious difficulties finishing the program, the supervisor, in consultation with the advisory committee as appropriate, will inform in writing, both the student and the graduate officer of the nature of the problem(s), suggested remedies and may recommend withdrawal from the program.  More information on  assessing students’ progress  can be found in the Graduate Studies Academic Calendar.

2.15    Thoroughly review and provide constructive feedback on all written materials relevant to the thesis or research paper submitted by their students. The supervisor and the student are encouraged to establish in writing expectations on what constitutes timely feedback; a timeframe of two to three weeks depending on the complexity of the document is commonly applied. However, this can vary depending on various circumstances such as travel or vacation.  These circumstances should be discussed between the supervisor and student.

2.16    Have knowledge of the  guidelines for evaluating students’ progress in a research program  (Graduate Studies Academic Calendar).

2.17   Inform students about the  broad spectrum of resources available  (Writing and Communication Centre) to facilitate development of oral communication and writing skills.

2.18    Be active and supportive in promoting students’ well-being.  This may include:

• Inquiring about a student’s well-being, as appropriate.
• Directing students to  appropriate support services , including  Mental Health and Wellness resources  (Campus Wellness).
• Displaying empathy towards the student.

2.19    Complete as appropriate the University requirements for  Sexual violence awareness, referral and support training  (Human Rights, Equity and Inclusion Office) to understand how to respond to disclosures of sexual violence and refer students to the appropriate supports.

The University recognizes that supervisors will be away from the University for extended periods of time (e.g., sabbatical, satellite campus, visiting professorship).  Being physically away from the University does not preclude a supervisor from remaining engaged with their graduate students.  In cases where the supervisor will not be available either in person or via electronic communications, the supervisor should:

2.20    Inform students, prospective students and the department of any anticipated extended period where communication will not be occurring. In cases when the absence is for a period of two months or more, supervisors should arrange for suitable communication methods. Interim supervision also must be arranged, for example, using members of advisory committees. Supervisors must inform the student’s department (chair/graduate officer) of the arrangements made for the period of absence, including supervision of laboratory or field work where graduate students continue to work during the absence.

2.21    Ensure students know that in situations where a supervisor works away from campus for two months or more and where their students can accompany the supervisor, the decision to remain on campus or to follow the supervisor rests entirely with the student. Students shall face no pressure (explicit or implicit) or consequences when making this choice and are not required to provide any reason.

As with the departmental representatives, supervisors have responsibility to advance safety.  More specifically, supervisors should:

2.22    Ensure a safe working environment both on and off campus (working alone, field work) by assessing hazards and implementing appropriate controls. This must be in accordance with the Occupational Health and Safety Act,  Policy 34  (Secretariat) and department and Faculty regulations.  All supervisors must complete mandatory  health and safety supervisor awareness training  (Safety Office) and must ensure that graduate students complete both mandatory and work-specific safety training.  More information can be found on the  Safety Office  website.

2.23    Ensure that students obtain additional training when new safety risks arise and ensure training is kept up to date.

Inherent to graduate education are the dissemination of knowledge and the participation in scholarly activities away from the University campus.  Travel (domestic and international) can include fieldwork, conferences, course work and other work related to the thesis. Supervisors are encouraged to support students’ travel to accomplish these important objectives.  Supervisors should:

2.24    Follow or encourage students to follow  Policy 31  (Secretariat) that governs University-sanctioned travel.

2.25    Categorize and report risk associated with travel.  Low risk  (Safety Office) are activities for which it is expected that participants will encounter hazards that are no greater than what they encounter in their everyday lives. Examples of  significant risk  (e.g. industrial sites, remote regions etc.) are noted on the  Safety Office website .  Travel or field work that involves significant risk must be documented using the  Fieldwork Risk Management Form  from the  Safety Office .  For low risk activities off campus, supervisors should:

• Provide advice on preparation for pre-departure orientation and planning for any travel and including associated risk, as they are able;

2.26    Document the student(s) location and duration of travel, including personal and emergency contact information. Review the material provided by  Waterloo International  to understand how to best mitigate risk and ensure safety for international travel.

