I. Advising as Mentoring

Without a doubt, the advisor has the most direct influence in shaping the course of a graduate student's intellectual growth and career path. As such, advisors assume the function of assisting their students by becoming their mentors. The Council of Graduate Schools (1995) cites Morris Zelditch's useful summary of a mentor's multiple roles:

Mentors are advisors, people with career experience willing to share their knowledge; supporters, people who give emotional and moral encouragement; tutors, people who give specific feedback on one's performance; masters, in the sense of employers to whom one is apprenticed; sponsors, sources of information about and aid in obtaining opportunities; models, of identity, of the kind of person one should be to be an academic. [Adviser, Teacher, Role Model, Friend: On being a mentor to students in sciences and engineering, http://www.nap.edu/readingroom/books/mentor/

There is a fundamental difference between mentoring and advising; mentoring implies the presence of not only a professional relationship between professor and student, but a personal one as well.

A mentor should be attuned to the particular needs of each student and should vary the degree and type of attention, help, advice, criticism, and encouragement that s/he provides as deemed appropriate. In general, an effective mentoring relationship is characterized by mutual respect, trust, understanding, and empathy. Good mentors are able to share life experiences and wisdom, as well as technical expertise. They are good listeners, good observers, and good problem-solvers. They make an effort to know, accept, and respect the goals and interests of the student. Fostering mentoring relationships can go a long way toward improving graduate education at Harvard. Although there are faculty members who see their roles as advisors and mentors as being inseparable from one another, many faculty members do not take the extra step to move from a more 'mechanical' advising system to a personalized mentoring relationship. We suggest that the GSAS community see advising as more than just a chore to be summarily dealt with but instead include mentoring as an integral element of faculty members' roles. The professor should play a vital role in assisting the student to become an active and successful participant in his/her field. Promoting this shift towards mentoring by faculty would simultaneously clarify understandings of the status of graduate students as important members of the academic and University communities and improve the overall quality of graduate education.

1. Mentoring is essential to the advisor-advisee relationship. This relationship must be based on a common goal: to advance the educational and personal growth of the student. The faculty member should provide advice, encouragement and constructive criticism of the student's research and work, and take seriously his/her role in fostering the intellectual development of his/her graduate students.¹

2. Regular contact is essential to the advisor-advisee/mentoring relationship. Though the amount and frequency of contact will vary in each case, both parties should feel free to initiate contact at any stage. Faculty and student should establish a pattern of contact through both informal communication and regular, formal meetings at their mutual convenience. Faculty should, through regular and frequent informal contact, try to keep all students on their "radar screen" with an eye to anticipating problems.

3. When either the advisor or the student is not in residence, student and advisor should agree to establish regular means of communications while one is absent from the University.

4. Feedback on students' work, especially in the form of detailed comments on drafts of written or presented work, should be timely and well considered.

5. The Faculty of Arts and Sciences and the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences should support all faculty in their roles as mentors and advisors by providing information and programs on mentoring, advising, and managing research groups.

II. Program Structure

Departments should reexamine their programs structures with an eye towards ensuring quality of advising, clarity of requirements, and fairness of expectations. In this process of reassessment, departments should take into consideration such 'real world' factors as the availability of jobs from year to year, trends in the discipline and an awareness of career options for emerging Ph.D.'s. Faculty and students should reassess these expectations together to provide a clear picture of what can and cannot be seen as 'reasonable.'

A. Advising and Program Structure

1. It is the responsibility of the Director of Graduate Studies (DGS) to provide incoming students with a concise and early overview of each stage of the degree process, from advising about course work requirements to general examinations.²

2. As the student begins individual research, the DGS -- or another faculty member, in large departments -- should discuss with students the process of selecting a thesis advisor or committee. The DGS should point out the importance of choosing an advisor not only on the basis of the student's interests but on how well the advisor and student work together. In addition, the DGS should help in the transition from course work to independent research by discussing alternative advising structures, such as thesis committees, which allow graduate students to work with scholars other than their advisor. The DGS should utilize continuing graduate students as resources for new students engaged in the process of selecting a thesis advisor.³

3. Thesis advisors, thesis committee members and DGS's have the ultimate responsibility to ensure that students receive adequate advising. Both the DGS and the chair have the responsibility of identifying any faculty members who may not be adequately performing these duties and take the necessary steps to ensure that their students receive the advice and feedback which they require.

