The Excerpt
From Phillips, E.M. and Pugh, D.S. (2000) How to get a Phd.:A handbook for students and their supervisors 3rd Ed. Open University Press, Buckingham
All together the book has 12 chapters; becoming a postgraduate, getting into the system, the nature of the PhD qualification, how not to get a PhD, how to do research, the form of a PhD thesis, the PhD process, how to manage your supervisor, how to survive in a predominantly British, white, male, full-time academic environment, the formal procedures, how to supervise and examine and institutional responsibilities University responsibilities. So people, as you can see the title
of the chapters are so relevant. Generally, in my point of view, nothing that they have written that are new to us. However, not until we read it that we realize how important this is and how true that is.
since i am returning this book to PTSL most probably today, i will write some points for my own reminder.
in becoming a post grad, it is important to be aware that we are under our own management. for me personally this is the foremost important. well you know us the multi-tasker...i try to go to school everyday...consistency, perseverance, diligence but not necessarily academically-brilliance (in time management yes). so people, we always looked up to PhD holders differently ..Yes or no?? Self-doubt is a guaranty...whoever has not experienced self-doubt during PhD undertaking please please tells me. For newbie’s, selecting your supervisor is very very important.
I mentioned in previous posts of becoming professional researcher (or did not?? forgot). The authors spelled out the meanings in very neat way...some of it; you have something to say that your peers want to listen to; you have a command of what is happening in your subject, master the techniques that are current and know their limitations, able to communicate data and be international. A task that is quite important that I haven’t done is to read others’ PhD theses and evaluate them for the degree of originality in their research which ahs satisfied the examiners. Also, you don’t want to do these; overestimate or underestimate what is required, have a supervisor who doesn’t know what is required, losing contact with the supervisor, not having a thesis to maintain (the arguments) and taking new job before completing (again so important to the self-confessed multi-tasker).
Research is a craft skill
yes not surprising as I have mentioned it does not depends on brilliance but diligence and etc. 1st is to watch and note down the practices, skills and techniques of established good researchers including your supervisor, 2nd is to practice and gain feedback and make sure it is not the first time you exercise the techniques. Another important thing is to consider the advantage of doing ‘testing-out’ research rather than exploratory or problem-solving type for the PhD. Testing-out type is a basic type in which we are trying to find the limits of previously proposed generalizations. Last but not least, try to get as much help as you can, consider electronic peer groups.
I would also like to remind myself about the many accepted definitions of originality for the award of a PhD (Francis 1976 & Phillips 1992 in Phillips & Pugh):
Setting down a major piece of new information in writing for the 1st time
Continuing a previously original piece of work
Carrying out original work designed by the supervisor
Providing a single original technique, observation, or result in an otherwise unoriginal but competent research
Having many original ideas, methods and interpretations all performed by others (in the direction of PhD)
Testing somebody else’s idea
Carrying out empirical work (that hasn’t been done before(thbdb))
Making a synthesis (thbdb)
Using already known material with new interpretation
Trying out something in this country that has previously only be done in other countries
Taking a particular technique and applying it in a new area
Bringing new evidence on old issues
Being cross-disciplinary and using different methodologies
Looking at areas that people in the discipline haven’t looked at before
Adding to knowledge in a way (thbdb)
AND
A thesis should not be any longer than it needs to be
Personally, I also like the suggested diagram as attached below (check it out at pg 88 of the book). Another reminder to me, deadlines are important, be realistic and try to achieve them, Set pseudo-deadlines to report to your supervisor or a peer as motivating device.
