Professional Development Office of the Vice Provost for Graduate Students and Postdoctoral Scholars

Mentoring and Reporting

Mentoring: The Graduate Student-Faculty Relationship

One of the most important parts of the graduate student experience is the mentoring they receive from their major professor, as well as the numerous other individuals that can positively impact them. Purdue University wants every graduate student to have a rich and meaningful graduate experience. For that to happen, students need effective mentors. This page provides Purdue University’s guidelines for graduate student mentoring and advising. Additionally, the section at the bottom of the page provide numerous links for faculty and students to learn more about effective mentoring practices and mentoring relationships.

Purdue University Guiding Principles for Mentoring

As explained in the Guidelines for Graduate Student Mentoring and Advising:

A good student-advisor relationship is an important ingredient in helping students to be productive in their research and requires establishing reasonable expectations. While it is difficult to define “reasonable expectations” in a broad sense, the following principles and practices can be helpful in achieving a positive climate for discovery in which graduate students can thrive.

  1. Major professors should take care in not overburdening their graduate students: there should be realistic expectations, recognizing that students have the right to a personal and social life outside of work and time off, periodically, to rest and relax. Major professors should avoid working conditions that preclude their students from having a manageable work-life balance, as this is not in the best interest of Purdue’s graduate students.
  2. The best major professors are understanding, supportive, and empowering. They provide enough guidance to allow students to explore and discover without over directing or micromanaging. Students should be encouraged by their major professors to interact with their advisory and examining committees, as these committee members can provide multiple perspectives that can be beneficial. They should also encourage other types of mentoring relationships where appropriate.
  3. The best major professors put their students first amid competing priorities.
  4. Students should be given opportunities to attend and participate in professional development activities, as these are important to prepare them for the competitive job market.
  5. Projects in which faculty members involve students should be appropriate and consistent with providing a valuable educational, work or research experience.
  6. There should be clear expectations and differentiation of the work related to the assistantship duties versus work toward the graduate degree.

What are Detrimental Research Practices (DRPs)?

Historically, detrimental research practices were simply thought of as questionable practices, ones that may skirt the line demarking ethical behavior but that do not rise to the level of research misconduct. However, as of 2017, the National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine defined more fully what are considered DRPs. In Fostering Integrity in Research, the NASEM states:

This committee believes that many of the practices that up to now have been considered questionable research practices, as well as damaging behaviors by research institutions, sponsors, or journals, should be considered detrimental research practices (DRPs). Researchers, research institutions, research sponsors, journals, and societies should discourage and in some cases take corrective actions in response to DRPs.

The NASEM provides a list of examples of DRPs:

  • “Detrimental authorship practices that may not be considered misconduct, such as honorary authorship, demanding authorship in return for access to previously collected data or materials, or denying authorship to those who deserve to be designated as authors;
  • Not retaining or making data, code, or other information/materials underlying research results available as specified in institutional or sponsor policies, or standard practices in the field;
  • Neglectful or exploitative supervision in research;
  • Misleading statistical analysis that falls short of falsification;
  • Inadequate institutional policies, procedures, or capacity to foster research integrity and address research misconduct allegations, and deficient implementation of policies and procedures; and
  • Abusive or irresponsible publication practices by journal editors and peer reviewers.”

A report of potential DRP can be submitted via any means of communication to the Purdue Research Integrity Officer, Office of Graduate Assistance (OGA), or via the Purdue Hotline using the links below:

More information on detrimental research practices is available.

Additional Materials on Graduate Mentoring