Overview of directdrive

Recent Posts

Is it possible to have an academic career after self-funded PhD?
D

I don't think so, I know self-funded people in academic careers, although I'd maybe say, on balance, that they've struggled a bit more to get jobs.


The question is a bit more complicated than that, though. The funding issue plays into the question of whether the PhD is a good value proposition for you. Is it a good idea to spend, say, £75,000 of your own money on fees and living expenses over three years for a humanities PhD? Bear in mind that starting salaries, if you manage to get an academic job, are low, especially in humanities - and jobs are increasingly few and far between. My PhD (in the social sciences) was funded and I've still incurred a huge opportunity cost in lost potential earnings over that time, given that I could have spent 4 years in another field making a ton more money. That didn't bother me because I didn't want to do anything else, but it's relevant.


The other issue is - and I don't want to sound harsh or mean here, so please don't take it this way - academia is about securing funding. For many people, getting PhD funding is the first time they'll demonstrate that they can do that. If you can't get funding for your PhD, you might want to sit down and ask yourself why that is. Like I said above, it's perfectly possible for people with self-funded PhDs to have fulfilling and decent academic careers - but if you're falling down at the first funding hurdle, you might want to question whether this is the path you are best suited to take.


I suspect you probably can get PhD funding, unless your research proposal has serious and fundamental shortcomings. Given the massive costs of self-funding, I'd be inclined to wait a year until the next admissions cycle and beef up your chances of getting funding. It's competitive but it is very much still possible - especially if you have a supportive prospective supervisor and institution that is willing to help you out.


Minor point, but I do think that right at the start of your career, PhD funding from a big research council (AHRC in your case) does add a little bit of sparkle to your CV, but yes, it's quickly dwarfed by publications and professional experience.

Edit: sorry about the formatting, edited the post and it's taken out all the paragraphs.

Do you use the Dr title?
D

I work in academia and I use it on presentations, e-mail signature, job applications, etc. - i.e. strictly professional and formal situations. Personally I'd never think to use it outside of academia, unless it was directly relevant. For instance, we had teachers at school who'd go by Dr XYZ instead of Mr XYZ because they had a PhD in the subject they taught.

This is an age old debate and people will have different answers, but in an industry-based job in a different field, I would not use Dr anywhere. It would rub me up the wrong way a bit if someone did, as well, but not enough for me to make passive-aggressive comments in team meetings about it. Then again, my old housemate started putting Dr on his bank cards, Amazon packages, anything you like as soon as he passed his viva, so some people clearly have different views.

I can see how PhD is slightly better, although to be honest I'd be discinlined to use either. Then again, I'm a man, and I recognize that it's often more difficult for a woman to be 'taken seriously' in professional situations, and showing people you have a PhD could conceivably help with that - so maybe go for (PhD) after the name instead?

Can't motivate myself
D

Quote From Scottpierre:
I’m not yet a PhD student yet but would die to be in your seat. It seems like you need a philosophy for a mode of being. What you’re doing is taking yourself for granted but not only that you’re taking the lives of others for granted. The opportunity that you have is not something that can be easily obtained, the amount of people in evolution that bust their asses off for you to take the throne of your family hierarchy should not have been sacrificed for nothing. The problem is you need to get up and be useful again because that’s what the world needs you for. Don’t let your death be with apology and make your life as meaningful as it can get.


Come on, you're talking complete nonsense.

You have just posted a thread asking for a step-by-step walkthrough of how to get a PhD, and apparently don't have the motivation or wherewithal yourself to do the most basic research into the process.

If I were you I'd refrain from this kind of weird, grandiose posturing until you have the faintest idea of what you're talking about.

iu.org - A diploma mill - but I need a masters for a PhD.
D

'Most universities' aren't diploma mills, don't know where you got that idea from.

Neither is this one, it's accredited and as far as I can tell completely legitimate, just not very good. Private for-profit university that wants to make money by churning out MBAs. It will be a waste of time and money if you want to go into academic research.

You don't need an outstanding bachelors to do a Masters degree. In the UK a lower second/2:2 will be enough to get you enrolled on most MA courses at good and even elite universities - funding is the issue.

What you should do next depends what you want to do a PhD in, why you want to do a PhD, where you want to do your PhD. Difficult to help otherwise.

In terms of your original question, you've answered it yourself, avoid this one.

Advice needed: External Funding for a UK PhD (Cambridge University)
D

My advice to this is, and always will be, follow the money. If you have a fully-funded PhD offer (and it's a compelling one, good supervisory fit, etc) then take it. They don't come along every day. There's no guarantee you'll get internal funding if you wait. Doesn't hurt to try and get over the Oxbridge fantasies either.

Are there any academic alternatives to a PHD?
D

I work in a field close to yours. A PhD is unfortunately a bare minimum for the career trajectory you outline. No 'life hacks' for academia unfortunately, it is a grind and can be very difficult. Think carefully before you commit.

