I would echo what others have said about giving them stuff to do in small groups if that's possible, although I realise it might not be suitable for your lectures.

I am doing some training at the moment in teaching skills, and one tip I am going to try is to set them a couple of questions right at the start of class, to get them wondering what it is about. The example I was shown was a geometry class about working out the height of objects, and the lecturer started by giving the students questions like, 'Have you ever wanted to be shorter/taller than you are? Why?'

At my university there is training available in making best use of your voice, with separate classes for people who have English as a first or second language. Maybe there is similar training where you are?

Of course, at the end of the day, people in their late teens/early 20s sometimes behave like groups of school kids and will complain about anything rather than participate properly. There is only so much you can do and if they learn something, you've done your job.

The other thing I'd suggest is if you haven't already, go through any insurance policies/utility accounts and so on and see if you can switch to another company for less money, or negotiate a better deal with your existing provider. It's a bit of a pain but I've discovered it's worth phoning up my broadband provider and threatening to leave, getting new insurance policies and cancelling ones that have become expensive, etc. It frees up quite a bit of money each month.

I should have added to that that an hour's interview took something like six hours to transcribe.

I did some transcription work for someone and charged £9 or £10 an hour.

I think lots of them are. My study needs a very specific group of people and recruitment has been slow and painful, and my supervisor has kept saying, 'it's a shame your study can't just rely on students'. I was actually surprised that this would be acceptable at PhD level because, as you say, it has huge implications for the claims that can be made about the results. It's a shame recruitment is such a sticking point - I get numerous requests by email each day to participate in studies.

My experience with OU is as a student rather than an employee. I did my Masters with the OU and felt it was of a very good standard - well-written materials, good use of online resources and so on.

I think a lot of academic emails are to the point and short on niceties. I would try to see it as a positive that your supervisor is engaging with your work and suggesting improvements - if they thought it was hopeless, they wouldn't do that.

Regarding ethical approval, the university will have an ethics committee and a standard procedure for applying for approval - you usually have to give an outline of your project, copies of information sheets you'd give to your participants, informed consent forms and so on. You may also need to get NHS approval (if this is a UK project) which is normally the case if you're working with vulnerable or young people or need to get sensitive medical data. NHS ethics approval is notoriously slow and involved, so this is something you'd need to talk to your supervisor about early in the process if you start the PhD.

In my experience of PhD interviews they wanted to know more about how I'd approach the topic, what kind of study I'd carry out etc, rather than the stats, but others on here may have had different experiences. I'm a year into my PhD (which is in psychology) and haven't had to commit to my stats approach yet.

I think the main thing is to have a robust back-up here, as the posters above have suggested, and not allow any anxiety about technological things to get in the way. Good luck with your viva!

I'd second the suggestion about seeing if you can do your Masters (or a similar one) part-time. I did my Masters part-time with the OU and worked at the same time, as there was no other way for me to afford a Masters. It made all the difference in getting a funded PhD place. I'm one year into my PhD at the age of 44 :-)

Everyone is different, and I guess some people find that their lives become busier with new people when they start a PhD, but I still don't think that would be a reason to drop someone who was important to you. Unless she tells you herself, it is impossible to know exactly what the reason is for her change towards you. I don't think it is something that can be explained by being a PhD student. It sounds like you have a fairly good idea that you have drifted apart for some reason, and I think the only options in that case are to accept the situation and see what happens, or talk to her and find out if there is a problem that can be fixed. Relationships can be difficult, confusing and upsetting, and PhD students are no better or worse at them than anyone else :-)

I'm not sure that a PhD is the reason for this sort of behaviour. I have had friends who have treated me as if I am an inferior class of friend and it has had nothing to do with their type of work; it has just been either rudeness or that they genuinely didn't value me as much as some of their other friends. It's true that a PhD can get crazily busy and can mean that someone doesn't have as much time to socialise, but if you feel she prioritises other people above you then I think that is a separate issue. Do you feel able to talk to her about it?

My situation is similar in some ways to yours - I'm at the end of my first year and my supervisor is also leaving, although my experience of supervision has been good and so the change isn't a welcome one (I know these things happen and I was always aware that it might, but it still introduces an element of chance that I would rather not have).

It's hard to establish what 'should' be done at each stage of the PhD - I have asked this question too and found lots of different answers. I also don't have any data yet - recruitment of participants for my study has been very slow. I've just tried to make sure I am working on something while other things are stuck, and have been drafting my lit review and methodology chapters, figuring that if I am using the time productively on something then I can help myself stay on track.

Regarding other demands on your time, I think you may need to find a way of putting your own work first as it progresses. I also am a distance away from my uni and when the chance arises to get involved in other activities, I try to prioritise the ones that will be good for me (eg teaching experience). Of course, there is a case for doing other stuff that will be good for your relationships around the department, but if you're getting asked to do so much extra work that your own is suffering, you may need to put some limits in place.

I hope you manage to find someone else at your uni who can take over your supervision - if no-one specialises in your topic, is there at least someone whose way of working would be better for you? Is there a chance of getting external input from someone who is more of an expert in the field?

The job title 'Assistant Professor' has just recently been introduced at my university, and it seems to incorporate those who were previously Teaching Fellows or Lecturers, so they would all be 'Dr.X'. I think Assistant Professor is a really strange job title in this respect - I think I'd rather have the previously used titles if I was in one of those jobs, rather than one which is a bit meaningless because it denotes the most junior members of the department! Would be interested to hear if this is something being adopted in all universities.

Thankfully, the uni has decided to allow my partner to finish her other course with a two week overlap between it and the Masters. Phew!