4. Departments and programs must provide confidential mechanisms to address issues regarding advising at every stage in the Ph.D. program. Incoming graduate students should be made aware of such mechanisms early in their programs.

B. Student Progress

1. An expected normal time to degree must be specified for each graduate program, and the program requirements should be such that they can be reasonably completed within that time. Realistic and reasonable calculations should take into account time allotted for course work, teaching, preparation for general exams and other (e.g., additional research languages) requirements, preparation of publications and/or conference presentations, preparations of the thesis prospectus and the thesis itself. The total amount of work expected from any graduate student should be equivalent to that of a full-time job, e.g., no more than 40 hours per week in a lab.⁴

2. Like their faculty colleagues, graduate students have many obligations both within and without the University community that extend beyond their immediate research and work. Mentors and advisors should recognized the importance of such activities (proctor/tutorships, participation in the University committees, involvement in student organizations, and athletic activities, etc.) not only for professional development but also for the mental and physical well-being of their students. Involvement in community-related activities should not be looked upon as detrimental to the graduate student's work and career. Faculty expectations of work by graduate students should also take into account pregnancy, the need to care for small children, health problems and/or personal/family difficulties. Students may take leaves of absence for such reasons after informing their advisor and department and with the approval of the Dean's Office, and these leaves should not be counted towards the student's time to degree.

3. Departments must have in place clearly communicated procedures for reviewing student progress on a regular (preferably annual) basis. Such reviews should include an assessment of the progress made by the student during the period under review as well as careful planning for the following review period. These regular evaluations should also include direct input from the student. Evaluations of student progress and any decisions made by departments based on such evaluations must be communicated in writing to the student in a timely fashion.

4. In cases wherein an evaluation results in an administrative decision (e.g., academic probation), mechanisms must be in place through which students may appeal the outcome of formal evaluations that they believe do not accurately reflect their progress or are the result of unreasonable expectations. The mechanisms for such appeals should be developed in all departments through discussions between the faculty and the students.

5. Students should have the opportunity to correct deficiencies in their performance once informed of them. Any intent to terminate a student's degree candidacy for academic reasons must be preceded by at least one semester's advance notice, specifying reasonable goals to be achieved to avoid termination of candidacy. Decisions on the termination of degree candidacy for academic reasons are made by the department, upon consultation with the Dean of the Graduate School, and can be appealed by a student to the Administrative Board of the Graduate School.

C. Professional Development

1. Faculty should help create awareness of the many different career options, both academic and non academic, available to graduate students. Faculty should be aware that many students may wish to follow non-academic career paths and they should aid and support those students to the best of their abilities. Those students who express interest in non-academic careers should not experience loss of concern or interest by the advisor or department.

2. Departments should be proactively involved in the professional training of graduate students. Programs should be developed for newer students which help them become involved in professional associations, assist them in the preparation of conference presentations and papers, and provide them with funding for said participation.⁵

3. Graduate student participation in department administration provides useful professional preparation for graduate students and recognizes graduate students as vital members of their departments. Departments should establish mechanisms which involve graduate students in the development of the intellectual life of their departments. Graduate students are crucial to the continued intellectual vitality of departments and programs and therefore should have input into matters of program structure, academic direction, etc.⁶

1. To highlight the importance of mentoring and advising and to recognize those faculty members who excel as mentors, the First Annual GSC Excellence in Mentoring Awards will be announced in April 1999. These awards will recognize faculty members who exemplify the qualities of a good mentor.

2. Each department should have some sort of an orientation during which first-year students can meet their DGS and should be given a written explanation of what is to be expected from them and what advising mechanisms exist to help them. Departments should also hold a meeting at the beginning of the year for the faculty and students to provide them with information about the program's direction in the future, as well as providing an opportunity for students to ask questions and voice concerns.

3. Informal contact between faculty and students as well as among students should be encouraged. For example, several departments arrange parties at the beginning of the year wherein students and faculty can interact in a more relaxed atmosphere.

4. These expectations and requirements should be given, in writing, to every entering student. Students should also be informed, in writing, of the specific actions which could cause academic probation or dismissal.

5. For example, several different departments sponsor student-run conferences each year.

6. This already happens in some departments in the Faculty. In most instances, graduate students are fully engaged in discussion of program structure, faculty recruitment, etc. In departments that have graduate student representatives, representatives do not attend meetings (or portions of meetings) which deal with review of student progress, disciplinary actions or admissions.