Someone who failed their dissertation for bad plagiarism in my MA year, got London Met to let her in to just redo her dissertation there. I thought that was very bad standards on their part at the time, but she failed again apparently. I now wonder whether it was a cynical money-making attempt on their part, so you might want to be very careful about any offers that look too good to be true. I think the OU only let you transfer a lower number of credits than you have towards a qualification there, so you would need to repeat more than the dissertation. I would expect the same to be true of most places.

If it's any help, I, over 2 years, applied for about 40 jobs, got 7 interviews and got offered 2 x 1 year contracts - one of which I took, and then in the second year on the market got a RG permanent lectureship (given the latest news - permanent - don't make me laugh)... But i'm in a field that gets well over 100 good applicants for each ad so other fields might be less depressing.

In other words, I think you have to stop thinking that academia is any different to other job markets. You have to apply for lots of things and get used to taking rejections on the chin just like in any other field - it's no more personal (even though it feels like it). If you are getting interviews, you probably will get a job. It's when you never even get interviews that it's really time to panic.

I was strongly advised to clearly separate published material, items under review, conference papers and work in preparation in a c.v.. Otherwise it can just look like padding. If separated out, it shows that you understand the difference and can give a hint to your ongoing research agenda, which is helpful.

Can I recommend www.vitae.ac.uk for some ideas on jobs outside academia for PhDs? If it's research that you don't really enjoy, do you like teaching for example? That could lead you down a number of different tracks. Or is it the university life that appeals - what about the administrative side in that case? Perhaps think about things that you enjoy and get a friend to help you brainstorm ideas. Or even go and do one of those tests in your careers service that suggest careers. When I did it, they were mad things that came out, but even just seeing a list of jobs that I was supposedly suited for, helped me to start thinking outside the box a bit.

You've got the majority of that thesis written so don't give up now. Even a flawed survey will have some usable results, I'm sure and perhaps you could spin what you know see as the weaknesses as the 'directions for future research' bit of the conclusion. Are you trying to analyse it statistically? If so, could you get another member of staff who is strong on that type of analysis to help a bit. Or at least OK what you are trying to do methodologically, so that you felt a bit more confident about it? I think everyone's thesis has a bit of a cover up of what didn't exactly go to plan, and puts a positive spin on things that knowing what you do now, you'd never have done it that way... Perhaps your depression is leading you to be overly pessimistic about the quality of your work.

You can't do anything independently. If it's the open competition, departments can only put one application per subject area forward, so there has to be an internal competition first for that slot (assuming there is more than one person interested).

The obvious thing to say is don't make a decision now - wait until the ESRC actually announces what the situation is going to be. THey were already planning big changes before the spending review so I think you should wait until January when they let everyone know. I think the ESRC itself will survive by the way (it sounds like even the AHRC is safe and that was the most vulnerable) but just will have less money.

Why are you ruling out applying for a 1 + 3 scholarship that would fund both the MRes and the PhD full-time (or indeed part-time if you needed that)? It would seem the obvious solution assuming they will still exist (can't imagine that they won't).

But yes the underlying question you're hovering around is - is doing a PhD likely to pay off in terms of a research career? For that you'd need a crystal ball and there's no point denying that the future for ESRC subjects does not look that rosy (unless you're in economics or law which presumably will still attract students). But it's very unlikely you'll get any research jobs without one given the numbers of unemployed / under-employed PhDs around.

The ESRC will not announce until January what funding schemes will run for 2011. They had made universities apply for a completely different system of funding focussed around doctoral training centres (mainly a consortium of universities) but with the spending cuts they are not telling anyone who has got what or how many students can be funded, until the ministry tells them what their overall budget will be. I think though that it's unlikely to be good news...
Under the old schemes as far you would have been able to apply under the +3 scheme for 2 years funding, assuming you and your department met all of the criteria. The trouble was that universities were loath to give quota awards to people like you as it meant losing some money, so it meant trying to get an open competition slot, where the competition is much tougher. What things will look like in January is something no-one can tell you now for definite, but you should talk to whoever coordinates the link with the ESRC in your department because you will need that person's support to push you ahead of any new students.

I think you need to find out the specifics of what is 'bad' first of all. But yes, you can learn to write. What follows assumes that you haven't got any underlying learning disabilities like dyslexia, which do need specialist help, and which your university should provide.

Is it the grammar for example? If so, it might be worth checking whether your university has any resources aimed initially at English language learners to practice the different rules, but they can be genuinely helpful for others too. My university has computer-based packages in their language centre but there's also some material in the library. Equally go and get some of those guides aimed at new undergraduates writing their first essays - there's some good tips in those books on common grammar errors, and there are very few of us, who write naturally so well, that we can't be helped by refreshing our memory of some of the ground rules.

Or is it that your style of writing is the problem e.g. lacking structure, using over-complicated sentence structures or your writing not being 'academic' enough?

If it's structure, then I've always found it helpful to remember to make introductions and conclusions very clear. Intoduction - this is what the aim of the chapter is, and this is how I am going to approach it. Conclusion - recap of what the chapter aimed to do and what it concludes and then where it leads us next. Then try to look at each paragraph. What is the point you are trying to make in each paragraph? Is it clear? If there's no point being made in the paragraph, it probably can be deleted.

