Would you say you have a good relationship with your supervisors or is there a clash going on? Their stance sounds a little peculiar.

======= Date Modified 25 Jul 2011 11:55:15 =======
Strangely I feel that I don't 'get' what they're saying most of the time, it's as if we speak different languages, I assumed this was just part of the transition into academia for me so I accepted it. They've made a lot of assumptions about me and have projected these onto me at times which I have had to challenge quite strongly, for example I was told in an aside that I had said that what they said in a previous supervision was 'rubbish', I challenged that I had ever said this, they agreed and said that it was what I had thought, I challenged this and said I had not thought that at all and that I was interested to know how they had got this impression, they agreed they may have misinterpreted my 'confidence'. There seems to have been quite a bit of stereotyping and assumption making leading to some very judgemental statements on their part. Again Ive assumed this is simply a feature of the transition from a working life to an academic life so dismissed it as unimportant. They also gave me a lecture on the issue of being seen as an 'expert' and that many so called 'experts' at non academic conferences talk rubbish. I had to challenge this, my expertise is bought by people who only pay for tangible results, which I am able to deliver, this is a form of expertise and I'm happy to own it. At conferences this practical expertise is sought after and I also provide gratis a lot of follow up advice and guidance. This is the world I left behind for academia. I had assumed that practical experience and capability would make me ideal for research as I would be able to reach out to practitioners in the future from a different perspective. The gap is perhaps too wide in my case, and this is something I must now consider carefully. I am a very creative and inventive person hence demand for my training and consultancy and as I am a solution developer I nought this could translate into research. Without funding I needed to agree to some part time work, but the style I need to adopt for work does not suit the style required for academic research. My masters worked well alongside my working life and there was no clash of cultures, so I'm bewildered by this situation now.       

Have you ever thought - this problem may just be these people? You and they may not get on. It happens! It may not be the PhD, it may be a personality issue.

======= Date Modified 25 Jul 2011 13:45:24 =======
Hi Snowdrops,having read your posts, my view of your situation is as follows:

You are a very well respected expert in your professional field, hence you are super confident and secure, plus you sound very mature and happy with your self. These are unusual attributes for most supervisors to encounter in a PhD student, many supervisors are used to feeling as if they are at the more sorted ended of a student/tutor relationship. It sounds to me as if your sups feel threatened by your expertise and confidence, and are trying to cut you down. It also sounds as if you really enjoy the research element of what you are doing. So, perhaps youshould shop around for some more mature and level headed supervisors who will see your expertise, confidence and maturity for the boons that they are. You CAN work in a particular field while researching at the same time, you just have to have the right supervisors. How well respected are your tutors in their research field? And can you go elsewhere?

Best of luck!

I agree. Their attitude sounds peculiar at best. Can you find alternative supervisors, possibly elsewhere?

I do think you have been deluding yourself re the ability to manage what was supposed to be a full-time PhD alongside what turned out to be time-consuming work. So things were coming to a head in that respect. However there's no particularly good reason for you to abandon your PhD, and many people do successfully study part-time.

======= Date Modified 25 Jul 2011 16:00:26 =======
Your latest post puts a different perspective on the issue and your supervisors do seem to be a little off the ball.

It is true to say that the academic viewpoint can be different to that of the real world, but the description you give of yourself in the above is of a person that can adapt to that better than most. What I don't like from what you're saying is the way these two characters seem to assume you've done and said things you haven't. The senior Prof. for my second post-doc was in a way like that and it made for a very uncomfortable relationship. In reporting some information back to him in one meeting, I was accused of answering the question he wanted me to ask rather than that asked.

Based upon what you say, they sound as though they could be difficult to work with. You therefore have to consider if you can work with these people for the next 3 to 5 years. What is 'rubbish' is that you have to accept everything they throw at you should be an acceptable part of the transition to academia - bluntly put, as you progress through the PhD you also provide them with a service and you deserve better than people making assumptions. How do they honestly know or assume what you're thinking?

It really does sound like you need to take time out to rethink. At the very minimum, you sound as though you need to look at your supervision team and see if there are alternatives available as dismissing your real world experience and perspective completely would be a mistake. Yes, you have to adapt to a different approach, but that does not necessarily mean setting aside everything you have done before.

I do remain cautious about trying to combine work and study, as that does require good organisation and planning. However, if you managed during masters then it may well you'll be okay during a part time PhD and also, you sound experienced enough to be able to cope. My earlier views are based on my dealings with full time Masters students who clearly did bite off more than they could chew (also the part time PhD people, one of who was a next door neighbour).

Don't be disillusioned based on your dealings with these two characters as not everyone in academia is like that. You come across as someone who wants to do a PhD for the right reasons and it would be a shame to let that slip away. However, you may have to start afresh with new supervisors.

Crystalisation is occurring as I read all of your considered replies. I'm starting to agree that it may be an issue of interpersonal relations. Now I am wondering why would they agreed to take me on if they didn't like me, or saw me as problemmmatic in any way, also I am thinking back on the original interview and of course now seeing that there were plenty of red flags flying during our conversation then. I was so keen and excited to go ahead that I dismissed these red flags, believing them to be my imagination. If this had been a job interview I would have turned it down.
On a technical matter, if I withdraw will I be liable for fees for the whole year? Ive paid for the past 6 months only so far.

======= Date Modified 25 Jul 2011 21:04:17 =======

This you'd have to check. My PhD Uni. accepted six monthly installments. Others might be by semester. If you've not reached the six months, I don't see why you should have to pay any extra.

The purpose of the interview when you start is not just to see if they like you, but if you like them and the set-up you'll be working in.

Perhaps it's better to bow out and give yourself some breathing space. If you try again, you'll know better and be able to spot the red flags first. At least you're realising now and not seeing this with six months to go. That's the one time you don't want to be battling supervision issues.

If you try again, have a read on my blog (my take on things). Also, next time, try and go for funding.
;-)

http://www.wearthesis.talktalk.net/index.html