Hey there! I completely sympathise with you. I had to have an occupational health check in order to get an NHS research passport, as I am working with vulnerable NHS patients with mental health problems. On my form I had to disclose my bipolar disorder ( which has led to a number of hospital admissions and all sorts of treatments) and also my eating disorder which I recovered from almost 10 years ago now. I was terrified that they would not grant me this letter, which would have meant that I couldn't have continued with my PhD. After I filled in my form I was asked to go for an appointment and the doctor was quite nice and basically just wanted to make sure that I was well at the moment. There was no problem with him signing me off, although I did have to go back for a couple of follow-up appointments to make sure that I was coping with the work and was still well enough to do it. I have to admit, since then I did have a bad episode which I was supposed to inform them of and didn't, because I was worrried about the consequences of going to see them if I wasn't well. But for now, as long as you are well enough to do the job, and the job isn't likely to make your health worse in any way, I would tell the truth. The consequences of completely lying could only make things worse if you get found out, and these people aren't there to deliberately make life difficult for you. Just emphasize that you are well at the moment and you should be ok. Best wishes, KB

Hey Natassia, congrats on the first!! I know technically for a masters or a PhD people only usually ask for a minimum of a 2.1, but in my own experience a first can certainly be beneficial when it comes to searching for funding- my own PhD is funded by a scholarship that I certainly wouldn't have stood a chance of winning with less than a first. If you would like to stay at the same uni for your PhD, I would advise that you let the relevant supervisor know towards the beginning of your masters that you want to do a PhD in their area (are you hoping to have the same supervisor for the masters and PhD?). You will need to start applying for PhD funding quite soon into your masters, so the earlier you sit down and talk to the potential supervisor, the better. I spoke to my masters supervisor just a few weeks into the course and told her I was interested in doing a PhD in that area (under her supervision), and it gave us plenty of time to put a proposal together and get it sent off to various places- we actually had more than one offer for funding in the end. It's always good to get in there first too- there were plenty of people wanting to be supervised by my MSc/PhD supervisor but most of them only approached her much later on when it was too late to arrange for funding. I wouldn't read too much into the number of studentships advertised this year, funding opportunities fluctuate yearly, and some years there are certain scholarships up for grabs too, you will just need to see what is available for your year and go for it. Your potential supervisor will certainly guide you on that one. Although perhaps it shouldn't be the case, I would tend to think that if there are two candidates who are pretty much equal on terms of most things, the internal one is probably more likely to be offered a place, simply because they are known to the university and the supervisor, and people like to deal with known quantities. Anyway, with your first and a hopefully a good masters and PhD proposal, you should be in with a very good chance when it comes to the funding. Best of luck, keep us posted, KB

Hey there! I think it's probably really important to speak to a few universities and ask whether you need a masters. In the department I am in (Clinical Psychology) an MSc is an absolute requirement for entry onto the PhD, even if you have a first at undergraduate level. I know of no PhD student in the department who doesn't have a masters, except one who has a lot of other relevant experience, and even she was made to take a number of MSc modules in her first year PhD. Personally, my MSc really prepared me for my PhD and I would have really struggled without it. But I know in many other areas it is feasible to go straight from undergrad to PhD- I don't know much about computer science-best to find a few universities that you are interested in and approach them directly to find out what you need I think. Also bear in mind that you will be competing with a lot of people who do have masters degrees. But still, if you can get away without one, you will save a lot of money! Good luck, KB

Hi there! If you are sure that you want to continue your studies in that area then I would opt for a masters degree to start with. I don't know much about your subject area but if you could find a masters that is part research and part taught then this might be a good way to go- the taught bit might help you work out exactly what area you are most interested in, and the research part would give you a good indication of whether you enjoy the research side of things before you jump into a PhD. With respect to universities just have a look on the uni websites and see which masters courses look best for what you want to do- it would probably be useful to look at the research which is being done at each uni too, and see if you can find a uni that seems to match your interests. You should be able to find out about the research interests of each uni on their website. Good luck, KB

