Congrads Pink!

Congrads Wally!

Using your funding for their conferences? I may be mistaken, but I thought that your 'free' funding was part of the tuition costs. Of course, that is assuming you are paying and this is not funding for the project that you and your super are working on, which also happens to include your PhD.

Hi Sarahlouise,

I get that all the time from my supervisor. Actually, the best comment I have received on my written stuff is 'it's not as bad as last time'. You have to reach a point of detachment from the written work, it is not you. Easier said than done. I usually read though the comments once, so I can ask questions or make counter-comments (where appropriate). Then I put it down for a day or two and work on something else, then jump back at the writing. Just have to have view the writing as something that is on paper/the screen. It is hard to get there, but it is the only way you are going to get through it at all.
Yes, this is a bit 'pick yourself up by the bootstraps' but that is just my personality too. Good luck as it is never fun to get comments back on work that you really thought was ace.

I am only coming around to the use of 'I' in writing with academia. I have seen several journals that accept it (Business area) if the term fits the discussion style. For instance, if they are writing an ethnography, you should see 'I/we' in there, or if they are writing from a more positivist approach then I/we will not appear.
I asked my supervisors the same thing. They both agreed that they didn't really like it, but that it should be used when warranted (reflexive writing or very specifically relates to 'the research' but sounds less clunky to say 'I').

Well, it is not 100% on, but it is similar to your situation. When I was working as a Mech Eng for a US defense contractor, I had the same fears. So my boss made me come in one Saturday for a few hours with him. He pulled up all the specs and blueprints on the machines we were using for the tests. Then he helped me break the machines, intentionally. We went through a few of them, leaving a trail of broken equipment as we did the experiments, breaking it at strategic points. Then when he got tired of that 'game' and we were lined up with broken stuff that was much larger than my paycheck, he dropped a doozy of a thought on me. 'If only we had an engineer who could read the schematics and fix these broken machines.' Then the look of 'I hope you see what I am doing and get to work... you have until 5 p.m. today'.
Yes, he did stick about and help with repairs, but it took that bit of extreme demonstration to get on with it. So moral is that you have the knowledge of how to fix the stuff. Just check around for what spare parts are available so you know what your limits are.

I roughly remember a source from Wood (2006) that dealt with research in a latin american country during their insurgency fights (hmm, I want to say Honduras, but not 100%). Anyway, point was that Woods is not perfectly fluent in Spanish and was talking about reliability with translation issues. This involved running through two (or more) translations, Spanish-English first, English-Spanish second and comparing the meanings. Repeat until you get the same ideas across. That might be one way to aide in validity.

I am self-funding (care of the US Dept. of Education, Student Loan division). I find that I, and a few others here who are self funded, have had a different work ethic regarding the actual thesis when compared to friends who are funded. We tended to be more focused in the first 2 years and in the third year we have all be about the same (as the other 'half' realises that funding is running out soon). However, they were usually also tasked with several other 'funded related' jobs that they had to complete (teaching, marking, other research, etc.). In my department (business), self-funded is far more rare, but I don't know about the university overall.
So in quick review, self-funded is annoying to pay yourself but it lets you focus on just one thing for the entire time.

I have a few PhD friends in my uni that I *ahem* abuse the generosity from time to time with reading. I don't really mind that they don't have a full head of what my topic is because they are far more likely to point out jumps in my arguments than somebody who can think through it. I don't know what I am going to do come the analysis and discussion bits when having a grasp of the lit is essential.
I think it depends on what sections I am flogging my friends with for who gets to read it.

I had one where I was working on the PhD, doing one of my chapters, complete with notes written and pages typed. I was really bummed the next day at the office when 'all of my work was stolen'. A bit of panic ensued as I tried to figure out why anybody would have stolen notes that were in my personal version of short hand. It took me a good 30 min to figure out that I had only dreamed that I had done all of that work. What tipped it off was that I couldn't remember any details from my notes or written work. Normally I am fairly good with recalling that type of information. Needless to say, that was a rather depressing day.

Another thing to consider is to loosen up the structure. One of the profs here often deals with older generation folks and has found that eliciting stories is a very useful start. Sometimes he doesn't need to get into questions because the stories get into the topics on their own. If he has more questions still, then he tries to probe the stories for their reflections as related to the research.
He said that it puts them at ease and makes it seem more like a friendly conversation over tea/cake instead of somebody coming in and grilling them with questions. Also, allowing them to tell you their story lets them feel they are opening up to you AND that you are willing to be a recipient of their story. Just some food for thought.

Congrads!

Congrads Dr. Kikuka and thank you for the 'behind the scenes look, too.

I think this is a case of 'the grass is greener' and forgetting that it still needs to be mowed. Yes, I have wondered about that myself until I remembered that the insignificant blip of knowledge that any PhD will add is about the same unless it is just 1 in several million. Just have to find a way to make it interesting to you, maybe make it 'yours' with some tweaking as was suggested. If it was really that useless, it wouldn't have been thought up enough to be turned into a PhD and passed on to you (or anybody).

Icebreaker stuff (we had only been in contact via e-mail) and logistics was the main focus. Also a bit of what we expected from each other in the professional relationship. The only one where I was more or less relaxed with meeting her.