2.27    Encourage students to register using the  Pre-departure Travel Form  at  Waterloo International .

2.28    Consult the  Government of Canada Travel Advice and Advisories web page  for the international destination and discuss the mitigation of risk with the students to the destination.

Financial assistance

Supervisors regularly provide financial support for their graduate students.  Both the supervisor and the student benefit when a clear understanding exists of the value of funding, and the academic outcomes that should occur from the supported activities.  Specifically, supervisors should:

2.29    Be informed about the spectrum of funding opportunities available through the department, Faculty and Graduate Studies and Postdoctoral Affairs (GSPA) for students in  financial need  and to communicate these sources to student.

2.30   Communicate clearly and in writing to their students the terms (e.g., amounts, length of time, conditions) of the financial commitment being made when financial assistance is to be provided from research grants or contracts under the supervisor’s direction.

2.31    Support students’ understanding of their funding, including a consideration of student expenses (primarily tuition and housing) and taxation, if appropriate.  

Intellectual property 

Increasingly, students and supervisors enter into their academic relationships with previously established intellectual property (IP).  Moreover, students and supervisors may have an expectation that their collective work may produce new IP.  Best practices include the articulation of students’ and supervisors’ understanding of IP relationships at regular intervals throughout the students’ academic program.  More specifically, supervisors should: 

2.32    Discuss issues related to intellectual property such as patents, software, copyright, and income from sales and royalties, and inform students of University policies about intellectual property and the conduct of research. It should be recognized that, in accordance with  Policy 73  (Secretariat), intellectual property normally is owned by the creators. However, the University retains a royalty-free right to use, for educational and research purposes, any intellectual property created by faculty, staff and students. Ideally, supervisors and students should enter into a written agreement that expresses IP owned by either party prior to beginning the research relationship and the default way in which IP created by the researchers’ joint activities will be owned.  A common example is an assumption in the absence of an explicit agreement of joint IP ownership, with each researcher owning an equal share.

2.33    Ensure that students are aware of implications and/or obligations regarding intellectual property of research conducted under contract. If appropriate, discuss with their students and any research partners the protection of intellectual property by patent or copyright. Any significant intellectual contribution by a student must be recognized in the form of co-authorship. Supervisors must convey to students, in advance of publication, whether they intend to recognize the student as co-author for work under contract.

Publications 

Academic outputs – in various forms – document and demonstrate ownership of creative research and other scholarly activities.  These outputs are important for advancing knowledge and catalyzing additional scholarly activity in these areas and should be encouraged.  When supervisors and graduate students work collectively on these academic works, it is important for both that their relative contributions are represented appropriately.  To achieve these goals, supervisors should:

2.34    Discuss with their students, at an early stage of their program, authorship practices within the discipline and University policies about publications ( Policy 73  on the Secretariat website). 

2.35    Discuss and reach agreement with students, well in advance of publication and ideally at the outset of collaboration, the way in which authorship will be shared, if appropriate, between the supervisor, the student and other contributors for work conducted under contract.

2.36    Encourage the dissemination of students’ research results by publication in scholarly and research journals, presentation at conferences (domestic or international) and seminars;

2.37    Motivate the dissemination of research through non-traditional or non-academic avenues (e.g. Open Access resources, public presentations, and popular media).

Withdrawal of supervisory duties 

In rare cases supervisors may determine that they are not prepared or able to continue in a supervisory capacity.  When this occurs, the supervisor is required to:

2.38    Follow the guidelines in the Graduate Studies Academic Calendar regarding  University Responsibilities Regarding Supervisory Relationships  that outlines the steps for dissolution of the supervisory relationship.

Accommodation 

The University is eager to establish conditions that maximize graduate students’ likelihood of success.  To this end, supervisors:

2.39    Have a duty to engage in accommodations processes with  AccessAbility Services , as requested, and to provide appropriate accommodation to the point of undue hardship.

