Credit, rights and responsibilities of dissertation advisor
In a departure from the guidelines of a graduate program's guidelines, a doctoral student requests a summer defense within a few weeks of presenting her advisor with a first draft at the end of June. The student had intended to defend in the fall, apparently changed her mind and now wanted a defense the 1st week of August. Since committee members are entitled to 2 weeks to read the document, the manuscript had to be ready for circulation two weeks after placing it in the advisor's mailbox. The advisor, who had supervised and provided support for all aspects of the program for over a year, was out of town when the student deposited the first draft in her home mailbox and sent an email to the advisor saying that she would set a date and defend if she did not hear from the advisor in a two week period. Upon arriving back in town, the advisor agreed to provide feedback but would not approve a defense until the start of fall semester, two weeks after the student's desired date. The student replied that she was sorry the advisor could not be present at the defense. Without consulting the advisor, the Director of the graduate program who was not involved in the research or on the committee, agreed to Chair the defense. After the defense, the student wrote a note requesting to join the lab of the Director and filled out new paper work with the Director's name instead of that of the advisor. In Dissertation Abstracts, the Director is listed as the Advisor/Chair of the study.
Do students have the right to replace their advisor on the day of the dissertation defense if their own advisor did not agree to the defense date?
Since advising duties and study authorship impact on advancement in the field, including promotions and tenure, did the Director violate any ethical standards by allowing the student to defend, disregarding the current advisor and allowing her (the Director's) name to be listed as the Chair/Advisor in Dissertation year Abstracts?
Have the advisor's colleagues and/or university officials violated any ethical standards by failing to intervene on behalf of the original advisor despite being fully informed of the situation?