Reference no: EM132821612

A graduate student has made an appointment to see you to talk confidentially about a problem with the student's adviser.

Before the student comes in, you pulled the graduate records file and review it. You note that the student is on academic probation, an extremely unusual situation in your department. You also see notes in the file indicating that the student had been to see the department chair and your predecessor as graduate program director with concerns about several different faculty members. In every case, the student declined to file a formal complaint even when it might have been warranted, and seemed just to want to vent and talk to someone. You see in the file that the student's adviser is Randall Plottner.

Plottner is quite prominent in your discipline, publishes prolifically and is also frequently quoted as an expert in the popular press like the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal. Because he's a nationally recognized expert, you know that Plottner was the subject of a major retention effort by the university last year, when he was offered a prestigious chair by an Ivy League university. This was the subject of at least one news story and you're guessing that he got a pretty big raise to stay. (Plus, you know that his elderly mother lives about 30 minutes away, and he was reluctant to move away from here.)

You also know that Plottner is extremely disorganized, usually late with whatever he does, and that things fall through the cracks with some regularity. Plottner has a reputation of not being a nice man and most people in the department (in fact, anyone who's worked closely with him) dislike him intensely.

You want to help the student make the best possible decision taking into account possible outcomes based on both the student's history and Plottner's reputation.

(Note: assume that anything the student says is in writing and has brought along to show you is real and authentic.)

Please answer ALL the questions:

1) How do the grad adviser's preconceived notions about the student's ability or lack thereof affect the situation? What can be done about this kind of preconception and how it affects interactions?

2) What must someone do to be a co-author of a research article? The amount of effort alone does not determine whether someone should be listed as a coauthor of an article.

3) What should the adviser do next; what are the adviser's responsibilities, if any?

4) What's likely to happen if the adviser takes those steps?

5) Should the student proceed with a complaint or just let this drop? What is likely in either scenario?

6) Is this something that the grad studies adviser can let drop? Is proceeding entirely up to the student?