It's easy to submit papers as an independent researcher, at least in humanities. You submit them in the usual way, following carefully the advice for contributors given for each journal. And they go out to peer review in the usual way. Being non-affiliated (though I now have an honorary research fellowship as well) is no impediment. And because it's history and I'm the sole author it's all down to me to do the writing, the submitting, the revising etc.

The important thing is to target each paper really carefully, figuring out which journal is most likely to take it, and also considering whether you want to be really ambitious and aim for something difficult (I did, in the most eminent general journal in my field, and got published after revising my third paper), or go for something slightly lower down the pecking order where acceptance might be a bit easier to get.

And absolutely follow the contributor guidelines to the letter. Make the editor like you, and thus be keen to publish your piece :)

Publishing a thesis as a big book format can be a very hit and miss affair, taking an awful lot of work, and you may be lucky to find a publisher to take you on. Whatever you do, do not even consider the near-vanity publishers out there, many German, who will publish anything, with no editing, and have zero credibility in the academic world for publication purposes.

An easier option which you could pursue as an independent post-doc is to turn your thesis into a number of journal papers. These can be produced relatively quickly, and are highly regarded for employment purposes in future. They could also help if you look for employment outside academia.

I am unable to work in academia due to long-term progressive severely disabling neurological illness. It's a minor miracle I completed my part-time PhD, managing on no more than 5 hours total a week at the end. But I've invented myself as an independent academic historian, and am having fun turning my PhD thesis into journal papers, with 5 accepted so far, and more with editors. I am also looking at new research I can do from home - being a humanities student who can drag source material to me to study helps.

Basically you need to work out a plan for yourself. Have you consulted the careers service at your (former) university? They should be able to give you tips on what to do next, most effectively. Once you have a plan in place it's likely you'll feel more positive, and more productive.

I was also going to mention the teaching thing, since it didn't seem to be mentioned in your post at all, but is vital for many academic employers now taking on new post-docs. At least as important as publications. Basically you need both. What teaching experience did you get during your PhD? If you didn't get any can you get some now as a post-doc, via a local university or even college? Anything at all would help.

It's ultimately your responsibilty. It's your PhD, and you have more time available to spend on this than a busy supervisor.

Don't stress over small errors though. They can be easily and quickly fixed post-viva. And small errors aren't enough for a fail.

After submission people always spot masses of them and go into a major panic! Needlessly.

People don't need to publish to prove the validity of their PhD research for examiners. Their PhD is assessed primarily on the thesis, with an oral defence backing it up. That is quite sufficient to pass. Again you do not need publications. I had them, but they weren't considered in my viva, or even known by the external or internal. Both were pleasantly surprised in the discussion afterwards to find out I had publications, and insisted I must add them to my bibliography :)

In humanities it isn't normal to publish during the PhD, whether full-time or part-time. It's more than enough to manage to finish the PhD. However if you are aiming for a post-doc then publications will help. But it's not expected, or assumed that it will happen.

I agree with TEHEPIKDUCK321. Finishing a PhD in a timely manner is an important skill to show that you can complete a project in a reasonable time, and not drag it out too long. If there are personal reasons for an extension then that can be applied for, including medical reasons. But I don't see why full-timers should run on many years overdue, or part-timers similarly. I'm all in favour of research councils encouraging universities to clamp down on long-runners.

I should say that I took just under 6 years to complete my part-time PhD, but given that I was assumed to be half-time, and in practice was only 5 hours a week for medical/disability reasons, I feel ok about this. It was also within the strict time limits set down my both my university and funding body (AHRC) [4 years for full-timers, 6 years for part-timers]. I don't understand how some full-timers can rack up similar periods. There has to be some sense of urgency and forward progress.

Business to social science is a bit of a leap. You'd probably have to take a taught Masters degree first, in the topic you're interested in, (1) to overcome your 2.2 which would be somewhat difficult to be admitted to a PhD with; and (2) to start to build up the specialist knowledge in your new field. Normally you'd need to fund that Masters yourself, even if you were (possibly unlikely, with that 2.2) to win funding for the PhD afterwards.

Oh and the other thing I forgot to say is that you need to ask yourself now whether you really want this PhD. If you do, then stick in there, and go for it.

I left a previous PhD (full-time, science) after falling long-term ill. Quitting is not an easy decision. But you could have to live with regrets long-term if you do.

I was lucky to be able to get a second go (part-time, humanities). Most people don't.

Congratulations!

Smoobles has given really good advice.

Re the writing problems, I had these too. I lost nearly a year in the middle (part-time study, about 5 hours a week cos of long-term neurological illness) because my writing was not up to scratch, and I had to start the thesis writing all over again. This was despite getting a distinction in my Masters.

Your supervisor should be giving you practical help to turn your writing around. What are the precise problems with it? How can you start to tackle them?

You also need to start thinking of a timetable to get you to completion. If you were due to finish in September and are making so little good progress then you weren't going to get there anyway, so your supervisor's comments shouldn't have been such a shock!

Work out what your timescale is, work out what you need to do, and figure out how you can start making enough progress in the time you have.

But don't forget to insist that your supervisor gives you practical advice on sorting out your writing. You need to produce finished chapters, and overcome whatever the hurdle is.

You can do it! I completed my PhD with just minor typo corrections, despite having that huge writing problem in the middle.

Good luck!

Give them a phone call.

Congratulations :)

I'm one of the people here who's been a PhD student twice. First time full-time science. Second time part-time arts. But that was because I had to leave the first one, uncompleted, after falling long-term seriously ill with a progressive neurological disease.

When I reapplied for funding the second time I had to declare my past funding, and there was a high chance anything I was awarded funding-wise would be reduced because of the prior research council funding I had received. Therefore I have very grave doubts whether you would even be eligible for funding the second-time around.

I also think it's a very unwise thing to consider for future employment prospects. Within academia such a move would be viewed very negatively by future potential employers. Outside academia it would be yet another excuse for potential employers considering you to be over-qualified for their jobs.

Don't do it. Do something else, even for less money. Also make yourself more employable in academia by turning your thesis into academic papers. This can be done outside an institution: I'm managing it easily myself, even though due to the severely disabling MS-like illness paid employment is not an option.

I've not heard of gifts being given to examiners by a student before. I think it's very unusual and it would not be at all rude not to.

I didn't :)