Lastly I would like to include some general expectations from a supervisor as a reminder to myself:
You must be independent
You must produce written work that is not just a first draft!!!! (Write, check, re-write and re-write, review and re-write x n times before submit)
You must see them regularly (early notice with issues to be discussed emailed at least few days earlier)
You must be honest with your progress
You must follow advices especially if you requested it
You have to be excited with your work
You must later on educate your supervisors as you have become the expert in the area
All together the book has 12 chapters; becoming a postgraduate, getting into the system, the nature of the PhD qualification, how not to get a PhD, how to do research, the form of a PhD thesis, the PhD process, how to manage your supervisor, how to survive in a predominantly British, white, male, full-time academic environment, the formal procedures, how to supervise and examine and institutional responsibilities University responsibilities. So people, as you can see the title
of the chapters are so relevant. Generally, in my point of view, nothing that they have written that are new to us. However, not until we read it that we realize how important this is and how true that is.
since i am returning this book to PTSL most probably today, i will write some points for my own reminder.
in becoming a post grad, it is important to be aware that we are under our own management. for me personally this is the foremost important. well you know us the multi-tasker...i try to go to school everyday...consistency, perseverance, diligence but not necessarily academically-brilliance (in time management yes). so people, we always looked up to PhD holders differently ..Yes or no?? Self-doubt is a guaranty...whoever has not experienced self-doubt during PhD undertaking please please tells me. For newbie’s, selecting your supervisor is very very important.
I mentioned in previous posts of becoming professional researcher (or did not?? forgot). The authors spelled out the meanings in very neat way...some of it; you have something to say that your peers want to listen to; you have a command of what is happening in your subject, master the techniques that are current and know their limitations, able to communicate data and be international. A task that is quite important that I haven’t done is to read others’ PhD theses and evaluate them for the degree of originality in their research which ahs satisfied the examiners. Also, you don’t want to do these; overestimate or underestimate what is required, have a supervisor who doesn’t know what is required, losing contact with the supervisor, not having a thesis to maintain (the arguments) and taking new job before completing (again so important to the self-confessed multi-tasker).
Research is a craft skill
yes not surprising as I have mentioned it does not depends on brilliance but diligence and etc. 1st is to watch and note down the practices, skills and techniques of established good researchers including your supervisor, 2nd is to practice and gain feedback and make sure it is not the first time you exercise the techniques. Another important thing is to consider the advantage of doing ‘testing-out’ research rather than exploratory or problem-solving type for the PhD. Testing-out type is a basic type in which we are trying to find the limits of previously proposed generalizations. Last but not least, try to get as much help as you can, consider electronic peer groups.
I would also like to remind myself about the many accepted definitions of originality for the award of a PhD (Francis 1976 & Phillips 1992 in Phillips & Pugh):
Setting down a major piece of new information in writing for the 1st time
Continuing a previously original piece of work
Carrying out original work designed by the supervisor
Providing a single original technique, observation, or result in an otherwise unoriginal but competent research
Having many original ideas, methods and interpretations all performed by others (in the direction of PhD)
Testing somebody else’s idea
Carrying out empirical work (that hasn’t been done before(thbdb))
Making a synthesis (thbdb)
Using already known material with new interpretation
Trying out something in this country that has previously only be done in other countries
Taking a particular technique and applying it in a new area
Bringing new evidence on old issues
Being cross-disciplinary and using different methodologies
Looking at areas that people in the discipline haven’t looked at before
Adding to knowledge in a way (thbdb)
AND
A thesis should not be any longer than it needs to be
Personally, I also like the suggested diagram as attached below (check it out at pg 88 of the book). Another reminder to me, deadlines are important, be realistic and try to achieve them, Set pseudo-deadlines to report to your supervisor or a peer as motivating device.
Lastly I would like to include some general expectations from a supervisor as a reminder to myself:
You must be independent
You must produce written work that is not just a first draft!!!! (Write, check, re-write and re-write, review and re-write x n times before submit)
You must see them regularly (early notice with issues to be discussed emailed at least few days earlier)
You must be honest with your progress
You must follow advices especially if you requested it
You have to be excited with your work
You must later on educate your supervisors as you have become the expert in the area
Comments
right now, i sort of have my eyes set on this senior lecturer to be my supervisor. question is - do i write a brief proposal, then approach him OR do i go see him and ask if he has any research topics?
guess i'll take the latter also coz i think if i were to think up of a research topic, mmg tak akan start buat phd ni.
definitely don't know this lecturer but receive positive feedback from my officemate who had him for his supervisor for his master.