Agree with the advice to contact your supervisor and get them to chase this. It's starting to look like incompetence now on the part of someone. They said you'd have the results in October. It's now well past that. Chase it.

At my university there is a convenor who organises vivas. He passed the examiners' list of minor corrections on to me. I then did the corrections (nowhere, I think, would a supervisor do them), and then passed back the corrected thesis to him to check over. All my corrections had to be completed within a month, including delivering hard bound copies of the corrected thesis.

I'd echo the others' advice, but you're in now, so need to move forward with the course. I would recommend that you take advantage of the university counselling services though. It's sounds as though you're still in a difficult place head-wise, and you could benefit greatly from an informal chat or two with the counsellor.

After my PhD I took a number of undergraduate courses with the Open University, the latest one last year, an honours level Art history course. I found it quite a frustrating experience after the PhD, having to write to a plan, and not expand, though I didn't have quite your word count issues: I wasn't a natural at art history, so writing enough was my problem! Anyway I did vastly better as the course went on and I got to grips with it, and best of all in the project/dissertation at the end, where I got to define my own topic and explore it more in the style in which I'd tackled my PhD.

Best of luck!

It all depends on what student means. For me it means someone who is studying. And for me studying meant learning about something in a formal signed-up way. Not necessarily through taught classes or lectures, but in a formal degree or course that the student (or whatever) has signed up for. Hence my being perfectly happy with the term.

======= Date Modified 01 Nov 2012 14:58:26 =======
Afraid I have a different take on this. I don't see it as bitching, but more a realistic assessment in these academics' eyes. If they were bitching I'd expect far more criticism of her as a person and of her work. Not a discussion of her likely career progress.

Now it's wrong that they should assume that someone aged 39 or 40 would not be in a position to start an academic career. I have a very big issue with that part of this. But otherwise I don't see their actions as that wrong, or that dissimilar from what I saw a lot as a postgraduate student myself.

Absolutely 100% do not tell her. It would only upset her and cause unnecessary ructions. And not be of any help to her at all.

I always referred to myself as a PhD or postgraduate student, and so did my university. Research assistant wouldn't be appropriate in my case, because I defined my own PhD topic and wasn't assisting anyone. Staff at my university make a visible distinction between undergraduate and postgraduate students and how they are treated, and also to a lesser extent between taught and research students. Research students in particular are treated on a similar par to staff, and are regarded as part of the wider research community.

I was advised not to work from notes if possible - it can give a bad impression to examiners. And having been through a viva myself - successfully - I would probably share that view. It's better for the flow and impression you make if you can answer out of your head. But if you need to refer to your thesis do so, but preferably you won't.

Re why you chose the project say why it attracted you and why you think it's important. I was a similar student in my first go at a science PhD, so had I not had to leave for medical reasons I'd have been facing this too. In my second go, history, I defined my own research project, so had lots and lots to say about that in the viva! You can also take the chance to stress why your contribution is important here i.e. if there's a gap in the research knowledge/work, and why your PhD fills it.

I don't think that last question will come up either, but if it did for me I would have answered about why my case studies and research examples are representative of wider patterns, even if I could only study a small part of the research area for my PhD for practical reasons.

I have a different perspective on this from previous posters, possibly because my PhD (my second go, after falling ill and having to leave a full-time science one) was in humanities, and there it's virtually impossible to get funding. Unless people self-fund they generally can't do humanities PhDs, and you get a lot of people self-funding. Usually this is done part-time, alongside a nearly full-time job. The extra cost of not working and maintaining yourself as a full-time student isn't usually worth it. But people can get a lot of satisfaction out of doing their PhDs in this way, and some go on to academic positions, either full-time, or part-time, like Open University lecturing/tutoring.

Each person has to weigh up the pros and cons. If it was me in your position I wouldn't consider full-time self-funding. It is just too costly, and your part-time job that you will need to sustain it will make it hard to do the work you need to complete the study full-time. Part-time PhDs are generally more sustainable financially, though you have to commit to them over many years.

And yes you are much more likely to be accepted for a PhD as a self-funding student. You will still have to meet the minimum entrance requirements for PhD students at the university, which is usually a 2.1 or higher, and sometimes also a Masters too. But beyond that you won't be competing for the limited (even in science, if that's your field) funding options.

I self-funded the first year of my part-time history PhD but won funding during that year for the rest of it, from AHRC. So depending on your field that might be another option for you. I was quite prepared to self-fund the duration though. The PhD was well worth it for me, in terms of intellectual satisfaction and opening up opportunities for me as an independent academic historian in future. This is despite me being unable to work due to severely disabling progressive neurological illness. The equation on whether to self-fund a PhD isn't always a financial one.

I prepared for my viva myself. My supervisor offered to do a mock viva type thing, but I didn't want that, and was happier preparing myself. We get on very well, but this just suited my way of working more. I used Jackson and Tinkler's viva preparation book, and analysed my PhD/thesis in 5 key ways pre viva (I've posted about these a lot here before). This way I covered a lot of questions that could come up, but didn't have a huge list of - often similar - questions to try to answer which wouldn't suit me at all. Note you cannot prepare for all questions. Your examiners will generally ask you things you haven't anticipated at all. Nor could your supervisor have anticipated them all either.

I submitted on 10th February 2010 and received notification of the date a month later. The location and time wasn't confirmed until nearer then. Don't worry unduly about this. My viva was on 31st March 2010.

I wonder why it was mentioned at all. Like others have said, most people at academic conferences like that have PhDs anyway, so it's hardly unusual, and saying it makes the speaker look like a twat! Perhaps they were newly-PhD'd and still revelling in it, and didn't realise what a bad impression they would give highlighting it?

I'm curious about Pineapple's comments about a doctorate though. A clinical doctorate is different from a PhD, yes, but most PhDs are doctorates. So, for example, I am perfectly justified in describing my PhD as a doctorate.

I won't claim to be a Dr in general life though. Apart from anything else it causes confusion, with people assuming you are a medical doctor. Though I did change my title with the bank, for added ID with my title on it, since I'm an unaffiliated post-doc.

My husband was a postdoc research assistant for many years, and more recently a research fellow. From the very beginning it was a 9-5 job for him. Some other people in his group worked other hours, for example all-nighters, or coming in late and leaving late. But they generally worked the same hours, like a full-time job.

My husband's job was in the sciences. I worked as a part-time research assistant for a year, in humanities, 20 hours a week, and again it was fixed hours, though I was flexible in how I worked them. So I would work full Mondays, Wednesday afternoons, and full Fridays. I needed the days in between to rest/recover due to my MS-like illness. My boss (also my PhD supervisor) was happy so long as I put in the time needed, and, most importantly of all, got the work done. That job bridged my taught PG Masters and PhD, both part-time and studied alongside it.

No CV at my university. And the thesis is judged on its own merits there. Examiners were not aware of publications or wider research experience. Thesis + viva is what is examined. Not your CV.

Are you seeing a counsellor? You should still be eligible for the uniersity's own counselling service, assuming they have one. Use this as much as you want. It should help you cope.

I was scared of failing my PhD from the start. My second go at a PhD that is. I'd had to leave another one (full-time science, unlike the part-time humanities second one) after falling long-term seriously ill. And so to have another go took a lot of courage, and meant I had concerns that other people don't generally have. Right from before I started it, at the very beginning, through to the end.

But I got there. And you can too. The best thing you can do is to give it your best shot. View it as an opportunity to be seized. Enjoy it.

Good luck!