If it's over-complicated sentences, read some Ernest Hemingway to see how less can be more! Try to break dowm sentences with too many clauses, eliminate superfluous adjectives etc. Something I was once told was if you are over-complicating a concept, it means you haven't understood it properly.

If it's the reverse problem - your writing style isn't academic enough, then try to be really precise in how you write. Avoid journalistic flourishes and throw-away comments.

There are some helpful general resources here around writing too:
http://www.rlf.org.uk/fellowshipscheme/writing/diswriting/intro.htm
Even if your university doesn't offer courses, is there a writing centre or a writing fellow that you could make an appointment to go and see and get advice?

One thing you could suggest to your supervisor is that they work intensively with you on rewriting three or four paragraphs. It could be that you just need to see what your work could read like, to see what the problems are.

Hope something here helps.

Hi,

Are there any criteria given on the postdocs that they will be judging applications on? You might want her to to focus the reference around those points. You could give her specific examples e.g. if it says originality, tell her what exactly you think is particularly original about your proposal.

1) Yes. If you don't find out whether there is something able to supervise your project then you will probably be rejected.
2) Yes. But you can only accept one quota place or one slot in the open competition.
3) Yes.
4) I think it varies a lot between subjects. Mine, Politics, is stupidly competitive especially at the popular institutions. But I think the ESRC has designated some subjects as being priorityfor postdoc fellowships because they have capacity-building problems so I would assume they are less competitive. These are Economics, Education, Management and Business Studies, Social Work, and Socio-Legal Studies.

All of this may change a lot. The ESRC was due to announce a whole new system based about doctoral training centres - mostly consortia of universities bid together for one - and no-one knows who got what or where will have quota yet. But the announcement has been delayed & I have a nasty feeling that the funding cuts might be about to make it even harder to get a funded place.

If the PhD is something you really want to do and you are not going to get into debt by doing it then why not do it. It's the norm in the UK to do an MA first in your field to strengthen your research skills - is that a possibility? It might allow you to test the water a bit and then see what you think. I actually think your reasons though are exactly why you should do a PhD. However, I would talk to as many people who have done one (preferably with your prospective supervisor) so that you get a real sense of what it would be like. I enjoyed most of mine (particularly the fieldwork) but there were times when I was miserable as it was both tough and isolating. I also had the good fortune not to hit any major academic, personal or supervisory issues. Others on this board have been much less fortunate and have not found the experience worthwhile. So I think going in as well informed as you can be is a good thing.
On the over-qualified front - could you do some informational interviews with people holding the sort of jobs you want to see what they think? I think there are two things that can be problematic. You produce a highly theoretical thesis that you can't explain in words that make sense to prospective employees, or that you come to assume that the PhD replaces some other vital criteria like work experience. Both of these can be guarded against if you are aware of the potential problems at the start. I did go into academia (now wondering given what's just happened in the UK if this was a very bad decision...) but I wasn't sure about it, so kept networking in policy circles while doing my PhD, attended some of their workshops not just academic conferences, presented my work to practitioners etc. I think if you do this sort of thing and get your face known as a useful person, then that can really help with the 'PhDs = arrogant, over-educated and useless' prejudice that sadly some do have.

I think what is normal is a bit field specific but certainly in my social science viva I was asked questions about the wider field and how my work related to it. Personally, if I was you, I would accept the MPhil and move on with life as you put it. If you appeal, you have to exhaust the university's appeal process before the OIAHE will look at your case by the way. Has your university got a student advice centre? It might be worth seeing if you could get some advice there. But unless there's something really dubious in the second viva report, I'm not sure from what you say what you would appeal on.

Are you using a textbook by any chance? If so check to see if there are any online resources. I've found using the 'have you understood this concept' end of chapter quizzes helps. What I've done is divided the big group into smaller groups and made them do the quiz and then each group has to report back their answers and reasoning for them to the full group. I find particularly in 'bad seminar groups' there are often a few people, who do know their stuff, but feel initimidated in the full group because they don't want to look like teacher's pet (first years still do think like schoolkids), but who will talk in the smaller groups.

I just wanted to say that Eska is right and imposter syndrome exists well beyond the post 92 universities. I'm sorry you had poor advice when choosing this MA. Getting (and keeping) ESRC recognition is a lot of work for a department because it means you have to constantly keep your research methods training classes not only up-to-date but also to fit every whim of the ESRC. They keep moving the goalposts. Because of the regular rerecognition process, it is a sign of quality, because a department has had to commit considerable resources to their MA/PhD programmes to get it. But for smaller departments, particularly when not all staff are themselves research-active, it's just seen as too much hassle for the probable outcome of being allowed to put one student forward to the open competition each year (where the odds are against you). I have sympathy for that position, but I do think you then have to advise students about how this might impact on their options.

I don't think quota awards are transferable, because they are applied for and given to the institution who then award them to students. It's not like you were awarded it directly through the open competition. You need to talk to the ESRC nominated contact at your university but unless your supervisor is strongly supporting this, then I suspect the answer will be no. A friend of mine wasn't allowed to follow her supervisor when he moved because she had a quota award. The bad news was somewhere in that ESRC guide - here you go...
See p37 of this guide to funding;
http://www.esrc.ac.uk/ESRCInfoCentre/Images/Postgraduate%20Funding%20Guide%20-%202009-10%20(updated%20October%2009)_tcm6-12067.pdf