Major corrections - run out of energy to finish
D

There seems to be an assumption within academia that we're able to spend 6 months fully dedicated to the corrections. It would be so much easier if that were possible, but obviously like most people I've got bills to pay.


I'm a bit surprised at this; what I've heard from colleagues in my dept who've gone through the process is that corrections time is given according to a recognition that you have other things to do, i.e. that you'll probably be working full time. I know several people who've had 6 months corrections, and it's always been '6 months in which to do your corrections' rather than '6 months' worth of corrections'. Have you been able to speak to anybody in a bit more detail about this? Is there a possibility that you have overestimated the amount of work that needs to be done, or that it's been overstated to you? I don't mean to question your assessment of course, just exploring options. 6 months corrections is a perfectly normal outcome, it's still a passed viva and as such it's a laudable achievement, and of the exact same 'worth' as 4 weeks or even no corrections. It is absolutely not worth quitting academia over, you have done extremely well.

For what it's worth, my viva is tomorrow and I'll be content with 6 months corrections - it's honestly a big achievement.

Eligibility For UK Government Master's Loan
D

Quote From DJC:
DJC RESPONSE TO directdrive's comment:-
Your comment is both facile & simplistic! There is an ambiguity which you fail/choose not to recognise. The loan application form - upon which the loan award decision is made - specifically refers only to ineligibility IF the applicant has received prior funding from SF England, SF Wales, SF NI or Student Awards Scotland. My son has not had any such funding; so, prima facie, should be eligible! The loan guidelines, to which you refer, states ineligibility if already holding a Masters; BUT, in view of what the application form states, that might imply or suggest that it is ONLY a UK awarded Masters that would render the applicant ineligible since there would have been indirect assistance already given simply by virtue of attending a UK university even if there had been no direct UK government (loan) assistance to the student in gaining that UK Master's degree. If so, then there might be a degree of discretion available to the assessors of the Master's loan application for students having my son's circumstances, ie an EU Masters. That was the point of my query herein. Directdrive, do you now understand that the situation may not be as clear cut as you confidently say?? I was searching for a serious reply to my query not the superficial 'analysis' you provide.
I would welcome insightful responses from any other readers to my query.


My other comment was deleted, so how about this. Is an MA from the EU recognized as a Masters-level qualification in the UK? There's your answer.

Eligibility For UK Government Master's Loan
D

https://www.gov.uk/masters-loan/eligibility

Not to be funny or anything but it does say right there on the government website that you're not eligible if you already have a Masters degree or equivalent. I take that fairly unequivocally to mean that a non-UK MA makes you ineligible.

Another form of imposter syndrome?
D

Continued:

It's great that you have time-consuming hobbies on the side. That's very healthy. Nurture them while you can. You will find your workload ramps up towards the end, and then once you submit, it's all change and likely a stressful period ahead. The PhD can be a very valuable time to prepare for that by treating yourself well, developing healthy approaches to work, and nurturing those other interests to the extent that, when you finish and go into the hellscape of early-career research, you'll still feel compelled to make time for them even when things are really busy.
If everybody thinks you're doing well, and you're not being dramatically under-supervised, then I'd advise to keep on trucking. Get the PhD finished and after that you can hopefully focus on research that's more interesting to you. Enjoy the relative abdundance of downtime while you can.
I can't speak to the other stuff about your supervisor and witholding contacts etc., that's all very strange. Maybe they are concerned that you focus on your work, maybe they are scheming and being deliberately evasive. However, my main point is don't feel bad for not working more if you're making good progress. You probably have a better-adjusted approach to work than your colleagues and peers, and that will serve you well in the long run.

Another form of imposter syndrome?
D

Long time lurker, made an account to respond to this.

I think you're fine. I submitted in August and have my viva at the start of next month. Never during my PhD did I work a solid 40 hours a week (although many many weeks did I sit at my desk and waste time for 40 hours). 1st through 3rd year my workload was honestly quite relaxed, and I did other extracurricular things alongside - teaching qualification, big academic admin role to help with career stuff, plus a lot of cycling and bikepacking! During my 4th year it really intensified and I did the lion's share of my writing, but I don't think I was touching 40 hours of work at all. That's normal, I think. The majority of posts on here are horror stories and people going through serious problems, but I think for a lot of people (if not most) the PhD can be an enjoyable experience where you get to read a lot and work to a relatively relaxed schedule. Don't get me wrong - it's still been hugely psychologically stressful (for many of the reasons you described) - but I haven't worked my fingers to the bone.

I'm in social sciences rather than STEM so my experience re: supervision and project will have been very different to yours, but I think it's also very normal to not be excited about your project. As I finished my thesis, I really felt that I'd gone as far as I could with my research topic, and I'm now drafting up a big postdoc bid on something that's different but related - and which I'm actually really excited about. The PhD is an apprenticeship, essentially, to prove you can do research. I think anyone who's still absolutely mad about their PhD project after 4 years of work on it is either lying or has a screw loose. I've submitted a thesis which I'm pleased with and proud of, but it doesn't excite me like it did in 2017.