Timeline for Students not involving postdoc supervisor in publication
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 19 at 13:22 | comment | added | Janus Bahs Jacquet | @QuantumBrick I’d call that overruling, rather than ignoring. As long as you had the dialogue with the student and told them that all of you agreed that he was wrong, and that you were going to rewrite the article to make it intelligible, then you didn’t ignore him – you simply outvoted him. That’s fair and can be necessary. | |
| Mar 19 at 6:10 | history | edited | QuantumBrick | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 24 characters in body
|
| Mar 19 at 6:08 | comment | added | QuantumBrick | @JanusBahsJacquet I edited my answer. But, well, I did ignore the student's opinions about the paper after discussing with him. It was the first paper he had ever written, he was stubborn and there was nothing to discuss. It is because I am his senior, yes, that I felt I had the right of discussing directly with his supervisor. All coauthors agreed the paper was illegible, except for the student, so we all ignored his opinion and rewrote the paper. It is not the first time I had to ignore stubborn students that, even without any experience, insist on shooting themselves in the foot. | |
| Mar 19 at 6:03 | history | edited | QuantumBrick | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
First version looked like I ignored feedback from the student, which is not true. I ignored his opions about the paper, which were meaningless.
|
| Mar 18 at 21:19 | comment | added | Janus Bahs Jacquet | @QuantumBrick Having meetings without them present, sure. There’s no ignoring in having meetings. Actively ignoring someone is a lot more than just doing something without them being present. The answer currently reads as if you first talked to the student (this is good); but then when you didn’t like what he had to say, you chose to ignore him and cut him out of the loop by going straight to the advisor behind his back, and felt justified in doing so because of your seniority (this is bad). If that’s not what actually happened, I’d suggest editing to clarify the sequence of events. | |
| Mar 18 at 15:09 | comment | added | QuantumBrick | @JanusBahsJacquet The first thing I did was to talk to the student. Read the answer again. Besides, you're wrong: postdocs in charge of students will often have meetings with the student's supervisor without the student present. | |
| Mar 18 at 12:13 | comment | added | Janus Bahs Jacquet | “Now, since I am a lot more experienced than he is, I believe I am in a position where I can simply ignore him and talk directly to his advisor.” — No. Just no. Regardless of your relative levels of experience or the hierarchy in your work place, ignoring a colleague and going above their head is never the right solution unless there is a valid reason for explicitly keeping them in the dark (e.g., reporting someone for sexual harassment). Having a meeting with the supervisor is fine, but the PhD student should be made aware of this as well and should not just be ignored. | |
| Mar 16 at 17:33 | comment | added | QuantumBrick | @quarague First author. | |
| Mar 15 at 12:03 | comment | added | quarague | Just for clarification, the student is still an author of your paper? The first author? | |
| Mar 15 at 6:02 | history | answered | QuantumBrick | CC BY-SA 4.0 |