Have you looked at scientific realism or even just pragmatism? My methods chapter is a bit of a haze at the moment; all I remember is talking about iterative-parallel emerging research design and holism. Actually, you may find some of the stuff by Piet Verschuren useful for arguing for holism, particularly "Holism Versus Reductionism in Modern Social Science Research" (should come up if you stick it into google scholar).

Everything you say as a negative (including "life-changing", not knowing anyone and not being England) I would view as a positive. Go for it! What've you got to lose? If it doesn't suit you can always come back. Plus the whole "I won't know anyone and I won't have any friends" is fairly similar whatever you do - if you get a job in a new city in England, for example.

Also, if you've never been abroad before and you've spent a fair proportion of your life in education, ain't it about time you went exploring a bit? If you don't try something, you'll never know if you like it or not.

"Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things you didn't do than by the ones you did. So throw off the bowlines, sail away from the safe harbor, catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover."
Mark Twain

But, hey, that's just me. I'm full of frustrated wanderlust :$ If it's a Politics job and you don't want it, you can always recommend me as your replacement 8-)

Sorry, don't have access to it. I'm guessing you're in politics (like me). What's your PhD on?

Erm, from the social sceinces, but I can give you my story. I have an over-arching research question that my research addresses a very small part of. It's kinda the wider contextual question that motivates the research. Then I have a main one and three subsidiary ones, with the subsidiary ones helping direct my focus on answering the main question (which, in turn, is only a small part of the big big question).

That's the hard and fast rule, of which I can think of several exceptions. I would say if you can replace which with that, then you should. That is direct and which is indirect. Plus, when you use it in a sentence which (hehe) should have "that" in it it sounds poncy and pontificating.

Whilst is a far nicer word that while. Fact.

Anyone else who thinks different(ly) is wrong.

One thing that (which) really annoys me is when people use which instead of that. Oh, and when people don't have a subject for "this". My favourite example (nicked, somewhat poorly, from my sup) is below.

"The states were in constant tension during the Cold War, with small conflicts bringing the threat of nuclear annihilation. This occured in 1963......"

I like the former after my sup kept on changing my writing from the latter. However, I think the former is the US standard - they just hate adverbs over there and say things like "that was real good" (I like to annoy my American girlfriend by adding "ly" everytime she doesn't use an adverb when she should).

Erm, you would need to conceptualise power first. Clarissa Hayward's "De-facing Power" is on similar issues as you are looking at, but I would recommend the powercube (http://www.powercube.net/) for a more rounded understanding of power. You'd have to work on it to produce a scale, unless you choose to ignore a few faces of power.

Not sure if your business would support you; depends if they get anything out of you having a PhD. If you got funding then your stipend is not taxed and also, as a student, you wouldn't have to pay council tax. No idea how both of these things combine, but your 13k is worth a lot more than in a 13k job.

I'm not certain you would be allowed to work 2 days a week on a full-time funded PhD - there are normally restrictions on hours outside of PhD for funded students. Have you considered part-time?

Also, universities do offer opportunities, normally after the first year, to earn some money teaching and doing other jobs.

Hah, it got 29 (not after the introduction). Wow, that's the worst mark I've ever given.

At least I know why the marking scheme distinguishes between a fail and a bad fail now.

I'm marking late essays today....it's like they failed themselves. One had a 20 mark deduction - I knew within the first page they weren't going to overcome the deficit. Okay, onwards with a 15 mark deduction one....

So it's that time of year again. A big pile of essays were dumped in my pigeonhole and I have two weeks to mark and correct over 100,000 words. YAY!

What's currently getting to me is that I'm reading the same essay over and over and over again (although a couple of people have managed to do it well). It seems like, instead of thinking about writing an interesting essay or even making an argument, the students have asked themselves what content they understand and what is the easiest way to include that content. As such, I keep on going through many words that say little at all.

I kinda get the impression that this way is how they are taught to write at A-level - with absolutely no critical thinking whatsoever, just the churning out of content that they heard in the lectures. What's even more depressing is how few turned up to my office hours for help on the essays. :-s

Anyhow, how's everyone else getting along? Any fun gaffes to share?

I get the feeling I started as a 1, but teaching them (and being a subwarden) kinda puts you off undergraduates. I'm glad I'm not 18.

Strangely, despite a very depressing teaching day yesterday, I'm feeling confident at the moment. I'm going 6 or 8.

At the very small risk of sounding arrogant, I know I'm more intelligent than some of my fellow PhD students. One asked where Kenya is and tried to mix beer with Fanta (like it was a spirit) damnit!