As the thread title says, really. I am interested in the Env Psych PhD course at the University of Surrey. However, according to the British Psychology Society website, Environmental Psychology isn't recognised as a discipline in its own right, nor is Social Psychology, so upon completion, what would this degree qualify me to do? I am guessing being a contracted researcher (if the ConDem government hasn't eviscerated all funding streams by that time) or academia. But it will not qualify me to practice a trade as a psychologist, or will it?

I guess bottom line - I don't want to spend 3 years of my life and however many thousands of pounds to end up with a nice piece of paper that I can't do very much with.

Does anyone have any insight to share on this please?

Thanks all for your responses - they are quite encouraging, which is also very helpful in itself.

I have come up with two proposals that I drew from research priorities in the sub-field of interest (hydrology) and which I will be submitting once I have finished proof-reading, etc. and so far have applied for one advertised studentship which really interests me. I keep going through the studentships that are advertised and it is partly because of that that I was beginning to feel rather apprehensive about how much a student was already expected to know about the field. For example, many environmental and energy related programmes stipulate computer modelling and advanced statistics. So I am now trying to teach myself the basics of environmental modelling using computing (NetLogo and a language), but unless there are some courses at the Uni I can take to enhance my beginner skills, it would seem foolish for me to apply for programmes which require modelling because I don't have those skills yet. But, the "yet" is important here, I guess, because as teek noted - this is why one does a PhD in the first place: to advance skills & knowledge, to address questions, etc.

I suppose that when it comes right down to it, I was just wondering what the expectations are from the perspective of the Uni for prospective PhD candidates when they apply. I can handle having background knowledge, being familiar with the research trends, and all of that ... it was just really the computer simulation-related skills I was most concerned about.

I really want to go back to complete my studies, I really enjoy studying and learning new things, am keenly interested in environmental sustainability, complexity theory and all of that exciting stuff, so will keep plugging away. I suppose my only other concern is my age - I presume that at 46 I am not yet over the hill?

Anyway, thanks again for all of the reassurances.

All the best

======= Date Modified 05 18 2010 11:18:45 =======
I am applying for PhDs in environmental-related sciences. There are no end of topics that interest me, and when I dig into such topics I get concerned that I don't know enough to even be considered a viable candidate.

How much is a prospective student expected to know about the field of research before one begins the programme? For example, will I need to know about computer modelling, or complex energy equations, and all of that before I begin, or are students expected to pick that up along the way?

This boils down to my not being sure of the expectations schools have of prospective candidates. I think that I am smart enough (scored a distinction on my MSc while working full time), so how do I impress upon prospective grad schools that I have the brains, the intellectual curiosity and tenacity to go the course when I don't know the level of detail many of the studentship programmes appear to require.

Any thoughts?

Thanks