Hi,

I’m currently doing a lot of reading before I start the mammoth task of starting my literature review.

However, I’ve come across some books/academics that are clearly retarded - their work is shoddy and makes no sense. Their arguments are poor and very simplistic, and sometimes very sexist. I get angry just reading some of their work.

My dilemma is - Is it worth actually noting these in my literature review? I essentially will only be putting them in there to show what rubbish has been written on my subject area. I know a review is in part a huge critique of the work.. but I’m just torn as I’d rather have more scholarly and worth while texts in my PhD.

Thank you!

Hey!

I've been asked by my supervisor to make a CV - however I only have an old one which includes all my non-academic jobs I had (working in bars, stores while at university).

I'm in my first year of PhD and I don't really have anything to put on an Academic CV.

Any advise would be great about what to include and how long it should be.
I'm a little bit embarrassed really as It'll look so bare

Thank you!

I'm in the exact same position, i have only just started, i'm drowning in literature and to top it all off i've been asked to write 2 papers in the next couple of months, as well as start my research out in the field.

To be honest, at first I felt like I genuinely didn't know what i was doing and so I did nothing, I went into uni and just sat on my phone all day.

But luckily I have excellent supervisors who are highly motivated - so they've steered me into the direction of tasks ( noted above ). So my advise to you, and to myself... is to take baby steps, each day. Don't put too much pressure on yourself.

In regards to being alone, I totally sympathise - i'm from the UK but moved to NZ for my PhD, I know no one and it's very isolating - however it's like any University journey, it takes time to make friends and to find your feet. You're at the very beginning of a big journey ahead, everything isn't going to fall into place straight away. Chin up - and remember, baby steps.

I'm sorry to hear that you're in this very awkward situation, but as I understand it, Academia is a somewhat selfish arena in which you have to stand by what you believe in, even if your supervisor isn't on the same page as you.

At the end of the day, your supervisor has already got their place in this Arena and I must agree with Dunham, others will probably see the flaws in the paper ( lets be honest, academics love to draw on the negatives of a paper more than the positives) and this will more than definitely stay with you for most of your career.

Your career is just starting out, don't let it be on the foundation of a clearly stupid, unsupportive supervisor.

Hi!

I'm new to this forum and to the PhD world ( Only started in September 17) and unlike my MSc, as you can imagine, i'm already reading and collecting a lot more literature.

How have people found the best method to catalogue their literature?

In all honesty, what I used to do for my BA and MSc was either print out the journal article, or make notes in a note book if it was a book (obviously i couldn't print out the entire book). As for my bibliography I used to just add to it as I went. 4 months into my PhD and well ahead with my literature reading, I'm feeling this method may not be sustainable - thus I have been looking at other options, but i'm still stuck at which is potentially the best.

What have others found that work well?

Several other students I have spoken with have adopted the use of Mendeley and Endnote, however i'm not sure if this would suit me.

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance!