Supervisors are like coffee…. See why!

By Roula Inglesi-Lotz

As a student, I thought the most important element towards completion of a PhD is… Who else? The student. Only after wearing the famous red cape at my PhD graduation, did I started realising how much a supervisor is a “make it or break it” factor. No, it is not because nowadays I play for the other side! It’s mostly due to discussions with other doctorate holders or PhD students. I found out that my progress and excitement for my PhD was highly due to my supervisor (thank you Prof James Blignaut!); others also identified mentorship as the reason for completing their PhD fast, or slow, or enjoying the process (from a 2017 postgraduate experience survey).

From the other side of the field now, we heard as academics many times the statement, “We are the lecturers or supervisors we had.” I find more inspiring, “We strive to be the lecturers or supervisors we always wanted.” For a few years now, hence, I have been wondering what type of a supervisor I am and what my style is. I compared myself with my supervisors, my experienced colleagues, and I analysed my personality to understand better. Within this introspection and analysis, I concluded that supervisors are like coffee… Let me explain myself.

They come in different varieties.

If you thought, that all supervisors are the same, you will be in for a surprise. Supervisors are human beings (surprise?!?!?!) and they come with their own experiences background and beliefs. The Ethiopian coffee blend is not the same as the Kenyan, for example. One is not superior to the other; they are all different. Do you remember the last time in your life that you became obsessed with drinking that special macchiato from a specific shop EVERY SINGLE DAY for months because you loved it and you swore that is the best for you, and then you did not want to even see it? That is sometimes the case with supervisory (and lecturing) styles too – you might swear that this one is the ultimate for you until you try another one.

They can be stronger, weaker or even decaf.

Continuing within the concept of diversity, the strength of the coffee or the choice of decaf can also be linked to supervisors. Some are definitely stronger and more disciplined. They expect the students to work autonomously and take criticism and upsets in the research process with equal strength. The “espressos” plan in advance, work on schedules and are not flexible. They can work well with students that are equally structured, but might restrict a free spirit. The “decafs” on the other side tend to be more relaxed, give more freedom both in context and in time, and do not check on progress regularly.

Same coffee, different preferences (milk or sugar)

Most academics have established through the years their own supervisor personas (variety of coffee and strength of the blend). BUT, what helps tremendously is the adaptability of the coffee to the consumer’s personal preferences: sugar or not, and how much, brown or white sugar, or milk, maybe cremora? In essence, the supervisor has some core characteristics, but they do adjust (somewhat) to the needs and particular conditions of the student. When the student is an introvert and likes to work independently, the supervisor will not assist much if he/ she checks the progress frequently; on the other side, a student might need a constant support both academically and personally (add some sugar and milk extra, please).

 They get bitter if you do not stir.

Self-explanatory characteristic of the metaphor, right? Disappearing for months and then trying to pick up where you left it might create uneasiness with your supervisor (same from the other side, of course). Frequent communication and collaboration is essential in the relationship supervisor- student. “Like a marriage”, says Darce Gillie, from the University of Sheffield, a supervisor-PhD student relationship needs “honest communication, trust, understanding, shared goals, and the ability to compromise”.

If you don’t have one, you get headaches.

From the coffee-side, the doctors might diagnose caffeine addiction, while from doctoral studies perspective; there is absolutely no way to complete a PhD without a supervisor, or with an absent one. If the student knew everything in advance or had confidence that can surpass all the uphills of research, then why do a PhD? Ready-made academic! Some will argue here that their supervisor was mostly absent from the process and hence, no particular contribution should be attributed to them. I have one thing to tell them: the days I do not drink coffee, I drink tea or water, meaning some way or another, we all had a mentor whose experience, advice, and knowledge contributed to our PhD research.

Choosing coffee is of course much easier than choosing a supervisor.

