Quote From Sleek:
Can a 2:2 in first degree and a 57% in masters be accepted for a PhD? I have applied for close to two years but I haven't been able to get an offer. Even though I get a feedback from the school that there is no supervisor for my topic. I still wonder if my low scores can be the reason. A school actually rejected my application because they accept only distinction for a PhD. Please help!!!

Quote From mak17:
Unfortunately this sci-hub didnt work ... the DOI of the article is:
Thank for the help

Quote From Tudor_Queen:


What was absolute tripe in your view? I haven't read the whole thing yet. I liked the part I quoted though.

Quote From Tudor_Queen:
I must say that often these books can sort of brainwash you into a particular view of being a PhD student that isn't healthy. I say that from experience of having read lots of them in my first year and only now in my third year realising that so much of what I read was utter rubbish. Written by people who had made it through and seemed to want to instill fear and create or perpetuate some sort of PhD student myth. Just my view and I cannot comment on those newlease has recommended. Some are more helpful than others - the more practical kind.

I came across this recently on the Yale website (not my university!) and found it super helpful:

There is some really useful and interesting stuff in it. For example: "Nothing elicits dominant behavior like subservient behavior. Expect and demand to be treated like a colleague." If I'd read that before I'd started, I'd have been a much happier PhD bunny!

Quote From barnj083:
Hi All,

A few days ago I just received my final marks for both my master's degree and dissertation. Prior to the start of my dissertation I had a merit and was on track to finish with a 2:1 for Masters. However, I was incredibly devastated to find that I did not do as well as expected on my dissertation and as a result, not only lost my merit, but finished my Masters degree just 1% shy of a merit. I feel lost, confused, devastated and unsure what to do at this time.

What I have done is emailed my supervisor to request for feedback on my dissertation so I can see what I did wrong and what I can improve upon the next time (assuming there is a next time). Prior to the results of my dissertation I have been networking like crazy throughout the UK, attending PhD study fairs, networking with graduate students and universities so that I can work on the PhD application. Now because of my dissertation results and final Master's mark, I don't know if this is the end of the road with me. I had to apply to attend for a PhD funding fair here in London and submitted my undergraduate transcript as part of application process (which I completely understand and agree with given that funding is involved and it is extremely competitive). Now I don't even feel worthy of attending because of my final Master's mark.

With that said, is it still possible to be considered for funding opportunities for PhD despite my final Master's mark, or is this the end of the road for me? Also, should I even attend the PhD funding fair now despite being accepted and receiving my invitation already? I worked so incredibly hard on this dissertation and based on the feedback my supervisor gave me I was slowly gaining confidence thinking I was going to do well. Then I get my results and feel like i've been hit by a train. Please help me out.

Thank you

Quote From Gummibaerchen:
Hi,

Many thank for all your help!
@tru: Thanks! I'll do that!
@pm133: Actually I wrote already two publications but as I mentioned they are waiting ages (more than 6 months) at my supervisors desk! He simply doesn't care!
In Germany (where I am from) you do not need publication to finish your thesis and get your PhD. There are two ways to get your PhD. The first one is what is called Kumulativ Disssertation which is based on publications within a topic. Generally is 2-3 publications as first author. It doesn't matter which journal or impact factor (thing that is stupid and is based on the traditional and old-fashioned German academic system). The second is a normal dissertation. In this case, you might have no publication. Some people has one or two publications. The thing is: in Germany if you have worked on your PhD, in the end you will get it... it doesn't matter if you have publications or not. However, you will get a note in your PhD diploma and this makes the things harder. If you get a bad note your chances to stay in academia or research are really dropped.
The german PhD system is old-fashion and the supervisors follow the same rules. Just google the "12 years rule for academic positions at the Universities". This is somehow ridiculous and senseless.

Best

Quote From Tudor_Queen:
The joys of reflection! Having replied and re-read my first paragraph here, I am tempted to just make the changes. After all, if they are as menial as I suggest then what is the problem? I think it is just a matter of having requested not to be supervised by this individual because of a serious issue makes one feel heck, why do I have to change a word because you want it? And yes, that specific thing can be risen above : )

But with regard to my second point - going forward is this going to work... i.e., where there is a need to make changes and decisions about more substantive points. Any thoughts?

Quote From Lewlyn:
First you need to write a research proposal. If you need help let me know.

Quote From Gummibaerchen:
Hi pm133

No.... as first author no. I have written 2 manuscripts but they're dusty already in my supervisor's desk. Terrible. I have publications as second author, with some collaborations I did.

Best

Quote From Tudor_Queen:
Hello there

This query is for seasoned PhD students/post docs on this forum.

There were some issues with my supervision, which resulted me in requesting a change in supervision - I requested to be supervised by the same supervisors all but the main one - as this is where the issue was. Anyway, long story short - the co-supervisor said that she would only continue to supervise if the main one stayed on. So the situation now is - I have a new main supervisor who acts as a sort of point of contact and I meet with, but not to discuss the intellectual content of the PhD as such. Then I have two co-supervisors (the old main supervisor and co-supervisor) who I no longer meet with and our only contact is when I send them a draft and they comment on it, prior to journal submission. They are then included as co-authors. This was the new procedure agreed by all - and instigated by the new main supervisor (who has no input herself in the drafts but is copied in on all emails).

The problem arises that there are some comments that I do not necessarily agree with/want to address - but there is now no forum for discussion. If I were to email and begin a discussion that would take me back to the original problem - having to interact in a sour relationship that does not work. So do I address those that can be addressed and leave those that I do not agree with and submit the manuscript? The comments not substantive and I am first author.

It would be useful to get some advice on here.

Tudor

Quote From Fled:


Hey I am the king of extreme accountability, and everything is my fault, INCLUDING not reconciling my supervisors' inability to catch obvious academic flaws in my work. Supervisors are your safety net. They are your feedback loop. If they are shitty, you will be allowed to publish shitty work, if they are keen-eyed then your work stands a better chance to be academically thorough.

What part of "feedback loop" don't you understand? If you have supervisors who are incapable or ill-equipped to catch MAJOR errors....and the ONLY time you are told your work is crap is at your viva....you are telling me that's just fine?

Then according to you....there are no good or bad supervisors.....taken further, if there are no bad supervisors, there is no need for a supervisor at all? If no one is teaching you your errors along the way, how do you improve? Success is built on continuous micro failures, not just letting a candidate do as they please and then try to retroactively correct a disastrous viva!

As for my comment about meeting with supervisors about catching errors, if you cannot tactfully get your point across in that scenario, the fault lies in your interpersonal skills not my reasoning.

Anyways, this is my last comment, we agree to disagree. And I hope you don't go on to supervise anyone with that kind of attitude, because clearly, you will approach that role with zero sense of accountability. I've learned from the best, and they see their candidates (and their success) as a reflection of them to certain a degree.

Good Day.

Quote From Helbell13:
I'm thinking of applying for a PhD at my current university. I know the supervisor well and thought it would be nice to drop by his office before I apply to ask him a couple of questions about the PhD. Mainly to just show my face and let him know I'm keen. Any suggestions on what kind of questions I could ask him? I have a few generic ideas but would be nice to see if anyone else has had this experience and what worked for you?