I know I'm getting a bit ahead of myself here (PhD starts in October!), but...

I've noticed that an 'Awards and Grants' section seems to be a standard feature of academic CVs, and I was wondering whether there's any perceived difference in status/value between departmental and research council funding? I've been awarded a departmental studentship worth the same as an AHRC full-time PhD award, but might that be seen as somehow 'lesser' than an actual AHRC award - like I wasn't good enough to get 'proper' funding, but managed to land in a safety net? Or would the perception be that departmental funding goes to 'first choice' candidates, with the rest being put forward for AHRC awards? (In chronological terms, I must have been the first applicant in my dept. to be given funding - back in May, before anyone was nominated for an AHRC award - but I don't know if that means anything). Or is there just no difference?

(Apologies for the lack of tact here - I know a lot of people are getting bad news on the funding front round about now and I don't want to come across like a complete prick for worrying about whether I've got the 'right sort' of funding. Obviously I'm thrilled to have funding of any sort, but I'm also painfully aware that I'm about to enter a very competitive world...)

I took a year out between finishing my MA and starting a PhD, and I'm glad I did. Three reasons:

1.) It meant I could focus on getting the best possible mark for my MA rather than spending half my time worrying about PhD applications.

2.) It meant I had an actual Distinction, rather than a predicted Distinction, when I did come to apply for PhDs. I only got a 2.i undergraduate degree, and I'm certain I wouldn't now be about to start a funded PhD if I hadn't been able to send my complete MA transcript along with my application.

3.) It meant I had plenty of time to prepare and polish my PhD application materials. I had a lot of hoops to jump through as I was applying for several different sources of funding as well as a PhD place, and each of them required something different (a research proposal here, a case for support there, a CV, a personal statement...)

So there is a definite bright side here! Treat this as an opportunity to give yourself the very best chance of getting a funded place starting next October.

Oh, and I didn't have any 'connections' at that Uni by the way - I was a complete outsider.

I got a Departmental Studentship at 'another' Uni (i.e. not where I did my Masters), so it does happen. It's hard to generalise I suppose, but I certainly wouldn't assume students already at a Uni will automatically be first choice. (Not sure why Uni-funded scholarships would be any different from externally funded scholarships, by the way - surely the Uni chooses the successful applicants in just the same way?)

Hi Fay

Nice to hear from a fellow philosopher!

Let me put my practical hat on first:

I don't know what employers' perceptions of a Philosophy MA are, but I suspect they'd generally recognize the value of the sort of skills required to get one. I worked in marketing for many years after getting my English and Philosophy BA, and it was always my 'analytical skills', 'lateral approach to problem-solving', 'willingness to challenge assumptions' etc. etc. that would get singled out for praise at performance reviews. (My 'annoying tendency to question everything and split hairs over details nobody else considers relevant' may not have gone down so well though!)

Anyway, I don't think people with Philosophy MAs have significantly more trouble finding work than anyone else. So unless there's some job you've got your heart set on that you'd be more likely to get with a more 'targeted' (vocational?) qualification under your belt, I wouldn't worry too much.

OK, time to take my practical hat off and put my personal-bias hat on. Ready?

JUST DO IT! Did I mention the ten long years I spent working in marketing after finishing my nice, sensible, something-to-fall-back-on English with Philosophy BA? Well guess what - it was rubbish. I ended up going back to do a Philosophy MA in my 30s, and now I'm about to start a funded PhD. (Yes, it IS possible to get funding for a Philosophy PhD - though you'll probably need a solid Distinction.)

Really, nothing could be more absurd than worrying about what some corporate little Hitler is going to think about you studying a subject you love ('Hmm... how can a philosopher help me design/sell/repair cars/socks/spray tanning systems?'). Sod 'em. If you have to go crawling to The Man one day for financial reasons, fine - you can prove you've got a brain and he needs brains to feed on. Till then, do what you want to do for as long as you can.

Rant over - best of luck!

Natassia - for imposter syndrome in a nutshell:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imposter_syndrome

(I'd never heard of it till someone mentioned it on this forum!)

Thanks for the encouragement. I think the support for tutors is pretty good in my dept., and it has been spelled out that tutors are NOT expected/required to have in-depth subject knowledge in every area they might end up teaching.

As I say, it's not my ability I'm unsure of - I know I've done well so far (and a lot better than most people who joined my MA course fresh from a single-honours degree). It's subject knowledge where I feel shaky.

Thanks for the advice/reassurance everyone!

Yeah, I am doing a bit of reading to try and fill in the blanks in my knowledge, especially areas I know will be relevant to my PhD topic. The trouble is, the more I read, the more I think EVERYTHING is going to be relevant sooner or later! I just have a growing sense of a huge amount of interlocking material out there that I've barely scratched the surface of.

I think I need to keep reminding myself that it's not really the case that everyone else has the whole Western philosophical canon at their fingertips, and that I'm (hopefully!) perfectly capable of picking things up fairly quickly. I just can't help picturing scenarios where I have to confess (e.g. to my supervisor) that I don't know the first thing about Wittgenstein etc. etc...

Anyone else had this issue?

I did a joint honours BA - 6 assessed modules in one subject, 3 in another. And the modules I did in the subsidiary subject weren't exactly carefully chosen to give me a rounded view of the field, in fact they were in rather specialised areas that I've since pretty much lost interest in.

