======= Date Modified 31 May 2012 07:23:22 =======
I can get it for you - will I send the pdf to the email listed on the article?

Edit: sent it to the email address I used for you before :-)

Massive congrats to you Eimeo, richly deserved I'm sure - I am delighted for you. (gift)(gift)(up)

Would agree 100% with Bilbo here; don't underestimate the importance of your conclusion, a good final impression is very important, really spell it out. That's what I did but eh, not until my post viva revisions! Why I didn't just do it first time round I don't know:$

======= Date Modified 29 May 2012 07:08:38 =======
If it's not together as one document I would amalgamate it NOW. Work on the chapter that needs finishing but other than that, I would start to think of it as the final and full version. Therefore, ask yourself does it read as a single piece of work rather than the individual chapters you probably still think of it as? You are more likely to spot inconsistencies when it's all together. Think of it from the examiners' point of view - is it coherent?

I worked right up until the final submission and nine weeks is enough time imo, just no time for days off at this stage! Best of luck Pam, keep us informed but you definetly can do it(up)

I had a prelude to analysis and lived to regret it and had to 'correct' it [aka remove the label] after my viva

just to echo Pjlu, LOTS of GT studies in nursing. I referenced quite a few of them in my research which isn't in any way health or nursing related.

There are websites devoted to GT as others have said and obviously many articles. A few good ones are freely available and might help to get your head around what GT is and what it is not:

Elliott, N. and Lazenbatt (2005) How to recognise a 'quality' grounded theory research study

Corbin, J. and Strauss, A. (1990) Grounded theory research: procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria

Wilson Scott, K. (2004) Relating categories in grounded theory analysis: using a conditional relationship guide and reflective coding matrix

Hallenberg, L. (2006) The "core category" of grounded theory: making constant comparisons

Suddaby, R. (2006) From the editors: what grounded theory is not {Get this one above all others}

Rutherford, G. (2011) Peeling the layers: a grounded theory of interprofessional co-learning with residents of a homeless shelter {very very useful paper on 'how to' report a grounded theory study}

McFerran, K. (2010) tipping the scales: a substantive theory on the value of group music therapy for supporting grieving teenagers {another very useful paper for how to report GT}

Wilson, H. and Ambler, S. (1996) Methodologic mistakes in grounded theory

I found all of these useful for getting to grips with GT, regardless of what the authors were actually researching. Pm me if you want any but can't access.

The 'GT' portion of my viva was the part I enjoyed most:-)

too easy at times!, one click and it's yours and as Smoobles says, no wires, cables etc. I tend to save it for books which I might otherwise not try. Can't beat the feel and smell of a real-live book imo. I feel guilty every time I buy a Kindle book although not guilty enough as I clicked on four yesterday!!!

Like Corinne I had wondered how things had gone for you. Massive congratulations on a terrific achievement wrought from dedication, sheer grit and hard work. Be very proud(up)

I have about 100 of these short pieces left, 140 from another class I have (those are about 1000 words) and then two lots of end of semester exams (about 300 and 140 respectively) to be collected this week. However, I shouldn't be grumbling as after all this marking, unemployment looms large :-(. So mad busy for another couple of weeks and then zilch!

Good luck with your viva prep Skig, every confidence in you(up)

I have it all right, will send it in a mo - woof, woof ;-)

Re marking - part of tutorials I have already been paid for so it feels like I am not been paid for them:-(

======= Date Modified 21 May 2012 16:34:04 =======
AM marking over 300 ~500 word papers, all saying practically the same things, am desparate for distraction, paper on its way:-)

Know I have sent you something before but can't remember your email I'm afraid - if you pm me again, I'll send the pdf on

Try to break it down into years and then months within each year, or at least blocks of months. If you are applying for funding, or if the law department where you are applying has a set time for PhDs work with this timescale. Year 1 for example, background reading, literature review formulation, application for ethical approval etc etc. Year two, commence fieldwork or source data etc. Year three commence write up. If you have classes that you have to complete, include these also. Nobody will 'hold' you to this initial timescale but it is a good exercise in focussing the mind.

I did this in year 1 and submitted the last day of year three - as per my timescale;-).

If you are familiar with Gantt charts you could use one of these, or maybe Excel. It doesn't have to be on a spreadsheet but I think it helps convince the authorities that you are organised and have a good handle on how the PhD process unfolds.

As am I - have you truly spelt out your contribution to knowlege - always a few words in that;-)

======= Date Modified 19 May 2012 21:36:59 =======
Hi Emmaki

Try not to stress about it too much. Initially I was worried mine was too long, then too short but in the end, after all the edits, revisions, tears ;-)mine came in at 82,800, 277 pages. Guide length in my uni is 80,000-100,000 words. I know somebody who passed [very successfully] with a word count of ~73,000.

Usually in the end it all comes together(up)