Policy note. This handbook is a living document and does not replace official NMSU, College of Engineering, Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering, Graduate School, funding-agency, immigration, employment, or university policies. When conflicts arise, official policies and written funding/appointment letters take precedence.
Overview
The advisor is an academic and professional mentor, not a boss or supervisor. Graduate students do not work for the advisor; they work with the advisor on shared scientific goals.
The advisor is committed to:
- providing guidance on research, coursework, and professional development;
- working proactively with students and the department to identify and support stable funding pathways, subject to university policies, assistantship availability, fellowship opportunities, and project funding; and
- helping students prepare for and pursue post-PhD opportunities.
This document outlines how the Abeshu Hydrosystems Intelligence Lab operates. It is not exhaustive and will evolve as the lab grows. Students are encouraged to ask questions about anything that is unclear.
Research progress is a shared responsibility. I will help students define problems, interpret results, navigate professional norms, and find support. Students are not expected to solve every problem alone, but they are expected to communicate challenges early, document attempts, and participate actively in finding a path forward.
Meetings
Frequency
Students should generally expect a weekly individual meeting at a regularly scheduled time. As students progress, the cadence may shift to a more flexible schedule by mutual agreement, project stage, and mentoring needs.
Format
Meetings are typically in person when both parties are on campus, and by video call otherwise. Students should come with an agenda, an update on progress since the last meeting, and questions or decisions they need input on. A useful meeting note includes what changed, what is blocked, what decision is needed, and what will happen next.
Lab meetings
Lab members are generally expected to attend regular Abeshu Hydrosystems Intelligence Lab meetings, where members present research progress, discuss papers, share technical lessons, and prepare for upcoming professional activities. The cadence may change as the lab grows.
Communication Norms
Routine email or chat messages should usually receive a response within 1-2 business days. This is a shared expectation for both advisor and students, recognizing that teaching, travel, field work, deadlines, illness, and caregiving can affect response time.
Urgent issues should be clearly marked as urgent and, when appropriate, communicated through a more direct channel. Urgent issues include safety concerns, time-sensitive university or funding deadlines, major computing or data-loss problems, serious interpersonal concerns, and situations that could affect visa, payroll, appointment, or degree progress.
When decisions are made in meetings, students should briefly document them in a meeting note, project README, issue tracker, or shared document. If expectations are unclear or if there is disagreement about a scientific or professional decision, raise it directly and early. Clarifying a disagreement is part of research, not a failure.
Degree Progress
Progress is monitored through:
- ongoing advisor-student discussions;
- semester or annual planning conversations;
- required reviews in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering;
- committee meetings after committee formation;
- the Qualifying Exam, the Dissertation Proposal Defense, and the Final Defense.
Students are encouraged to refer to the Abeshu Hydrosystems Intelligence Lab PhD Progress Rubric as a guide for stage-by-stage development across research, teaching, coursework, and professional growth. The rubric is not a contract or a guaranteed timeline; progress expectations should be adjusted based on program requirements, project needs, funding context, coursework, and student goals.
Dissertation Committee
The dissertation committee is typically formed early in the PhD program, subject to program requirements. Students should consult closely with the advisor on committee composition because the advisor may have institutional context that is valuable for this decision.
Committee meetings should occur at least as often as required by the program, and more often when useful. These meetings can discuss research progress, plans, coursework, and professional goals. The committee also conducts formal exams and defenses according to official program rules.
Time Off, Vacation, and Work Hours
Graduate students are independent adults responsible for managing their own time. Students are expected to commit the time and effort needed to make research progress, including any responsibilities tied to their assistantship, fellowship, project, coursework, or degree program. Within that, students should find the schedule and routine that works best for them.
Vacation, holidays, and personal time are encouraged and should follow applicable university, appointment, and funding-source policies. It is courteous to inform the advisor of planned absences. Coordination becomes important when manuscripts are under review at journals, since journal deadlines can appear unexpectedly.
Coursework
Students are expected to consult with the advisor about course selection. Backgrounds and career goals vary, so the right courses differ for each student. The dissertation committee may also recommend or require specific courses, and the advisor will help students interpret those recommendations alongside official program requirements. The final course plan must satisfy university and program rules.
Writing and Feedback
Writing is part of the research process, not a final cleanup step. Students are encouraged to share drafts early and often, beginning at very early stages and continuing through journal submission. Drafts are working documents, not tests of worth.
- Early drafts will receive structural feedback (sections, paragraphs, framing).
- Once structure is solid, drafts will receive detailed line-level feedback.
- Detailed feedback is time-intensive (about 15 minutes per page; about 8 hours for a full manuscript). Students should refine their prose with each iteration.
- Students should not send drafts to co-authors until there is mutual agreement with the advisor on the version to circulate.
- Advisor feedback may be critical, but it should be constructive, specific, and focused on improving the work. Revision is normal.
Letters of Recommendation
For the first letter at a given career stage (graduate fellowship, postdoc, faculty position), please give at least four weeks notice when possible. If something arises on a shorter timeline, ask anyway; flexibility is possible.