2.40    Remain informed of their roles and responsibilities with respect to accommodations.

Guide for Graduate Research and Supervision

• Roles and responsibilities of departments, graduate officers and graduate co-ordinators
• Roles and responsibilities of graduate students
• Roles and responsibilities of advisory committees

Stack Exchange Network

Stack Exchange network consists of 183 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow , the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.

Q&A for work

Connect and share knowledge within a single location that is structured and easy to search.

What is the difference between the promoter and the advisor?

I am applying for a Ph.D. position at Netherlands and I see that there will be a promoter and an advisor. I have never seen such a title as "promoter". What is the difference between the two titles?

• graduate-admissions
• terminology
• netherlands

2 Answers 2

As far as I understand, in the Netherlands, only full professors may be appointed "promoter", i.e. the official advisor, the super-boss if you will. Other faculty members must apparently get authorization from the university (see comment).

So if you are going to be supervised by someone who is not full professor (e.g. associate/assistant professor), that person will be appointed as "(co)advisor", while a full professor will be acting as an official advisor/promoter and will chair the doctoral examination committee.

To add to the previous answer: an advisor is likely to be your daily supervisor, meaning that you have most contact with him/her. This person can also be a full professor. Your Promotor is a full professor (often head of department) who is likely to be too busy to meet often (though their level of commitment differs). An assistant professor is (since a couple of years) allowed to also be a promotor.

In short: the advisor is someone you'll spend more time with and should be there to help you with practical matters.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for browse other questions tagged graduate-admissions terminology netherlands ..

• Featured on Meta
• Bringing clarity to status tag usage on meta sites
• Announcing a change to the data-dump process

Hot Network Questions

• What's the benefit or drawback of being Small?
• Nausea during high altitude cycling climbs
• Word for when someone tries to make others hate each other
• Why does the church of latter day saints not recognize the obvious sin of the angel Moroni according to the account of Joseph Smith's own words?
• 99 camaro overheating
• Is it a good idea to perform I2C Communication in the ISR?
• Should on use mutate or insert to update storage?
• What does "dare not" mean in a literary context?
• Matrix Multiplication & Addition
• Why isn't a confidence level of anything >50% "good enough"?
• Would an LEO asking for a race constitute entrapment?
• When has the SR-71 been used for civilian purposes?
• Does a party have to wait 1d4 hours to start a Short Rest if no healing is available and an ally is only stabilized?
• Sylvester primes
• When can the cat and mouse meet?
• Why does this theta function value yield such a good Riemann sum approximation?
• What does "Two rolls" quote really mean?
• How is carousing different from drunkenness in Luke 21:34-36? How should they be interpreted literally and spiritually?
• What other marketable uses are there for Starship if Mars colonization falls through?
• How to realize the index shift operation in quantum circuit?
• How rich is the richest person in a society satisfying the Pareto principle?
• Did Babylon 4 actually do anything in the first shadow war?
• In Lord Rosse's 1845 drawing of M51, was the galaxy depicted in white or black?
• How do you tip cash when you don't have proper denomination or no cash at all?

Mentors, advisors and supervisors: Their role in teaching responsible research conduct

• Published: December 2001
• Volume 7 , pages 455–468, ( 2001 )

Cite this article

• Stephanie J. Bird Ph.D. 1  

1003 Accesses

50 Citations

3 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Although the terms mentor and thesis advisor (or research supervisor) are often used interchangeably, the responsibilities associated with these roles are distinct, even when they overlap. Neither are role models necessarily mentors, though mentors are role models: good examples are necessary but not sufficient. Mentorship is both a personal and a professional relationship. It has the potential for raising a number of ethical concerns, including issues of accuracy and reliability of the information conveyed, access, stereotyping and tracking of advisees, and the abuse of power. Nevertheless, mentors can be critically important for professional success and are one of a number of elements that affect the responsible conduct of research. In addition, the community as a whole has a responsibility to mentor junior members.

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

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

The Mentor’s Role in Fostering Research Integrity Standards Among New Generations of Researchers: A Review of Empirical Studies

Choosing a Suitable Research Area and Supervisor

Hall, Roberta H. and Sandler, Bernice R. (1983) Academic mentoring for women students and faculty: A new look at an old way to get ahead , Association of American Colleges, Washington, D.C.

