This sounds awesome. Exactly the kind of experience I wanted. Maybe imagine if you had the opposite experience because of external factors (let's admit - things can go wrong in supervision/project - a mismatch in either of those things can be disastrous). But you're still the same person... you still have all that in you and are longing to keep developing in your potential... but your PhD has not afforded it for you. Even though that was your purpose for embarking on it. You know it isn't imposter sydrome. You know it isn't your effort or abilities. You know it was a bad PhD experience.

Would you still recommend just submit the thesis anyway since it should pass (on the basis of its content - not on the basis of that person's learning and development through the whole process)? Or would you consider recommending the MPhil is a viable option here... if that person can manage to secure funding elsewhere for another PhD?

Thanks so much. The good thing is - I have a some time to make my decision. And absolutely - I listed in a Word doc the other day the things I HAVE learnt from my PhD as I see it...!

By the way, I'm really proud to have started a 4-page thread! :-D And really grateful for all contributions. I hope people in the future will be able to see this thread when searching for "MPhil" on this forum or on Google. I am beginning to think that MPhils might be a little unfairly stigmatized. Hopefully, what I've shared here ( a) about me considering one at a late stage of my PhD, b) about my PGR tutor understanding my perspective and sharing with me about how he has been on PhD panels where people with MPhils were awarded PhD funding, and c) an example of a person who self downgraded to MPhil and then went on to start a new PhD successfully...) will open up the general debate / consensus a little on that front. That is, there may be something to an MPhil as a way forward - not just as a red flag for PhD-quitter. I'm getting a sense that it's just not spoken about favourably (or at all) as it isn't encouraged / desirable. But it isn't NECESSARILY the worst choice one could make in a given situation or the be all and end all. More on that front as I learn more about it and come to my own decision.

Have a great weekend everyone.

I was surprised by that too - but I think ToL was just referring to imposter syndrome.

I agree - what is the point if a certain level of academic attainment wasn't achieved? That is exactly why I am spinning around in this dilemma :-/

If I'm entirely honest, I think my confidence has been affected by the fact that it hasn't been great, which probably DOES make me think it has been "even worse" than it has been / I've developed "even less" than I have in reality. If that makes sense.

I think there IS a genuine issue (there really has been little scope for development), but this is compounded / amplified because I am the way I am (I know what I want from a given thing - from a PhD - and I have high expectations).

I guess the bottom line is: I could accept that it was a very poor experience, be proud of what I DID manage to get out of it, and move on fingers crossed to better things...

Thank you for helping me get more of a balanced view of things. One idea is to get going on tying the thesis together and seeing how I feel about it then. There is definitely enough work/data to merit a PhD, so maybe that is the logical thing to do - WHATEVER I feel about how the process has been.

I don't think there are fees for the fourth year, aka "write up year"? But yes, you'd need to be able to support yourself during that time. In my immediate cohort, 3 of 5 have finished (as in submitted) in the 3 years, and I could have too if I'd have pushed, so it is definitely do-able. May depend on your area though and some supervisors expect you to use the write up year. Something to discuss early on if you're less keen on that.

Ps. What you've put in the second paragraph kind of concurs with what my mentor in the States said to me when I said I hadn't been developing much and it was depressing. That is the one thing that is making me think: just submit as planned, and get this behind you, so you can move on to the next thing.

Hmm, interesting take - thanks! In the space of the seven days since I started considering my options in this way, I've already spoken to another person who submitted for an mphil in her final year and then undertook another PhD. By her account, it wasn't about being utterly phenomenal. It was about knowing what she wanted to get from her PhD, and some good networking. There must be more of them out there!

I like how you describe it as a glorified apprenticeship. An apprenticeship in research is exactly how I view it, and that view informs what I expect to get out of it.

I'm beginning to feel a little like my account of my PhD experience (which surely I know best) is being undermined a bit.

Ah, yes, I understand about imposter syndrome. That's not what this thread is about. I'm talking about limited scope for development on my PhD. If I could say something like your first paragraph about my PhD, then I'd be a very happy bunny about my PhD. That's kinda the point - the thing I've been trying to explain since the start of this thread. Lack of development, lack of learning.

That's great. Thankfully, I have reflected throughout my PhD and always sought out ways to improve things - usually starting with changing my own behaviour and attitudes. That's something I'm proud of, but at the same time, rather regretful about. Sometimes persevering is good. Other times, it makes much better sense to cut your losses and move on sooner rather than later. But nevermind, you live you learn. :-)

Thanks Eng, good points :-) I definitely need to choose an environment that suits me better next, whatever my next move is. I suppose what I am worried about is that I have gained so little from my PhD experience that maybe I won't be able to get a good post doc. But then again, thankfully, I have done some good networking and worked with others away from my immediate context, which could open doors. :-)

Well, one of my peers who recently got offered a postdoc said to me along the lines of: this has been so hard but so worth it; I have learnt just SO much during my PhD.

She found her PhD challenging. Now having done her PhD, she knows a good bit more than she did before. The PhD afforded her development and growth.

Would you say she is the exception rather than the rule?

If it's not for the development and learning, then what is the point?

These aren't rhetorical questions (although I do feel rather incredulous lately).

...then I need to seriously consider my options (which is what I'm now doing).

Thanks for the encouragement pm133! I'd say my brother is a lot like you described (he is very intelligent yet currently works as a washer upper while pursuing his interests as hobbies). I am similar but far less extreme these days. I've sort of mixed in a bit (a lot) of pragmatism - hence how I've got this far through the PhD though it hasn't been a good learning experience since day 1...

It may be that the best option is still to go for this PhD anyway - even though I don't feel I've got from it what I wanted. I'll try and do the most pragmatic thing (in terms of my goals and motivations as I see them in the immediate context but also in trying to look further ahead) in my decision. I don't want big regrets. Just need to get all the info to make an informed choice. I'll keep you posted.

I've definitely known this to happen before. I think that is a really good explanation/theory for why what happens happens. It's almost like being different is an offense and can even lose you friends. But I still can't conform! :-D



If this is so, then I hope people on this forum can make a judgement of me based on my posts over the years, and come to the conclusion that even if they don't understand me in my present conundrum, what I'm going through doesn't arise from arrogance. And I'm happy to say that none of my seemingly crazy decisions have ever closed doors for me. :-)



I agree. But at the same time, after quite a few years of a depressing and boring day job, I decided that I wanted to make my interest my career... which is why I went to university and did my BSc, MRes, and now PhD. That's why I'm being very careful in my decision now because if completing the PhD IS the best way for me to pursue my goal, then I want to do that. But if on the other hand, the PhD hasn't afforded me the development (and thus confidence) I need to pursue an academic career...

This is normal! We are way less hierarchical / formal in academia compared to many European countries. That's what I was trying to say - it's a big positive of the UK.

And us Brits are a friendly bunch on average!

Good luck in your decision!