Thank for your encouragement!

I would say that my field has little lab work, it is mainly theoretical and experiments could be run either in a computer or I could schedule my visits to the lab to concentrate them in periods that suited me. But there would be no organic beings involved in my research that could cause an emergency situation and force me to stay up late.

How could part-time studies possibly be an advantage?

The reason for my failing those subjects at the first try were of two kinds:
- In a couple of them I couldn't follow the explanations of the professor at the speed he was delivering them. Also, he supported his explanations with results taken from other branches of this science that were very difficult to understand. The following year, I took the same courses with a different professor who didn't make use of those external results, and I passed, in one of them I got a B and in the other one I got honours.
- The rest of my fails can be explained by the fact that my schedule was too full. I was taking 5 or 6 courses at the same time, which meant 5-6 hours per day of lectures, plus the time spent at home studying and preparing essays and practices to hand in, plus the commute time. All of this with very full syllabuses for each subject. It is not that I chose this busy schedule because I miscalculated my energies. The school year was designed just like that for all students. I just couldn't take in all the information in such little time, and some subjects suffered as a result. I chose to devote my time to some of the courses only, and failed the others on purpose/out of necessity. It so unfortunate that I chose to fail the subjects taught by the professors that I now admire the most.

The reason why I did well in my masters course is double: first, it was online, therefore although I had to work a lot, I didn't waste any time commuting. And second, the work load was lighter: on average I think I spent 1.5 hours per day working on it, for two years.

So I think I can do good at my studies, provided I'm given enough time. Knowledge settles in my brain slowly. Does this sound too "lazy" for a Ph.D. student?

44 views and 0 replies? Ouch. Either my post is too long, or people think I'm no PhD material but they don't want to be the ones to disappoint me. Come on, guys. Don't be shy. Express yourselves. :-)

Hi. Please excuse my ignorance. I see that no one is suggesting in this thread to talk to your supervisor about this. There must be a reason for that, but it just escapes me.
I work in a big corporation and I'm supposed to fend for myself, of course, but if I had a bully disturbing my performance at work, and talking to the bully didn't make things any better, I could talk to my boss and explain the situation. Maybe they wouldn't do anything about it, but most likely they would.
Why can't you ask your supervisor to find you a desk in a different room?

Hello. I'm considering the possibility of asking some of my professors at my former faculty if they would like to supervise my PhD thesis. Although there are other universities with related PhD programmes, the PhD programme at my former faculty is the only one I like.

But given my academic background, I wonder if my ambitions are just unrealistic. Somehow I can see only arguments "against" being my supervisor. But I REALLY want to get a PhD in my field.

Is there a chance that they will accept me? If so, how can I increase my chances of being accepted?

My situation is:

I graduated in Science six years ago. My grades were not brilliant but fine. The professors who are candidates to be my supervisors now happen to be those professors I failed with when I was an undergraduate. I had to take the same courses with other professors whose style of teaching I found easier to follow.

My plan is to start the PhD course in the academic year 2011-2012, so it will be 8 years since I graduated. That's a long time without studying. Even if I work hard from now on to review all the stuff I learned as an undergraduate, I'm afraid there won't be enough time.

Since I graduated I've been working non-stop in a big corporation applying some intelligence to the data contained in our databases (somehow related to my university studies, but the relation is not direct).

Also, I've studied a 2-year masters course in a field related to my university studies, where I did a very good job, but unfortunately the grades were limited to PASS/FAIL, so instead of an A, I got only a PASS. So I can't prove that I did brilliantly there (unless I ask for a letter of recommendation to my masters professors).

I plan to continue working full-time while I study my PhD, so I would be a part-time PhD student. That could expand the amount of time I need to complete my thesis.

Although I was not brilliant in my field as an undergraduate, I'm very hard-working and highly motivated. I want to join the research community and contribute to science with my findings.

So, what do you think? Am I PhD-able? If so, how should I approach my ex-professors to increase my chances of getting their approval?

Thank you very much in advance!

Hi. Please excuse me as I'm not a native English speaker. I would like to know what a 'poly' is. In your original post you mention 'ex-polys'. What is that? Thank you!

Hi! Thank you for your reply! But what happens when you have had no prior contact with the university, and you don't even know names (let alone contact details) of people that the prospective supervisor has supervised before?

Hello,
I've been filtering my options and I've ended up with three possible doctorate programs in three different universities. They are all interesting, equally good quality, and affordable (I don't qualify for grants).
I guess my choice must be made regarding the quality of the supervisor.
I've heard there are two kinds of supervisors:
1) The kind that detach themselves from your daily work and leave you alone to choose your direction and do your research, only contacting you occasionally to see how you're doing and sign the paperwork.
2) The kind that work with you more closely, offering suggestions constantly and also constantly checking up on your progress.
I'd like to have a supervisor of the second type. But I'm afraid that there is no polite way to ask a potential supervisor which one of the two types he believes he is.
So how can I find out?

Thanks!