I didn't do the up-grading. I graduated with my Masters and then I started the PhD - in spite of my supervisor's attitude!
I never had doubts about my project, but many about supervision and my ability to cope with it and with the requirements and pressure of a PhD. I am at the end of my first year now and I think it was the best choice for me. If you decide to graduate you can take some time off and look for alternatives, including a better project and/or supervisor/ uni. No point in rushing on something so important, you risk to waste time and energy.

Hi picchu_flower. I started my PhD because this is what I always wanted to do, so I am not sure that I can relate to you in this respect. However, we all have periods when we lack motivation or we struggle to make headway for whatever reason. I think that you need re-assess the very reason why you started in the first place. If your reason is solid enough you will get through it by setting short-term goals. Long terms goals are necessary, but do not have an immediate outcome - and that is what you need in order to nurture your self-confidence. Self-confidence will help you to keep motivated. So, if after the reply to the big question -why am I doing this? - you are still of the idea of going ahead, write a list of tasks as soon as you enter your lab in the morning and do not leave until you have ticked all the boxes!

I had a look at my notes, etc. The only thing that I found published and can be applicable to your case is:
1) In the footnote explain what you are citing/quoting, something like: 'I would like to thank Dr. Xyz for allowing me to read his copy of paper/article 'Zzzz', published in Yzx, etc.
2) In the bibliography you can just use the published details.
This is what you usually do when the author let you read his article before publication.
Hope it makes sense!

I had a similar problem during my Masters. I was sent a copy of an article with no references (issue number/year, etc.), which meant it was useless! I looked everywhere for details and eventually I found out that my copy was only the transcript of a speech. The only thing that I could do was to include it in the bibliography as such, but I didn't cite it in the main text. I didn't think it was appropriate without the publication details. Is there any other way you can access the published version? (e.g. Interlibrary loans?)Are you sure that there isn't an electronic version available on-line?

Congratulations to you both! Well done!!! You must be very proud of yourselves.

I wrote my own research proposal, which was fairly generic at the time. I don't think I could have coped with a project written by someone else. The only thing that I would suggest you -if you are going to write your own -is to think how to make your topic attractive for your Uni/dept. rather than to yourself! Also think about the potential for future development (e.g. post-doc) and why that particular uni would benefit from your research.

I agree with dazednconfused. Love is all about giving. Sometimes happens that you walk for a while with someone, but at a certain point you take different paths. One grows and the other one doesn't.
It is hard to accept this after you have invested five years of your life to build what you thought it was a strong relationship. However, I can tell you in my little experience that this is just the end of a cycle and - although now it seems impossible - you will build that dream, perhaps with someone new, who can appreciate you.
You have all my sympathy and a big, cuddly hug.

The point here is not about being a 'loser' or a 'winner'. The point is being able to assess what you really want and fight for it. You should consider that the problems that we experince with our supervisors are likely to happen in other contexts and with other people. You cannot run away every time. You must do your possible best to make things working and think constantly about your objectives. You must be motivated, no doubt. Do you enjoy doing research? What is the outcome of what you have done so far? What sort of feed-back do you get from other people in your field? These are the important questions. If you don't enjoy what you are doing and this affects your quality of life of course you should leave. It seems to me that you are giving too much importance to the roles of the 'others' (supervisor, potential boss, etc.). Concentrate on yourself, what you need, want and can do.

Hi SeaBird, I try to do the same by getting involved in conferences, etc. Sometimes is tough, but on the other hand it just give me the strength to go ahead in spite of everything. Thanks for your words, I feel better now.

Hi MichealA, I think that we are talking about two different things here. I haven't problems with my research. That's absolutely fine and on track. The problem is my supervisor's attitude and behaviour towards me. Attituted and behaviour that I don't get by anyone else in the dept./uni. I cannot and don't want to talk in detail about this, however this is something that limit the development of my PhD and has a negative impact on me. As I said I am not in the position to change and I must do my best to make it working, but it's far from ideal and cannot be solved so easily.

I can only sympathise with you Snowglobe. There are many useful pieces of advice in the previous posts, but they are only valid if you deal with a person that play the game openly and correctly. Unfortunately - and this doesn't happens only in academia - it is not always in this way. I am in my first year, and I would certainly change supervisor if I had the chance, but I am not in the position to do that. My PhD pass through this person and the only thing that I can do is to work as hard as I can and take on board all the opportunities that arise outside - being aware that I will never get encouragement, support or help. I know how difficult it can be to keep your motivation going. The only thing that I can recommend you is to do as much networking as possible. It takes double time to achieve things, but you will get there, be sure of this.

I am not in your field, therefore take my advice only as a suggestion based on personal experience. I can imagine that the prospect of an extra couple of months revising your work can be daunting. However, you have been very lucky to spot it before submission. There is nothing wrong by admitting a mistake, there are no supermen or wonder women around. I would take the chance to make the changes now, or it could be more difficult later or even jeopardise the results of your viva. Are you prepared to take the risk?

I agree with Sue. There are good and bad supervisors, and unfortunately this can make a huge difference in your PhD, in the opportunities that you may have to teach in your dept., present papers, publish, etc. Of course it is your PhD and you must be able to make headway on your own, but the idea that hard work is enough to achieve objectives, is a bit too simplistic I am afraid. We all need to feel we are valued and supported, and supervisors should be there for that. I had problems with mine and it was very hard to keep the motivation going. I spoke with others in the dept. and also with my sup directly. I know that I cannot expect much support from this person, but at least now the relationship is civil, which is already a big achievement.

So the question is not why am I so unlucky? but What can I do to make it more attractive to the sponsors? (not to myself!) Do you have any access to the application of a successful candidate? That's a good way to start: research your sponsor and previous successful candidates. Then is only matter of time and patience...and keep trying!

Just a last post before I am off for a conference. I would like to encourage all the people that feel low because their funding application was rejected - I have a string of those in my CV too! And I am currently fees only.
Of course we all need a bit of good luck in everything we do.
But this is not equal to: I don't get anything because I am unlucky. This removes responsibility and control from us - so that we can feel better about it. The real truth is that we all have a substantial control over our lives and our research. As I pointed out in a previous post, the rejection is not about the person. I don't think any dept/ uni would nominate someone for the sake of it. Probably the research project needs to be further developed, or at the moment, is considered less important then others for whatever reason.