Dear MentorDoctor:
I am an African American who recently graduated with
a Ph.D. in chemistry from a predominantly white institution. During
my time as a graduate student, my adviser became chair of the
department, and as a result, training graduate students and doing
research were no longer a priority. Although I wrote two research
articles at her request, they were never published due to her lack
of involvement. Now, I'm looking for a postdoctoral fellowship, but
without any first-author publications, I'm having difficulty
finding a position. How should I handle this situation without
openly complaining about my adviser?
Sincerely,
Up a Creek Without a Paddle
Luis Echegoyen:This is a very difficult and sensitive
situation to be in and, unfortunately, a reasonably common one. As
a department chair myself, I know how difficult it is to maintain
an active and publishing research group, but it is a serious
responsibility that needs to be upheld at all costs for the benefit
of the students.
The student-adviser relationship is a two-way street, and both
sides have to be committed. You state that you wrote two research
articles, which makes the situation even more troublesome to me,
because correcting and editing articles that are already written is
not that difficult to do. In my view, based on what you stated in
your message, you have every right to complain about your adviser
and to demand that she help you in every possible way to publish
your research work.
Go to her in a polite yet firm manner and request her help. If
she refuses, ask if it is acceptable for you to proceed with the
publication of the work, even if it requires that you send the
manuscripts yourself. If she refuses, go to her superior, maybe the
dean, and present your case. Your whole future depends on these
publications. As a minority scientist, you are going to have enough
difficulties, so you don't need additional problems and red flags
against you.
There is another, less confrontational, way around the
situation. Perhaps a trusted faculty member from your thesis
committee could help by being a liaison between you and your
adviser. Sometimes it is easier for faculty members to talk between
themselves, and usually colleagues are able to communicate the
gravity and importance of these kinds of situations.
I hope that you publish your articles in a timely manner and
proceed to a postdoctoral position in the near future. I wish you
the best.
Isabella Finkelstein:You do have a challenge, and not an
uncommon one. Obviously, you must have your adviser review and
approve any manuscript you submit for publication. Some suggestions
are listed below.
1. Have someone in your laboratory or on your committee
critically review your manuscripts. Perhaps if your adviser just
had to review "a finished product" she would find the time so that
the manuscripts could be submitted.
2. Has your adviser written letters of recommendation for you
yet? If not, perhaps she could indicate on the letters that she is
currently reviewing your two first-author papers. This would
establish that you have prepared manuscripts.
3. For the past several years, I have reviewed postdoctoral
applications for a program. At the time they submitted their
applications, 15% to 20% of the applicants did not have
first-author papers. Make sure that your application presents the
positive aspects of your training. Remember, the postdoc is
supposed to give you additional training. Good luck in your
search.
Thomas Landefeld:Unfortunately, your problem is not
isolated (not that it helps you!). Here is what I would
suggest.
The personal statement or letter of interest is an invaluable
means to provide important information to a prospective employer,
program, fellowship, etc., in a way that does not have to indict,
accuse, or discredit anyone, especially a mentor who may be needed
later on. The key is how it's written and the wording. Once an
interview is provided, appropriate details can be shared.
I would recommend that you fashion your statement/letter so that
it highlights your mentor's new responsibilities as chair along
with any benefits that the department, other students, faculty,
etc., gained. The effect of your not publishing was an unfortunate
"side effect" that for these purposes can be just mentioned but not
made to be significant (even though it certainly is!).
Most committees are aware of the negative effects of
administrative commitments on student mentoring, especially in the
lab, so it should not be emphasized. An important part of writing
is to be able to say what is needed without making someone mad. So,
say what you need to without being inflammatory, accusatory, or
overall negative, and in the long run it will work out. I cannot
overemphasize the importance of a personal statement always being
your signature, your mark, so make sure that it says what you want
it to say as you continue to climb the ladder.
The GrantDoctor:Your adviser's reluctance to put these
papers forward for publication is likely to be seen by others as a
lack of confidence in your work. I have no way of knowing whether
this is the correct interpretation; perhaps your adviser really is
so busy that she can't be bothered to spend a couple of hours
editing and writing a cover letter. But this is a reasonable
conclusion for any third party to draw--after all, scientists who
are very excited about a piece of work are always eager to see it
published--and for you it's a very damaging conclusion.
So you're stuck between a rock and a hard place. If you say
nothing, people are going to wonder where your publications are.
But if you provide an explanation--that your adviser is holding up
publication--some of them, at least, are likely to assume that
there's something wrong with the work or (at best) that even if
it's sound, it's not worth a couple of hours of your adviser's
time.
Although it's hardly flawless, peer review--whether applied to
scientific papers or to fellowship proposals--is a far better means
of evaluating work than this kind of innuendo. By failing to put
your work forward to be judged on its merits--so that you can in
turn be judged on your own merits--your adviser is inviting you to
be judged by presumption and innuendo. As some people say about
Supreme Court nominees, your work deserves an up-or-down vote.
There's really only one way this can have a positive outcome: The
work needs to be submitted.
How can you make that happen? You can'tmakeit happen, but
you can and must give it your best shot. Confrontation is a poor
strategy; use charm and savvy instead. Make sure your adviser
realizes what's at stake for you without causing her to feel
challenged, threatened, or criticized. Send her a birthday card (on
her birthday, of course) with a note. Buy her a bottle of her
favorite Bordeaux ... again, with a note. Hopefully, after spending
years working closely with your adviser you know what is likely to
work best, so I won't waste your time providing specific tactical
advice. Just please realize that at this point in your career,
getting that work published is the most important thing that can
happen. So find a way to make it happen.
Still, if that doesn't work out--if you try and fail--that
doesn't spell the end of your scientific dreams; far from it. You
will still find a good postdoc, whether or not you have a
fellowship at first. (Both NIH and NSF offer administrative
supplements to existing grant holders that can be used to support
minority science trainees; these are frequently granted and require
no additional scientific review.) During your postdoc, you will
have the opportunity to do good work and get it published. Once
that happens, you'll be on your way.