publications - What to do when a thesis adviser refuses to recommend me?

After I completed my PhD program, during which I published one refereed paper, I applied for several academic positions. For a while, my two main thesis advisers agreed to write letters of recommendation, but after a few couple of years, one of them told me he would no longer recommend me because I had not published enough. He even admitted that it was not his job to judge my publication record -- potential employers could do that -- but until I published again, he wouldn't recommend me.

I do admit that I should have published more during my PhD program, but I was always under the impression that my publishing would begin after I had got a relevant job. During the period between graduation and being refused a recommendation, I'd been a consultant, a college teacher and unemployed. I could have published on my own but, after the delay, I felt hindered by being unemployed and rather "burned out" after the thesis writing process. Catch-22? Even more ironic is the fact that I had asked my thesis advisers if I could submit my thesis in the form of a series of published papers (this was allowed under the rules), instead of as an unpublished monograph, and both said no!

Don't thesis advisers have a duty to both encourage candidates to publish and to recommend them for academic positions? At the same time, is it right that universities expect job applicants to already have publications before they arrive? What could I have done, other than publish as an independent after the fact? It is hard not to feel very bitter about the whole PhD process.

Addendum Since it was not yet listed, I add How to handle not having my PhD advisor as a reference? is a related question.

Answer

This is a tricky situation, and it's hard to interpret it without more information. Thesis advisors certainly have an obligation to help their former students within reason and to recommend them for appropriate positions. An advisor who gives up too quickly on a student is an unsupportive jerk at best (and it's easy to think of much worse descriptions). On the other hand, nobody has an obligation to recommend a candidate they cannot honestly support. Telling someone that is really awkward, especially when it's their own student, but the alternatives are writing a dishonest letter or writing a letter that undermines the candidate's chances, neither of which is any better.

Based on what you've written, there's no way of telling whether your advisor is a jerk or the two of you are just caught in an awkward situation. I'd recommend asking your advisor some key questions:

1. 
   

   Are there other positions you could apply for that might be a better fit for your background and accomplishments so far?

   
   
   


2. 
   

   Based on your unpublished work, how could you prepare a good paper as quickly and efficiently as possible?

   
   

Hopefully you'll get encouraging and useful answers. If you and your advisor can work out a plan that satisfies both of you, then that's great. If not, you may have to give up on your advisor and apply with letters from other people. That's far from ideal (the first thing everyone will ask is why your advisor didn't write a letter), but it can work if you get strong enough letters.

Of course publishing would help with getting strong letters. Ultimately, I'd bet that publishing another paper or two is in your best interests, regardless of the situation with your advisor. I can understand that it's upsetting to feel forced into publishing on your own, with no job in your field and no guarantee of getting one in the future. However, it's probably a worthwhile investment of your time, and it's a valuable contribution to the academic community in any case (so regardless of what happens, it's something you can be proud of).