The following statements codify what you and I should expect of one another while in a mentor-mentee relationship. The source of many of these policies comes from my interpretation of the Adil E. Shamoo and David B. Resnik’s Responsible Conduct of Research (3rd edition, Oxford University Press, 2015).
Supervision location and duration. I agree to serve as your thesis adviser contingent that you have access to ECU’s library and computing resources. If at any stage you choose to leave Greenville and are not living at a location that allows your easy return (i.e., within 2-3 hours of Greenville), you will lose efficient access to these assets. Students who lack efficient access to ECU library and computer assets complicate the advisee-adviser relationship (advising quality diminishes) and they tend not to finish their thesis. Access to resources is critical for thesis writing success. Departing the campus permanently for personal or professional reasons jeopardizes your progress. Hence, I agree to supervise your thesis contingent upon your residence within a two-hour drive of campus, and for a duration of up to three years from the date we started working on your thesis prospectus. If you exceed this time, you will have to find a new adviser.
Prospectus/chapter/thesis reading. I will put in as much effort on your thesis as you do. Work hard on writing, and I will supply prompt turnaround times on writing. The best way to do this is to agree to deadlines with me and stick to them. I understand that sometimes you will need to ask for deadline extensions – please feel free to ask for an extension (in advance). Edits on written drafts may take 3-4 weeks per submission. I will try my best to turnaround written drafts within 1-week, but only if you show a recurrent commitment to submitting work by deadlines and engage in thoughtful proof-reading where you provide attention to detail. If you need tips for effective research, writing, and proof-reading, I can provide this advice. Remember that I am your adviser, and not your copyeditor — if your writing does not improve between drafts, I will likely recommend you seek aid from the university writing center, or other professional support. If at any stage, I become unresponsive to returning edited work (i.e., I recurrently take much longer than 4-weeks/submission), please talk to me. If I continue to have a slow turnaround time, please talk to the chair of the History Department. If this does not help the situation, you are well within your rights to find another adviser and thesis topic.
Data Management. Because I have many projects and advisees, data management can be difficult. For this reason, please consider the following:
- When you submit work, please ensure that the filename includes, 1) your name, 2) a description of the content, 3) a date of submission. This will help me keep track of file versions. I will return edited work with 1) a modified date, and 2) “NR_edits” to the filename (denoting it is a document being returned).
- When you look to create or share files or folders via applications like Dropbox, please follow some sort of similar file naming protocol. For example, if you share a folder named “Draft” with me, I will have to decline — as I invariably have no way of identifying where the draft comes from (or who it belongs to). It is requested that ALL project folders exist as subfolders within a shared “[your surname] & Richards” folder I have set up.
Grant writing. For an array of reasons, students usually cannot independently apply for most grant schemes (there are a few exceptions). Grant writing is a complicated process that takes up significant amounts of faculty time – not only in the preparation stage, but also due to administrative duties incurred with a grant award. In some cases, a professor must also fill out annual reports many years after a project’s successful completion. Nevertheless, I will support new grant applications for students who are working on projects affiliated with my research activities (i.e., connected with my research designs), or who have made progress in completing their thesis prospectus on time. Where there is a grant initiative that awards to individuals (i.e., does not have to go through the ECU processes – such as the National Geographic Young Explorers scheme), my expectation is that you will have communicated to me your desire to apply for funds beforehand (remembering that there is a difference between a project and a thesis project), and have a research idea. The critical thing with all grant applications is that I will only support projects with cogent question-driven research designs that are logistically possible. Going forward with grant-writing activities will rely on a range of factors such as, a) availability of a suitable grant scheme, b) estimated cost of the project, c) thesis prospectus progress, as well as my current grant administrative load and work schedule. Grants are “hit or miss” and most applications are unsuccessful. If a project relies on a grant, and is unsuccessful, you and I should have devised a “Plan B” for completion (e.g., a “no field work” possibility). If a grant is unsuccessful, please do not assume that we can apply again, or make more submissions elsewhere. In some cases, “in kind” aid can be coordinated, but might require you to spend your own money to complete research. If at any stage you would like to talk about finding grant-funding for your thesis project, please feel free to discuss this with me.
