I am so sorry to hear this too. Her reaction seems unfair, as does the whole scenario. Do you think that you can address the things they have asked you to address? Do you have a secondary supervisor who might be more supportive?

Regardless, I think it's important to find out where you stand. Hopefully people on here will have more experience and advice. Is there anyone you can talk to at uni , for example in the student union? Or doctoral academy? There should be someone knowledgeable and impartial (not even an academic) who can answer your questions and tell you what you are or are not entitled to. At my uni, it was called the doctoral academy.

I hope you get clarity soon.

Congrats on giving a good interview. Have you had your follow up interview yet? The advice may be too late, but just do the same thing as you did in the first one. :)

Good luck!

Hi everyone

I wouldn't normally come on here with such a trivial questions, but I thought maybe someone will know... I am trying to find a movie that I nearly watched a couple of years ago but then forgot about... it has just come back to mind, and although it sounds a bit depressing I wanted to give it a go... The problem is - I have forgotten its name...

Here's what I remember: It's about a man (with dark hair) who gets tragic news one night that his family (wife and kids) have been killed in a car accident. I'm not sure what all happens in between, but the synopsis said something about him going to live in (and possibly buy) a lighthouse... I don't remember anything else or any of the actors, and when I search on IMDB for lighthouse films, I get a load of horror movies, which it definitely wasn't.

If anyone knows what it could be (or has any alternative suggestions I could try - I seem to be craving something a bit melancholy though), please let me know!!!

Thanks
Tudor

Ps. Have just finished corrections! Need to check them all tomorrow and then will submit - fingers crossed!

Yes, you will be fine! The report you have prepared and submitted to them should be the basis for all their questions. So ensure that you understand everything you wrote and why, relax, have a good, open attitude, and you should be sorted. Curve balls are just curve balls - there may be a few - and you might be able to answer them, might not - either have a try if you think you can or just admit you don't know if you really don't - those are the two best (arguably only!) options and either is fine! This is the advice I give based on my progress report viva and my final viva. All the best!

Thank you everyone and hope you are all doing well! Well, this is reassuring. Someone said they can't be bounced back - it's a pass or fail - I find that interesting indeed! Hope not to test it out... I haven't yet submitted mine (I was given extra time due to personal circumstance) - they're due next week :-).

Hi all,

I was wondering what the possible outcomes are of minor corrections. Can they be bounced back if the examiner doesn't feel they've been addressed adequately? I am not in this position (and hope not to be), but just wondered as it doesn't say on my examiners' form.

Thanks
Tudor

I am also sorry to hear about your experiences. I don't think it is an automatic process. You would need to formally discuss and submit it as an MPhil in order to be awarded one. Have you considered doing what you can and submitting it anyway - on the off-chance that it is enough to get the award of PhD? Maybe you would have nothing to lose that way, as if the supervisors thought it wasn't good enough for a PhD, they would be suggesting MPhil, and guide you down that route. Or if it got to viva stage and the examiners decided it was worthy of an MPhil and not a PhD, ditto.

To find out about the ins and outs - I would suggest to talking to your supervisors. Or you could try talking with the relevant team at your uni (at my uni it was called "the doctoral academy" and there were advisors who you could talk to about this kind of thing to help you decide what to do and understand the ins and outs of things).

I really would suggest talking to them because it sounds like you are (understandably) on a huge downer, and this means you could be seeing things more negatively than you might otherwise, and than they might. I left writing up till late. Also a few months prior, I had been on the verge of quitting (or rather, downgrading to an MPhil). I thought my thesis was crap and wouldn't be awarded a PhD. In the end, I felt happier with it once it was written (though still not over-joyed) and passed with minor corrections. It's probably better than you think. And you can do way more than you think in a short amount of time. And if needed you could always extend your deadline (I did mine several times!).

Hope this is somewhat informative / encouraging. Don't give up (unless you seriously do want to), and go for the PhD Award - it will be behind you forever soon.

Best
Tudor

I think having a Distinction at Masters (very rare from what I hear) will overwrite the 2:2 at Undergrad. They will probably assume you were not fully engaged until you really got into what you are passionate about (and then you got a Distinction). And logically, Masters is a higher level of study. I wouldn't be concerned about someone GCSE reults if they got all As at A-level, for example. Good luck! :)

Eng, that is exactly the sort of thing I want to avoid!!! I am visiting the lab next week and will try get a sense of things then and possibly ask the very few lab members some questions! I am hoping I will just be able to get a sense of things - having had experience in a lab where the PI was great and the lab members happy and productive. Why don't they sell metal detectors for this sort of thing? Then again, I suppose that is what instinct is for...

I don't agree - I've had a collaboration before which then led to a job offer (postdoc) - in my experience it's a great way to get to know whether you would want to work with / for someone in the long term or not.

Ooh, my reply to you has actually given me an idea...! I guess I could start a collaboration with them and see how that goes and whether I would actually want to do a postdoc with them... now there's an idea!

Thanks for your reply pm133. And I like your phrasing of whether "they are a good match" for me. That is another aspect. There are some PIs who I think would be decent people, but not necessarily a good match. I agree that asking questions and "interviewing" them would help me to discover this. But I wonder how to find out what kind of person they are - how they regard and treat others being the primary thing.

I don't want to start working with someone only to discover that they are someone who I don't think has many principles - e.g., someone who engages in bullying or treating with less respect of those who are perceived as in a position of lesser power, etc etc. I just can't stand that kind of thing. And now I've had a taste of working with folks who seem decent and respectful, and it has made me set that as a bit of a red line myself - that is what I value right now. I wonder how I could find out what kind of person they are - short of just getting to know them and interacting with them over a period of time... it's not really something you can probe by questioning...

Congrats on getting interview! Two friends of mine had postdoc interviews where they had to analyse some data. Not sure if it would have been described as written or not (it was computer based - using specialised software). Try not to sweat about this. Part of what they'll be looking at is probably how you handle the uncertainty / stress of the situation. And certainly what will be the deciding factor on whether you get the job is you as a whole package, not a test performance. Good luck!

Cheers both! I think I asked my question in a confusing way. My question isn't - is a big / small lab inherently good / bad? It is - could it possibly be any indicator on the personality / style of the PI? Or - could a small lab despite success (as I judge it - through high quality research that I enjoy reading - plus lots of grants and things) be indicative of them being a d*ck? I've come to realise that there are two types of people in academia (and maybe a third group who haven't quite yet decided), and I am very keen to avoid the latter type. But I realise, I may be being a bit paranoid / speculating too much here as I wonder, hmm, why such a small lab... are you a d*ck and no one wants to work with you and everyone ends up leaving...?!

That's my question :-) I don't care one bit about whether a lab is big or small or metrics on how others judge people's research. I want to know how I can find out what kind of person this PI is before I get myself trapped in something like I was in during my PhD (my supervisors... never again... please...). I am visiting the lab in a few weeks... but is it really possible to make a judgement through an initial meeting? Argh... help... any tips / advice on things to look out for (subtle signs of someone being a d*ck?) would be appreciated.

Hope it makes more sense now.