Anyway, I realized late in the day that the subsidiary subject was where my strengths and interests lay. So I did an MA in that subject, and did my best to choose a course that had a strong taught element in core areas. But the specific topics we were looking at had clearly been chosen with a view to putting something new in front of people who'd tackled a lot of the really 'central' material as undergraduates.

As a result I was painfully aware throughout my MA that the topics I was studying were set in the context of a wider background I didn't know that much about.

None of this seems to have been a problem as far as results go - I got a good distinction and I'm starting a funded PhD in October. But I still feel more like someone who's managed to write a few good essays than someone who's got a real command of their subject.

You know how everything's supposed to 'click' when you reach a certain stage in your learning and begin to see how topics that used to seem unrelated all fit together? Well, I just don't feel like I'm there yet. And I'm starting to worry that I'm not going to get there while I'm studying for a PhD, because presumably I'm expected to engage with my chosen topic without having to break off and study a load of stuff everyone else tackled as undergraduates! I'm feeling even more intimidated at the minute because I've been looking at the BA programme within the department where I'll be doing my PhD, and realising that the average third-year single honours student is going to have covered way more ground than I have even now. And as for the prospect of actually *teaching* a subject I feel like I hardly know my way around... eek!

Anyone else had/have this problem? I know some people do a masters and then a PhD in a subject they haven't studied at all at undergraduate level. How does that work? Does PhD study allow for some time spent reading round the 'basics' everyone else has already studied? Do I just have a touch of 'imposter syndrome'? I'm in the weird position of being perfectly confident of my ability to do this subject, while also feeling like I just don't have the sort of grounding in it I really need.

This somewhat contradicts what others have said, but:

My dept. have sent a letter asking students to register their interest in tutoring 1st year undergrads, and they're at pains to point out that you *don't* need to be acquainted with the specific subject matter of a given module in order to tutor that module. The assumption seems to be that if you have a good degree in the subject, you'll be able to pretty much pick it up as you go along (with appropriate support), at least to the standard required to tutor 1st years.

So depending on the subject, the department etc. there might be more to it than just subject knowledge.

At the risk of committing a metadiscursive utterance of the bleedin' obvious, might I venture the interpretative metahypothesis that the pseudo-contentular vacuosity of the author's textual-critical verbularisations might have been rendered nonobfuscatedly reader-perceptible if he'd written in plain English?

======= Date Modified 17 Jul 2009 21:58:02 =======
You really shouldn't think of it as 'soft' to go and see your GP. Anyone can become depressed - I've been there myself (and yes, I did go to my doctor). From what you say about 'dark thoughts' it does sound like you might be suffering from depression.



And it certainly doesn't sound 'pathetic' to be finding things a struggle after the end of a serious relationship. Cut yourself some slack - you're entitled to be feeling low and you're entitled to do something about it. You shouldn't be feeling that you ought to be able to just 'get over it' (which it sounds like you do).

Oh, don't get sick of me Hazyjane!:-(

I know it's a pain being mistaken for a teenager (I've known people in that position). I'm just saying, looking older isn't necessarily going to make you feel any more confident in a teaching situation. I think we've probably all got things we're self-conscious about (looking young, looking old, being overweight, talking too quietly etc. etc.) - at the end of the day confidence is going to come from knowing that you're up to the job, and from just 'settling in' to the role.

Apologies if my 'ee, you toung 'uns should count your blessings' venting has caused offence... you'll have to excuse me, I think I'm having an early midlife crisis!

God, I wish I had your problem... I'm about to start a PhD, conscious of being 10 years older than many of my peers, and just to rub it in my hair seems to have chosen this exact moment to start thinning and turning grey... I don't think looking old is going to be an issue! And if it makes you feel any better, I don't expect a gleaming pate and general sense of impending decrepitude to boost my confidence significantly when I come to take my first seminar.

I know where Angus is coming from in the context of essays where word count is paramount, and maybe signposting isn't such a big deal in other subjects as it is in mine (philosophy, where it's obviously all about making complex arguments hang together). But when I came to select the writing sample to submit along with my PhD funding application, I went straight for the (4,000 word) essay that was best signposted - the one that I felt best demonstrated my ability to address a problem in a clear, insightful, carefully structured way.

It's not that it was full of passages summarising things I'd already said, just that I was careful to spell out the relevance of everything I was doing to the overall trajectory of the essay. I'm not sure it would have been a distinction-standard piece of work (or would have got me my funding) if I'd left the person reading it to figure out for themselves why I'd bothered to discuss X at such length, why I was ignoring Y, what exactly Z was supposed to demonstrate, why I thought A needed addressing before I could talk about B, etc. (It certainly wasn't an earth-shattering piece of original philosophy that cried out for a high mark; in fact it was my lowest-marked essay. But it did show that I knew how to piece together and pick apart arguments.)

Anyway, how's it going Sinead?

Very good. I can never bring myself to write things like 'ROFL' and 'LOL', but if I could you'd have earned them!

I dunno though, I feel a bit sorry for the people who post on here asking for help dreaming up topics. It's hard when you're 'out of the loop' one way or another - not already studying, or studying in the wrong place, and hence without people around you to give you an idea of what PhD students are working on in your area and so on. I know there's always Google, but it's sometimes surprisingly unhelpful, and certainly no substitute for networking or one-to-one advice... I remember desperately trying to find some helpful examples of research proposals and Cases for Support online while I was applying for my PhD, just so I could get some vague idea of what was expected of me, and getting absolutely nowhere.