Google Scholar  

Swazey, Judith P. and Anderson, Melissa S. (1996) Mentors, advisors and role models in graduate and professional education , Association of Academic Health Centers, Washington, D.C.

Anderson, Melissa S., Oju, Elo Charity and Falkner, Tina M.R. (2001) Help from Faculty: Findings from the Acadia Institute Graduate Education Study, Science and Engineering Ethics 7 : 487–503.

Swazey, Judith P. (1993) Teaching ethics: Needs, opportunities, and obstacles, In: the Proceedings of the Sigma Xi Forum, “Ethics, Values and the Promise of Science” (pp. 233–242), Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Society, Research Triangle Park, NC.

Fischer, Beth A. and Zigmond, Michael J. (2001) Promoting Responsible Conduct in Research through “Survival Skills” Workshops: Some Mentoring Is Best Done in a Crowd. Science and Engineering Ethics 7 : 563–587.

Bird, S.J. (1994) Overlooked aspects in the education of science professionals: Mentoring, ethics, and professional responsibility, Journal of Science Education and Technology 3 : 49–55.

Article   Google Scholar  

Gorovitz, Samuel (1998) Ethical Issues in Graduate Education, Science and Engineering Ethics 4 : 225–240.

Olmstead, M.A. (1993) Mentoring new faculty: Advice to department chairs, CSWP Gazette 13 (1): 108–11.

National Academy of Sciences (1997) Advisor, teacher, role model, friend: On being a mentor to students in science and engineering , National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.

Faddis, Bonnie, Ruzicka, Patricia, Berard, Barbara, and Huppertz, Nancy (1988) Hand In Hand: Mentoring Young Women , Newton, Massachusetts: Centre for Sex Equity, Women’s Educational Equity Act.

Weil, Vivian (2001) Mentoring: Some Ethical Considerations, Science and Engineering Ethics 7 : 471–482.

Eastwood, Susan, Derish, Pamela, Leash, Evangeline, and Ordway, Stephen (1996) Ethical issues in biomedical research: Perceptions and practices of postdoctoral research fellows responding to a survey, Science and Engineering Ethics 2 : 89–114.

Abeles, Norman (1998) Commentary on “Scientific societies and whistleblowers: The relationship between the community and the individual”, Science and Engineering Ethics 4 : 115–117.

Association for Women in Science (1993) Mentoring Means Future Scientists , Washington, D.C.

Gadlin, Howard (1994, February) A male perspective in mediating sexual harassment . Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, San Francisco, CA.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Room 12-188, 77 Massachusetts Avenue, 02139, Cambridge, MA, USA

Stephanie J. Bird Ph.D.

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephanie J. Bird Ph.D. .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Bird, S.J. Mentors, advisors and supervisors: Their role in teaching responsible research conduct. SCI ENG ETHICS 7 , 455–468 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-001-0002-1

Download citation

Issue Date : December 2001

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-001-0002-1

Share this article

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

• thesis advisor
• responsible conduct of research (rcr)
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Rules/Help/FAQ Help/FAQ
• Members Current visitors
• Interface Language

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

• English Only

advisor or supervisor

• Thread starter slacker11
• Start date Jun 17, 2009
• Jun 17, 2009

Dear teacher and friends... How does one call the professor who helps their students to develop their work (doctorat and masters dissertation/thesis) at universities? They usually tell students what to do or help them to figure out things... I am not sure which name is appropiate, supervisor or advisor. thanks  

Senior Member

You would call them a professor . They teach you and advise you in the writing of your dissertation. Edit : I now understand what you are asking. I must agree with Nico. I would call someone who adivses OUTSIDE OF CLASS (then it would be your professor) an academic advisor .  

Around my university, they call such people advisors. Supervisor could be used but that is generally used more in the workplace, not the academic environment.  

thank you.  

Moderato con anima (English Only)

I think there might be a British/American divide here. Academics who guide students in writing their theses or dissertations are generally called supervisors in British universities (and in the Commonwealth). I think advisers would be the American term.