The value of thesis advisers.

Abstract

It appears that for us, perhaps more than for any other species, education, or the communication of factual information as well as of instructions on how to behave in novel situations, is so essential that without it, we would simply not survive. We all know, of course, that the quality of education differs for each young person, with some having the chance of being lifted up perhaps even above their natural gifts, and others being stifled early in their lives, be it for reasons of economy, access, or cultural tradition. Education is certainly of utmost importance for young scientists, a group that will lead the quest for future knowledge and progress. For many of us, the thesis adviser was our single most important educator. Thesis advisers give us the first deeper insights into how to use our creativity and to approach a scientific question rationally and, perhaps even more importantly, into the greater problem of which types of questions we should ask. Ideally, they also teach us to recognize the many hidden assumptions that can make us blind to alternative views, and so they open our minds to the unknown. And they may have influenced us most profoundly if they have lit the fire of curiosity in us so that we never lose the enthusiasm for this demanding enterprise called science. But how does a budding scientist select the most appropriate adviser? Many factors may play a role in this decision, including interest in the questions being pursued in the laboratory, fit with the approach to mentoring and running a laboratory, and the success of past trainees. For some of us, the decision might have been reached after careful evaluation, with input from people with more experience, for others it might have been the luck of the draw or limited by resources. In making this decision, it may not be unwise to also consider who educated our advisers. Education is a continuum, and what our advisers have been taught with respect to philosophy of science, such as a preference for big versus small science, or for following the trendy versus persistence with core problems, may again shape the thinking of their students. The choice is often not an easy one, but we hope that the current—and the future—readers of these pages will have much satisfaction in being taught and in teaching. After all, ‘teaching is learning twice’, as the French essayist Joseph Joubert once remarked.