For subsequent letters at the same career stage, one week notice is sufficient (more is appreciated).
When requesting a letter, provide:
- the position or fellowship description;
- submission deadline and method;
- your most recent CV;
- a short note on what you would like emphasized.
Funding and Fellowships
The lab will work with students, the department, and available funding sources to support stable funding pathways through assistantships, fellowships, and project support, subject to university policies and funding availability. Because grants are usually shorter than the PhD timeline, the exact mix of funding sources may evolve through a student’s time in the program. Students should expect to be involved in this process through fellowship applications, assistantship planning, and, when appropriate, proposal development.
Students are encouraged to apply for relevant external fellowships when eligible (for example: NSF GRFP, NASA FINESST, DOE Computational Science Graduate Fellowship, and Ford Foundation Fellowship). Beyond financial support, the application process itself is professionally valuable.
Conference Travel and Additional Funds
When funding permits, I will prioritize supporting students to present their work at appropriate conferences and professional meetings. Students should apply for available travel awards when appropriate, including professional-society, conference, department, college, and university-level opportunities.
Presentations
Presentation is a core part of scientific work and professional development. Students should plan to present in settings such as:
- Abeshu Hydrosystems Intelligence Lab meetings;
- NMSU CEE seminars and the IAAM seminar series;
- annual NMSU Graduate Research Symposium;
- AGU Fall Meeting and other field-specific conferences (CUAHSI Biennial, AMS, NeurIPS climate workshops, and related venues), when project stage and funding allow.
Publications and Authorship
Students are encouraged to develop dissertation chapters toward peer-reviewed publication as each chapter matures. Dissertations in the Abeshu Hydrosystems Intelligence Lab will typically consist of an overarching introduction and conclusion, plus a set of original research chapters, with publication status depending on project scope, committee guidance, student goals, and disciplinary norms.
Authorship will follow contribution, intellectual ownership, and disciplinary norms. We will discuss authorship early and revisit it as projects evolve. First authorship is typically associated with leading the framing, analysis, writing, and revision of a manuscript, but final authorship order will be discussed openly and fairly based on actual contributions.
The advisor will often be a co-author on dissertation chapters when contributing substantially to framing, analysis, interpretation, writing, revision, funding, or supervision. Other co-authors will be added per standard authorship practices in hydrology, Earth system science, engineering, and machine learning. When in doubt, raise authorship questions early.
Ready to Graduate
The PhD signifies the capability to independently initiate, conduct, document, and defend original scholarship. Graduation is determined primarily by research maturity, along with preparation for professional goals. Funding constraints and post-PhD opportunities also factor into the conversation.
In the Abeshu Hydrosystems Intelligence Lab, a common goal by defense is that at least one chapter is published or in press, at least one additional chapter is submitted or close to submission, and the remaining chapters are in advanced form. This is a guide, not a rigid rule; expectations should be discussed with the dissertation committee and adjusted based on project, funding, coursework, and student goals.
The final decision on graduation timing rests with the dissertation committee.
Other People You Should Consult
It is critical to have multiple mentors and intellectual influences. Beyond the advisor, students are encouraged to build mentoring relationships with:
- members of the dissertation committee;
- other CEE and IAAM faculty;
- faculty at other NMSU colleges (Engineering, Arts and Sciences, ACES);
- external collaborators at PNNL, UH, and partner institutions;
- postdocs and senior students within the lab, when present;
- members of the broader scientific community (AGU, CUAHSI, Earth Science Women’s Network, BlackInGeo, Latinx in STEM, and related communities).
Institutional resources include departmental graduate advisors, program directors, department leadership, the Graduate School, ombud resources, and other official university support structures.
Topics Beyond Research
Students are welcome to discuss any topic they find appropriate: teaching opportunities, career planning, work-life balance, personal challenges, immigration and visa issues, family considerations, and anything else relevant to their well-being and growth.
Raising Concerns
If a student feels stuck, unsupported, confused about expectations, or uncomfortable with a lab dynamic, I encourage them to raise the issue early. Concerns can be raised in a one-on-one meeting, by email, or through another trusted channel. When needed, students may also consult departmental graduate advisors, program directors, ombud resources, or other official university support structures.
Raising a concern is not disloyal and should not be treated as a problem in itself. The goal is to clarify expectations, repair misunderstandings when possible, and protect a respectful research environment.
Respectful Community
All members of the Abeshu Hydrosystems Intelligence Lab are expected to adhere to NMSU standards of conduct and to treat advisors, peers, collaborators, and community partners with respect. The lab should be a place where high standards and kindness coexist. Harassment, discrimination, retaliation, and behavior that undermines the dignity of any community member are not tolerated and should be addressed through appropriate university policies, resources, and reporting channels.
Acknowledgment: This document draws structural inspiration from the publicly shared graduate advising materials of Prof. Noah Diffenbaugh (Stanford). Content has been substantially adapted for the Abeshu Hydrosystems Intelligence Lab at NMSU.