Defenses: There will be no defenses during summer sessions. Professors in the Program in Maritime Studies are 9-month employees (i.e., employed August-May) and are usually engaged in summer field schools or off-campus (and sometimes remote) research and field work during summer. In some cases, I may review thesis chapters during the summer, but it is at my discretion (and will likely take longer than 4-weeks). Please take the thesis defense process seriously. Irrespective of any financial or personal issues, students will under no circumstances be allowed to have their defense until the thesis director (me), and thesis committee considers them ready. It is up to the student to ensure that members of their committee have adequate lead time (3-4 weeks) to thoroughly review drafts or manuscripts, and to ensure that completion is done before academic deadlines. If you plan to defend in a given semester you must plan to have your complete, polished thesis draft on my desk by the beginning of that semester – this is the only way you can ensure, a) multiple edits by your adviser (weeks), b) edits by your committee members (weeks), c) time to make edits (weeks), and d) the week-long period your manuscript must be available for open review and still leave time to schedule four professor to meet in the same room.
Publication and co-publication. Your thesis is primarily your intellectual effort. There is absolutely no circumstance whereby I will look to publish your work under my name (this is unethical), and I do not assume a right to co-publish your research. Co-authorship of published work involving an adviser and an advisee should occur only on a negotiated basis. While an adviser may spend considerable effort in helping a student gain an approach and method for undertaking research, I consider it a part of my job that does not culminate in my expectation of co-authorship. Co-publication appearing from thesis research should only occur if all parties have, a) designed the research, b) undertaken data collection, c) analyzed data, and, d) have written text, and can defend the content. Should you or I wish to co-publish from thesis research, this will occur only when the above conditions have been proven, and where the adviser has made “special independent effort” (e.g., involving extensive investment of time in grant work or special data collection or analysis skills) on the project. This will only occur through a conversation started by adviser or advisee. In all cases, co-publication from thesis research should culminate in the student serving as first (and corresponding) author. I wish to support the publication of your work. This can all be framed in the course of a conversation, and a willingness to accept constructive criticism.
Recommendations for Jobs, Internships, & Ph.D. Applications. I agree to write recommendations for internships and fellowships for current students based on my honest appraisal of the skills of the individual student, and their suitability for the initiative they are applying for. I will not write recommendations for students who have been unable to make deadlines, or who have not made progress on thesis research promptly (defined as deadlines agreed to between adviser and student).
Writing recommendations for jobs and internships takes a long time — and I usually have multiple requests from students for multiple internships at one time. As a rule, I will not write a recommendation for an archaeological job posting (i.e., paid employment) unless a student has an MA in hand (or at least has a good manuscript and a scheduled defense). I will make an exception in cases where students have sent me a complete thesis manuscript to my satisfaction that is ready to go to committee, and whom I believe will defend soon. I will write recommendations for Ph.D. programs based upon my assessment of the suitability of the student for doctoral research (gauged through thesis writing and fieldwork experience) for students who have given a complete thesis manuscript to my satisfaction that is ready to go to committee, and whom I believe will defend soon.
I will not write a recommendation for a job, internship, or Ph.D. application for any student who has not formally asked me to do so via phone call or email. There are three reasons for this:
- I need to manage my time, and it is your obligation to be respectful of my time (and sometimes I don’t have time to fulfill your request),
- You need to manage your time, and it is my obligation to be aware (and respectful) of your time — if you are my advisee, my most important job is to have you graduate — I will not support extended periods of time away from thesis research and writing, and,
- Not all jobs, internships or Ph.D. programs match the student — and my recommendation is my opinion. Sometimes my opinion is that “student x” is not matched to “opportunity y.”
Good mentorship is based on clear communication and good advice. I am owed courtesy communication in each instance you make an application and want my assistance. Hence, if requests arrive in digital or printed form without previous advisement to me, I will delete or trash the request or paperwork without explanation. This includes Federal employment forms. The only exception to this rule is when I inform you that I am willing to write recommendations for certain opportunities without the need for recurrent requests (i.e., in the case of exceptional students who have finished their course of study). If you follow this basic outline and give me a lot of time to consider and complete your request, you will either end up with a good recommendation from me or find someone else who can help you.