Firstly, it is the start of a long-term relationship and secondly, you do not know someone until you get to work with them. If you need to choose your supervisor, the first step is to have an idea of the research topic that interests you, even broadly. Next, look for the experts in this field that are willing to supervise PhD students. If the topic interests the supervisor as well, mission accomplished. Supervisors tend to work more with students when they are also interested to answer these questions AND the extra bonus, the students learn more from informal discussions.  If you find one or two that have what you want, go see them all. You will get a better feeling of them as people, and personal chemistry plays a role. (Find your supervisor Table)

Finally, just remind yourself, a PhD journey is difficult. It has ups and downs, that is a given. As a PhD student, make sure you choose the right coffee to give you energy, excitement, inspiration, and keep you awake and focus. However, the coffee is not really, what makes you accomplish anything that day – it’s your own drive and persistence.

Dear fellow supervisors, my suggestion is not to be stiff “coffees” that leave their drinkers with the jitters. Try to be warm and boosting ones.

Let’s serve coffee with a little – or even better, over cake – to make the journey enjoyable.

coffee
source: giphy.com

FameLab: Three minutes can change more than just your life

Three minutes doesn’t seem like a lot of time. In three minutes you could answer an email or two, write a tweet or make a cup of coffee. Three minutes in a PhD isn’t much either; I can capture a couple lines of data, transfer a few cultures to fresh agar plates and share a short conversation with one of the undergrad mentorship students in our lab. In three minutes it doesn’t seem like you could accomplish a lot… except when you’re competing in FameLab.

IMG-20180510-WA0004

FameLab is an international science communication competition hosted in over 25 different countries. It gives young scientists a platform to entertain and engage audiences about STEM by deconstructing complex topics into just three minutes. This year I had the privilege of taking part in the South African FameLab finals and it was awe-inspiring!

Before one can compete in the finals, you need to make it through one of the several heats, hosted at various institutions across the country. I took part in one of 2018’s first heats at Science Forum South Africa, which was hosted at the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR). There, I was runner up after the very talented, Khavharendwe Rambau—a renewable energy scientist at the CSIR. In her talk, she used the metaphor of killing two chickens with one stone to demonstrate how her research is looking at converting waste material into energy. It was an entertaining talk; a real eye-opener and a testament to what young South African scientists are trying to accomplish to help tackle our energy and waste problems.

The FameLab semi-finals and finals were then held in Port Elizabeth, between the 7th and 9th of May, and brought together thirteen of the fourteen heat finalists—all incredible scientists with a passion to communicate their work. Before the semi-finals, we took part in a Master Class, a two day hands-on workshop with Karl Byrne—an award winning professional science communicator trainer. We were all nervous. Nearly all of us were from different institutions, working on very different things but Karl (very cleverly) had us start off by telling stories, not about our science but ourselves. This helped break the ice, calm the nerves and turned the stranger across from you into a new friend.

While FameLab is a competition, and we were there to compete, the Master Class and the build-up to the finals really became about getting to know one another, learning from one another and sharing our stories. From a physicist that loves playing rugby to a young biologist with her own company, we had a vibrant collection of people doing great things in science and outside. I have always considered myself an informed member of the scientific community but there are so many great scientists producing fantastic science, even just in the South African space, that I wasn’t even aware of. We need to change that.

I found FameLab to be a celebration of science, a bringing together of young people with a desire to share just how their good science is going to make a difference in the world. During the training and my engagement with the other semi-finalists, I felt the science barriers fade; we weren’t biologists looking to stop plant pathogens or physicists trying to develop a more efficient energy source, we were regular people with a dream of a better tomorrow. Our areas of expertise were the tools we chose to help us realize those dreams.

One of the tools we rarely use or use incorrectly (because we weren’t trained enough) is communication. Our strength as a society has been through the transfer of information. It is how we grow, evolve and adapt—our strength lies in community and the science community is no different. To grow and strengthen our community, we need to practice using our communication tools, more and more. At your own institutions, make your own FameLab stage; in the hallway before a departmental meeting, at someone else’s table during your lunch break, in a different colleagues lab, etc. and take three minutes to share your dreams (with a stranger), start a conversation, share knowledge and even build a collaboration (a friendship). When put into practice, over and over, those three minutes, put together, will change many people’s lives.

Congratulations to Emmie Chiyindiko, my friend and chemist from the University of the Free State, on winning the FameLab SA finals at the Future Earth Conference! The FameLab finals were recorded; you can watch the whole function here! Emmie gave an excellent talk that taught me more about catalysts. Good luck in the finals, I hope you blow them away! See you on YouTube soon!