======= Date Modified 24 Jun 2009 15:45:35 =======
I'm not sure whether you can appeal or not...I would tend to think that the rejection letter is pretty final. I guess there is no harm in speaking to your proposed supervisor to find out exactly what the issue is. Normally a 2.1 is a criteria for undertaking any PhD but it is quite unusual to be turned down if you have your own funding sorted out already- the main source of competition is usually for obtaining funding. And there seems to be a vague unofficial agreement that a distinction at masters (or at least a very good mark) goes a long way towards making up for not having at least a 2.1. What field are you in, just out of interest? If the rejection is final though, don't give up! I have a friend in another department with a 2.2 and a pass at MSc who is on a fully funded PhD- I think in this case it might be more beneficial to do some research assistant work or something first, make a few contacts, and try to sort out a prospective supervisor and funding this way. At least if you get to know someone personally, and you are good at what you do, they are less likely to be put off by your having a 2.2. Good luck, KB

I'm kind of with BilboBaggins on this one- there is no way I could manage a part time job whilst doing my PhD. I could probably fit in a few hours of teaching for a little extra cash if I was really stuck, but I think that even this would comprimise my PhD study. I don't know of anyone doing a PhD in my department who also has a part time job, other than doing a few hours of teaching and taking on some extra undergraduate marking, but maybe this is different across different subjects. I know some people doing PhDs in other departments here who have official work hours (e.g. 9am-5pm Mon-Fri, 5 weeks holiday per year), but a lot of people don't- as long as the work gets done on time then it doesn't matter so much when you do it. So there could be some flexibility that way, depending on how flexible your consultancy work would be. I don't have official work hours but the nature of my work (testing NHS patients) means that I need to work between those hours anyway (and many hours on top of that most weeks). Stipends seem to be a minimum of £12,940 at the moment, some funding is slightly more generous and goes up to around £15,000. I don't think many people get more than this. Best wishes, KB

hmm this is a tricky one. I have had health problems (bipolar disorder) whilst I have been with my current supervisor (a clinical psychologist), and when I wasn't well she was really supportive and encouraged me to talk to her about it, which was a bit uncomfortable really. I know she was trying to be helpful what with her professional background as a psychologist but it was awkward for me and for her, and afterwards we both kind of agreed that it was difficult/inappropriate to cross the supervisor/student boundary in that way, and that whilst she is there to deal with academic issues, I would seek other help if I got ill again and needed it. So I guess if my health was affecting my work, I would have no hesitation to mention what the problem was, but for therapy I am sticking to my counsellor!!! I wouldn't start seeing your supervisor less frequently- maybe just stick to the academic stuff and think about speaking to someone else about the other stuff? Best wishes, KB

Personally, I would concentrate on your MSc- it sounds like you are within reach of a distinction, and this will definitely add weight to your PhD application. You will most likely have the opportunity to do some teaching whilst you do your PhD- for many PhD students this is the first teaching they have ever done, and it is unlikely that you will be expected to have prior experience of teaching to get onto your PhD. Not to say it wouldn't be helpful, but I doubt it would sway a decision on your PhD application that much- the main thing will be your grades, your proposal, and your references. I wouldn't take the risk of lowering your grades by devoting too much time to your job, but that's just me! KB

Hey Keep_Calm, I have been rather anxious of late what with important meetings and presentations and deadlines etc, and it can take over, even when you're not actually in the middle of stressing over something in particular. I guess I want to sing the praises of exercise really- I know everyone knows that they should exercise anyway, but it really makes a huge huge difference. Personally, if I really want to just switch off I go to the gym and listen to my ipod (a combination of trance and cheesy rubbish about being strong and moving mountains etc- you get the picture!). If I go in there all stressed about something I can guarantee I'll come out a lot calmer, often having been able to think things through and put them into perspective. If you need something more distracting because you don't want to spend an hour in the gym worrying about your problems, you could try aerobics or something and drag a friend with you. Usually you have to learn routines etc to music so you have to concentrate on what you're doing, which doesn't leave you with time to be stressed about work. And it's fun too! Kickboxing is great for de-stressing, but is pretty hardgoing! Or if I'm really tired and can't really be bothered, I like to go swimming, which I find is really soothing somehow, without being knackering. I tend to stay away from anything competitive when I'm really stressed cos that can make me worse lol!
Just grab a friend and try some stuff out...I go mad if I go for more than a day without my exercise- it's worth making time for! Have fun :)

