If you have faith in your supervisor, you should be fine. Perhaps that person submitted against the advice of their supervisor?? While it is not the supervisor who awards you the PhD, it is they who tell you when your PhD is good to go, ie ready for submission. Why not register (if you haven't already) with the British library thesis online service and have a look at other theses - either in your field or do a title search for those with literature review in the thesis title - it might put your mind at rest. It's free :-) and available at:
http://ethos.bl.uk/Home.do

Viva-wise I don't think conferences have much, if any influence on the success of the viva; except that you are supposed to make contacts and network at them - something I am totally rubbish at. I don't mind the presenting bit but it's the tea, coffee and biscuit schmoosing (sp?) that I am hopeless at! Anyway...

As you go through your PhD you will be expected to fill in a progress report each year, whether you are funded or not. They ALWAYS ask you about conferences attended and presented at. It's all about getting your work out there. You don't have to go to that many and while there is no 'perfect' number if you went to 2, 3 4 over the complete lifespan of your PhD you would be doing well. You could start with a postgrad one or one that has a dedicated postgrad session, move on to a national one and then one international one, again during the entire lifespan of your PhD. If you want to stay in academia, then you should try to go to a few. If you don't, well attending conferences does show that your work has wider resonance beyond it being your own personal project - unless of course it is, which is totally fine :).

While there may not be a conference completely dedicated to your topic, you would be surprised at the lateral links some people make. I have been to quite a few conferences where you look at the list of abstracts and think "wow, never knew that area impacted on my discipline".

I woudn't rule them out completely but if you don't think they are for you, don't get overly stressed about them

I wish I was good at the violin, as in the theme from Schindler's list (sigh) and art.

As opposed to what I'm very, very good at which is reading far too many crime novels (I have five currently on the go!!) and eating chocolate. However, I can do these two simultaneously ;-)

It's the 1994 bit that's the problem. I can get access from 1996 onwards. Have just sent you email.

the 3-page pdf below sort of answers this question but not completely.

http://turnitin.com/static/pdf/us_Legal_Document.pdf

Sounds [very] good to me - I think sometimes it's a case of semantics and people (and examiners, let's hope!) use different words interchangeably.

Good idea Pam for a thread. Best of luck with your art gallery interview next week - sounds a nice one (up)

======= Date Modified 22 Feb 2011 09:57:56 =======
I agree in a way Jepsonclough but that's what two Profs told us. We did question it in relation to inside candidates but they stuck to their assertion that it is possible to get offered the job, even if you are not the top candidate on paper. Having said that, there was a job recently in my dept. and from the job description there was only one person (in the whole world!!) who could have gotten it, and he did!! Depressing but that's the real world. However, the two Profs really stressed again and again how important it is to stress how suitable you, not just your qualifications, but you as a person are for that place.

Edit: sorry spelt your name incorrectly Jepsonclough the first time but now amended. That's the problem when you are replying - you can only see the original post, not all the other replies (for me anyway!).

Good luck with submitting (up), I'd love to be that close but it's a few months off yet.

All I can tell you is what a few of us were told at a seminar on CVs and cover letters recently. In a situation where most people applying will have the qualifications, the cover letter assumes even more importance. Yes you need the CV to show you have the right qualifications but your cover letter is what will convince potential employers to interview you. We were told that applicants are scored based on their applications but that come interview, everybody goes back to a 'zero' rating. Therefore it is possible to swing the decision at the interview stage.

Other than that we were told to convince them that you will fit into what they already have. Do a bit of background reserach on where you are applying for and don't just put a couple of generic platitudes about why you would like to work there. Name drop in your cover letter or mention specific projects going on there. "Show you are a catalyst, not a journeyman" :-( - I'm quoting the head of a reserach institute on that one!

Best of luck

======= Date Modified 22 Feb 2011 09:07:37 =======
Your supv is advising you from her position as a very well paid academic. While the job might not be totally in your field, it does keep you in the academic milieu. 'Not using your brain' - that's typical academic superiority on the part of your supv of anything less than lecturing/100% research work. How does she think her dept. runs, how does she get paid etc, etc - one of my pet peeves :-s.


I think you did the right thing applying (up)

I would take it - as you say it would be good experience for you and it would break that vicious circle of 'you can't get a job without experience and you can't get experience without a job...' Go for it.

Your experience of Admin/HR while frustrating, is not, from my experience that surprising! -certainly wouldn't let it unduly sway you.

you're the fastest replier in the west, Sneaks!!

Hi Emmaki

I have it, no problem. I can email you the pdf if you send me your email id

I would, sure why not?

I wrote in another thread about a course a few of us had to go on about cover letters and CVs. It was given by two professors both of whom are heads of research institutes. They said (about fifty times each!) that most people applying will have the qualifications etc. but what sways it for both of them is an applicant who conveys in their cover letter how they will fit into what is already there. Years ago it was all about having one of every thing, nowadays (per the two profs) it is all about research clusters and communities. Therefore an applicant has to show how their work (though unique to them), will compliment what is already there. So they advised saying something like "I am familar with the work of Dr. 'X' and feel that my recent work on 'y' will compliment this.

Good luck(up)

I applied for a job a couple of weeks ago and saw another 'juicy' one recently.