Lin,

Another thing to consider is that you need to be able to show proof of a certain amount of money in your bank account to get a visa - in other words you aren't allowed to assume you'll be able to earn it (and in the recession we're in, this possibility of not being able to find even part-time work is something to take seriously). I think this is the first year's fees plus £7200 assuming Kingston is outer London. Here's the table:
http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/studyingintheuk/adult-students/money/what-money-do-i-need/
To be honest, unless you really are from a relatively well-off background, I would keep looking for a funded PhD. Are there no scholarships for study abroad that you could apply for (the British Council might be a source of information there) or even what about funded PhDs in your home country? Your parents might be happier to help you if the costs of overseas study aren't there. If you do decide to self-fund, you also might want to think about how well recognised the university will be in your home country for jobs later on. Kingston is towards the lower end of UK university tables - I was talking to someone from Saudi Arabia and he said that there, they only really accept PhDs from certain UK universities - whether that would apply to your country too, I don't know but it might be worth asking about.

I don't really see how it would be viable for you to move to another school within this university - surely you are in the correct school for your discipline as it is? You can't really expect, for example, English Lit specialists to supervise an Economics PhD.
I honestly have never heard of a situation like yours but would suggest that you cannot viably continue there if your entire disciplinary group refuses to work with you. I think it's better to cut your losses and forget even trying to write up for an MRes there - if an environment has got that toxic then I wouldn't have thought it very good for you to stay there (I think an MSci wouldn't be allowed as you'd need to take the taught portion as well). I think though that you also need to get very well-informed about the formal complaints system, get an advisor in the student welfare / advice service to help you prepare a complaint, and try to get a refund of some, at least, of your fees as an outcome. If the university is not responsive, then once you've gone through their complaints process there is an independent adjudicator to appeal to - your student advisor should be able to give you details.
As far as going elsewhere is concerned, I think you'd be better to extricate yourself from this place, give yourself a couple of months break with family and friends, and then when rested, reconsider whether a PhD is the right thing for you or not. It does sound from the panel report that you had perhaps underestimated what was entailed. Is that really what you want to do, now you know more? Would you actually prefer to work now? If you'd prefer to work, you could write it down as period of postgraduate research at University of X on your c.v., and if an employer asks say that you got a lot of transferable skills from that time, but that you had concluded that academic research wasn't what you wanted to do.

Unless it's a very part-time job e.g. research assistant or hourly paid teaching, your supervisor can't legally offer you a job without it being advertised and you applying successfully, or you being written in on a successful grant application as a named researcher. So if you want to stay in that group then yes, you do have to speak to them, for the second possibility to be considered. But be aware, given the amount of people being made redundant right now in universities, and the increased competition for a decreasing pool of research funding, that even with the best will in the world your supervisor might not be able to help you. So if he/she can't, don't take it personally. Just look on it as another possibility in your job search rather than one that your sense of personal worth is invested in.

Hi Starlight,

It's several factors combined I think from what I've heard. It sounds like there is a problem across the sciences in that grant money has become scarcer and so where a lot of people are employed on soft money as is usual in the sciences, then if grants don't come in then redundancies follow. Then some universities are shutting research groups / subjects who disappointed in RAE2008. Finally, some universities are in financial trouble and all are planning for cuts regardless of who wins the next election. I've heard people say that 10% budget cuts across the board would be a good outcome! So tbh I think it's not great anywhere but where a few of those factors combine, it's really bad. I'd have thought your subject area might be safer than most to be honest given the political salience of climate change. But most cuts tend to turn up on the Times Higher Education website (particularly interesting at times are the comments under the articles...).

Did two lots of fieldwork in two different countries abroad and then did my final case in the UK - it's fantastic! It was much the best bit of my PhD. It IS intimidating and I had so many worries about getting interviews, coping etc but I found if I really tried to plan everything that calmed me down. I also made a list of touristy things to do in my downtime - almost as if I was planning for a holiday and that made me feel a lot better. Booking accommodation was the most important bit pyschologically for me - once I knew I had a bed to sleep in and so a base, I felt I could cope.

But honestly, it was when my PhD really came together, suddenly all the dry theoretical stuff came to life in the real situations people were outlining (my theoretical framework went out of the window 2 weeks in but the replacement was so much better) and I really felt that I somehow gained mastery of the materiel and became much more confident about the whole project. Some of the people I met I'm still friends with and I had a really fun time too. Honestly, you'll be fine!

If students really aren't capable, as I understand it (could be wrong) it's OK for universities to get rid of them before upgrade / first year review, but otherwise a dept is judged on the completion rate for ALL not just research council-funded students, so it's in their interests to weed out early. So yes, supervisors do get blamed if they pass a student through the upgrade and that person then doesn't complete.

Is it possible that he/she thinks you've not really understood what he/she is trying to get across to you? E.g. not attending some careers events, sounding as if you think an academic job is a given in meetings? Maybe he/she has just had a bad experience with a recent PhD who holds them, rather than the realities of the job market, entirely responsible for their failure to get an academic job and is trying to overcompensate with you? I know it's irritating but I've heard several academics talking about the morality of taking on new PhD students at all with the bleak funding otulook.

As it's Euros I'm guessing Europe somewhere - that sounds about right for anywhere that has strict national rules on pay scales dependent on years of service. It can add up to less than a PhD stipend in some countries if the tax situation goes wrong (as happened to a friend in Belgium).

The funding research council for economics is the ESRC. This is the link to their guidelines:

http://www.esrc.ac.uk/ESRCInfoCentre/Images/Postgraduate%20Funding%20Guide%20-%202009-10%20(updated%20October%2009)_tcm6-12067.pdf

I think to make their academic eligibility criteria, you'd need a strong distinction at masters as they seem to say they'll consider a degree under a 2:1 only if subsequent performance is equivalent to a first. Or at least that's my reading of p 13-14.

University specific funding may be less regulated, but I think they'd still want a very strong masters performance.

Depends a lot on the subject - can you give us more information?

I think I'd suggest doing two things:
1) make an appointment to see your MA thesis supervisor to get more detailled feedback
2) check the university's rules to see under what grounds you can actually appeal - often you can't just because you think you ought to have got a better mark.

I think zero teaching experience would be a problem for a permanent lectureship or even a temporary one but not if you're aiming for a postdoc. Really try to get some, not least because it is a big part of being a lecturer and it's as well to know whether or not you'd actually like the job!

======= Date Modified 10 Nov 2009 22:45:04 =======
Totally normal - you know where the bodies are buried in your own thesis but it's less obvious in somebody else's!

Is she planning to self-fund? If not she needs to look into the research council funding angle. I think social history falls under the ESRC's remit - if so she needs an approved MA to be eligible for +3 PhD funding, so she'd need to look for the 1+3 awards which still mean an MA year before you start the PhD. If she's applying for a 1+3 though then the research proposal doesn't have to be as detailled.

======= Date Modified 10 Nov 2009 22:29:53 =======
Fair enough - I still think you're mad though! As to where as I said, it depends on your academic background. Universities that are any good are going to want an u/g or MA in IR or a similar subject, if you've not got that then you know you're looking at the lower level of institutions. If you have that though, and you did the generic ESRC-recognised social sciences methods stuff for your other PhD, then that's really all the coursework most places require, so why not look for a relevant supervisor and run the scenario past them.



If by any remote chance you're a scientist and now wanted to do something peace / conflict related in IR, then try Bradford - they've got a few people there who made that transition themselves and could give you good advice on what you'd need in academic background to manage a PhD.