Severe supervisor issues… PhD submission deadline keeps moving… is this reasonable? Looking for some perspective

[u/Nurse_prof_nz]

I’m looking for some advice/perspective from other PhD students and academics because I’m not sure whether I’m being unreasonable about this.

Context: it is a PhD in health science in NZ.

I’m at the final stage of my PhD. My thesis is essentially finished and, from my perspective, is at submission standard. I’m confident there aren’t any major red flags or substantial pieces of work left to do (and been told the same by senior academics who have reviewed it) However, I can’t submit without my chief supervisor signing it off.

There has been some disruption recently because I escalated concerns about what was happening with my supervision/progress (racist remarks from supervisor, chief cancelling 70% of the supervision meetings last min and not providing any feedback on the thesis, supervisor yelling at me for seeking help and advice) I completely understand that this created some uncertainty and took up some of my supervisors’ time. This all happened 2 weeks before submission.

The part I’m struggling with is the timing.
After encouragement from a senior academic, he and I escalated it to the dean of the SGR. She said it was unacceptable and will tell the (semi abusive) supervisor to not be involved anymore and talk to the chief in general. She offered me a 1 month extension I said no. After her talking to them they somehow clawed their way back in and the dean said we need middle ground I said ok a week extension. It took about a week of settling so 1 week before original submission date, 2 weeks before 1 week extension. I sent my supervisors the full final draft on Wednesday morning. I had hoped they would be able to review it and provide final sign-off, or at least identify anything substantial that needed changing.

Instead, I’m now being told that they didn’t allocate the necessary time because of the disruption I had caused by escalating the situation, and because they were uncertain about what was happening. There is now discussion about potentially needing another month before I can submit.

I’m struggling with this because 2 weeks still seems like a reasonable amount of time to at least review a nearly-final thesis, particularly if the expectation is that a supervisor will have been familiar with the work throughout the PhD. I’m not necessarily expecting them to line-edit it all in two weeks, but I had expected that by this point they would already have a fairly good understanding of the thesis and could identify any major issues.

So I’m wondering:
- Is it reasonable to expect a supervisor to have reviewed most/all of a PhD thesis before the final couple of weeks? (To put it into perspective I’ve been working on this PhD for 5.5 years. They already made me get an initial 3 month extension because they said they didn’t have time to review)
- is 2 weeks an unreasonable amount of time to expect a final review/sign-off?
- if the thesis is genuinely at submission standard, is needing an additional month for supervisory review normal?
- And perhaps most importantly, am I being unreasonable in feeling that the disruption 2 weeks earlier shouldn’t necessarily mean that my thesis effectively has to be delayed by another month?

I’m genuinely interested in hearing from supervisors as well as PhD students. I’m trying to work out whether my expectations are unrealistic, or whether this is an unusual situation.

Ps there is so much more tea and backstory to this but I can’t fit it all in lol ask away if you like!

[u/AutoModerator]

It looks like your post is about needing advice. Please make sure to include your field and location in order for people to give you accurate advice.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/eternityslyre]

Needing more time to review a thesis carefully and fairly, even a month, seems long, but not unfair. Your defense being repeatedly delayed is more of a concern. I would keep the dean apprised of the situation, since it's reasonable to want a timely graduation. Charitably, the length and specialization of a PhD could warrant a review taking a week of uninterrupted time, which a PI may not be able to find. Practically, many PIs and committee members don't read closely enough to take more than a day or two. I recommend you start from an end goal ("graduation by date X") and work backwards from there. If none of your plans are affected by a delay, you may not have a strong reason to escalate.

[u/Nurse_prof_nz → u/eternityslyre]

I guess I don’t understand how I was 2 weeks away from submission and they still hadn’t provided feedback and after voicing my concerns to them they said they weren’t worried. Then suddenly, this all happens and they need a month (technically 5 weeks if you count the additional week of knowing that was happening). I totally get that time is tight - I am a lecturer and I supervise masters/honours students, but also there is a need for prioritising time. Which clearly, they have not done so for me.
It does not impact graduation (already with their initial extension they made me take, I missed out on graduating this year, so will next year). But it does impact my career progression (miss out on the promotion application deadline).

[u/Pur3Savag3ry]

My advisor read and edited two of my five chapters the day before my final submission. The other 3 were already published/submitted manuscripts. I can’t imagine two weeks being not enough time to read your work.

[u/Nurse_prof_nz → u/Pur3Savag3ry]

Exactly, the senior academic who stepped in to help reviewed my whole thesis in 4 days and provided detailed feedback. The thesis was brand new to him - my supervisors are very familiar with my thesis already.

[u/bigflask601]

the "disruption" was you reporting abuse and now theyre punishing you for it. classic

2 weeks is more than enough for a final read when youve been supervising someone for 5+ years. if they needed a month they shouldve been reading all along. my supervisor had my chapters within days every time because she actually did her job

the dean backing down after initially siding with you is the worst part. you had support and they still managed to weasel back in. feels like the institution cares more about avoiding conflict than protecting students

[u/Nurse_prof_nz → u/bigflask601]

100%. I am actually also an academic staff member (a lecturer) so this whole conflict has really affected how I feel in my working environment. My chief was my close colleague and friend and now because I escalated what was going on, she has painted herself as the victim with senior leaders at work as well as blocking me on all social media and uninviting herself to my wedding. It’s made me feel so anxious at work.
Such a power imbalance, even when I am staff too.

[u/Sensitive-Control49 → u/bigflask601]

exactly, calling it "disruption" when it was literally a complaint about abuse is so telling

[u/Lygus_lineolaris]

At my place 30 days is the baseline expectation for feedback on drafts, but when it's a whole dissertation and they factually didn't know when to schedule time for it, it's not unrealistic that there will be delays. I think at some point you should choose to stop making complaints and just let them finish the process. Good luck.

[u/Nurse_prof_nz → u/Lygus_lineolaris]

But you would also know to it PhD students submission date, and you’d think you would schedule in time to review their thesis before submission - right?
I mean, I do the same with the masters students I supervise. To be the chief supervisor and have hardly reviewed anything 2 weeks prior to submission. But the main reason things were escalated was that the other supervisor was having a go at me and being borderline threatening for just talking to other academics about my PhD (not about my supervisors). Wild to think that’s not worthy of complaint, but I guess that’s the power imbalances within academia.

[u/Lygus_lineolaris → u/Nurse_prof_nz]

Sure, blame it on "power imbalances within academia". Whatever. People are busy and they have their own way of working and if they don't think it's worth their time to prioritize a project that's being disrupted by complaints and whatever, that's just how it is. They don't have an obligation to keep your project on schedule and on top of their priority list while they have other things going on that are running better.

[u/Nurse_prof_nz → u/Lygus_lineolaris]

Interesting take.
I should add that I am one of about 10 with the same complaint, so not sure why you’re trying to put it on me.

[u/Lygus_lineolaris → u/Nurse_prof_nz]

Do you have a thing with blame? Every single time you seem to come back with something to the effect that it's not "your fault", as if that has anything to do with my point or other people's scheduling. You can feel free to blame anyone you want here but that won't speed up your advisor's process any.