PhD Supervision

Doctoral candidates and supervisors at ISOS commit to the co-supervision with regular advisory committee meetings. This format is not without controversies so we asked advisors (replies = 76) and doctoral candidates (replies = 60) for their opinion.


Feel free leave your own thoughts on the topic here.

A lot of valuable information is lost by putting things into plain numbers and percentages.
We received 21 individual feedbacks from supervisors and 9 comments from PhD candidates., read here examples from individual feedbacks:

“Supervisors should be reminded that supervising is not only talking about results and papers. It is also about giving a helping hand, showing interest in the PhD candidates work, giving advices and open doors for the candidate, like introducing him/her to important people in the field of research or giving an overview about upcoming conferences and workshops or other meetings.”

PhD candidate


“Generally the dependency of the PhD candidates to the main supervisor in Germany is too strong. Advisory Comittee meetings might mediate this to some extent. The ultimate solution, however, would be to decouple supervision from evaluating the thesis at the end, as it is the case in most other countries. […]”


“I totally agree about having an advisory committee, because it is needed to have a direct feedback from supervisors. Having more than one supervisor is very positive, because it can add different point of views to the formation of a PhD student, in addition to the experience that himself may absorb in the years of development of his studies.  Finally, in the case of conflict between students and supervisor, it is the best scenario to successfully solve the issues.”

PhD candidate


“I like the semi-formalized way of ISOS where PhD students gain benefits when they stick to their time schedule of meetings and protocols. It naturally encourages. […]”



Nina Bergmann ISOS Tel.: 49 431 880-4837



register | forgot password?