Personally, unless you are asked outright, I would probably steer clear from mentioning it unless it is obvious anyway, e.g. through gaps in employment or numerous hospital admissions etc. I have bipolar and have to declare it because I have lost 4 academic years through periods of ill health and hospital admissions, I have to attend a lot of health-related appointments, and it appears on my CRB check anyway. But it leaves me wide open to discrimination (although I am happy to say it hasn't affected me in this way so far), and even though there are equal opportunities policies in place, I'm not quite sure I trust them fully! And I am sick to death of having to go through extra procedures in my life just because I have this diagnosis. Plus, hopefully, you won't have this diagnosis for life- when you get better with depression you won't be still 'suffering from depression'- your diagnosis will be a part of the past whereas with illnesses such as bipolar/schizophrenia, even when a person is well, they still have the illness and the diagnosis. So in short, I wouldn't lie outright, but I certainly wouldn't make a big deal out of it if it's avoidable. But I am very biased (strangely), so do what you feel is right! Best wishes, KB.

======= Date Modified 19 Jun 2009 16:05:13 =======
Cheers guys, it does help to know I'm not the only one!



I tend to take criticism and suggestions reasonably well usually, but then it usually comes from someone who knows what they're on about, and when I think about it, they are almost always right! At the moment I am in first year, and the stats guy was checking my project proposal before it was sent to the NHS for ethical approval (my project involves testing patients with Alzheimer's disease who can't necessarily give consent for themselves, so there are no end of procedures to go through before I can start testing). I don't mind my stats being criticised at all, I appreciate that we all need a little stats help from time to time (or more often!)- it was more the absolute tearing apart of my entire project, the aims, the measures, the implications....I walked into the NHS ethics meeting yesterday terrified that they were all going to be of the same opinion and I wouldn't get approval to go ahead. Thus when I came out and they were all so enthusiastic about it I was thrilled. But I wish my own confidence and trust in what I'm doing wasn't so dependent on these events!!



Ah well, I can get on with now and try to stop stressing so much!

Best wishes guys, KB

I was wondering- how much do you let other people's opinions about your PhD topic and methodology bother you?

A while ago I went to go see the university statistician, and despite there being no issues with the proposed statistics, he tore my entire project to pieces, basically saying it was a waste of time and pointless. As my supervisor pointed out, the stats guy is a statistician, not a psychologist, and probably just didn't understand the background and aims of the project, but I still ended up in tears, thinking 'what if he's right?'. It really knocked my confidence and I began to have doubts about what I was doing. Then yesterday I was at my NHS ethical approval board meeting, and they had nothing but positive feedback on everything about the study, and how worthwhile they all thought it was, and I came out on a complete high (even better, the stats guy was there to hear all the positive feedback, which made me happy- childish, I know)! Whilst I have nothing but enthusiasm for my project, my feelings about it often seem to hinge on other people's evaluations of it, whether or not they are involved in the project. Do other people feel like this?! Cheers, KB

Hi again! Excuse my utter ignorance, being in psychology I'm sure I should know better, but what exactly is 'quantitative psychology' defined as? Obviously, most people in psychology use quantitative stats (as well as qualitative stuff) to analyse their data, but would a PhD in quantitative psychology be researching the statistical techniques and developing measures/tests...? Or do you mean a PhD in another aspect of psychology which will be analysed quantitatively?! Sorry for the confusion, have not heard too much about this field of psych! KB

Hey there! You should be fine with respect to age. I am doing a PhD in Clinical Psychology and there are a number of PhD students in our department who are in their 30s and 40s. But I would say that you are likely to need a masters degree first- as the others have mentioned, it is a very competitive area, and funding isn't easy to get. And quite aside from that, I did a BSc in Clinical Psychology and I would have struggled to do my PhD with no MSc, and I have stayed in the same subject area! Good luck, KB.

Hey Natassia, it's a horrible horrible wait, I was just like you, I could hardly think about anything else. To be honest, if you're averaging a first right up until your finals you will probably be fine. As you say, a 2.1. is still a good degree, but it's always nice to have that first to plonk on your CV and stand out that little bit more, especially if you're going to be applying for a PhD. I would just keep yourself busy, see friends, maybe get some voluntary work or work experience, whatever it takes to distract you for a few weeks! Do you actually need a first to get onto your MSc? Usually only a 2.1. is required anyway! Best wishes, KB