I see my 1st supervisor once a week and both of them together once a month. I'm also welcome to find them in between meetings.

I think once a week is too much. Would prefer it to be once every two weeks and I might propose this soon. I find on the odd times when it is two weeks before meetings I've accomplished far more and we have more productive meetings. But then I can hunt them both down in between...

Good luck!

the same thing has just happened to me. msc research (done at uni 2) accepted at lovely international conference, phd (at uni 3) has very little to do with msc therefore uni 3 would only offer about a third of what i needed. really couldn't afford to self fund!

the second author is presenting for me which means it'll still be in the proceedings. do you have a second author? if not, perhaps your supervisor is attending and may be willing to present? you could add them as second author...

hi shani,

i use the technical argument. i don't really buy into the philosophy...use qualitative to inform quantitative and then qualitative to 'validate' (not really the word i'm after but am losing the ability to think today) and further explore the quantitative.

hi...

first post so i hope i don't mess up.

i've been having focus group issues. the thing that helped me has been looking at the philosophical background behind qualitative research again. whilst there are strong arguments for using two qualitative methodologies (or more) these are technical arguments. hardcore qualitative researchers would probably be mortified that this kind of research takes place (no judgement here, i mix quants and qualitative so everyone hates me). in terms of justifying using only interviews, you'll be absolutely fine if you argue in terms of philosophy (i'm not a philosophy student either)!

i guess doing a phd is learning how frustrating the reality of research is. an interview schedule based on 2 focus groups and previous reseach (lit review) sounds better than the way most interview schedules are developed!