Unless you're somewhere to the right of Genghis Khan I'd avoid Buckingham. Two problems occur to me about your plans - you already have a PhD from a UK university - that means no more subsidised fees so you could end up paying a lot of money (international rates - it's the ELQ rule). Do you have any qualifications in IR already? If not, given the swarms of people doing IR PhDs they can be reasonably picky, you may find universities unwilling to take the risk of someone without doing a MA first. Otherwise I'd just ask the institutions that interest you what they think - many do offer more flexible arrangements particularly if you've been through a social sciences methods course for your last PhD.

But, sorry I have to ask, why on earth would you do this? For any IR-based career other than academia, there has to be an easier route surely! And presumably you rejected academia after your first PhD - and if you're thinking about IR as a route into academia do a search for wjgibson 's posts - really not a good idea.

What's up with Open University by the way - it's much better respected than Buckingham or Phoenix.

I also enjoyed most of my PhD. My reasons why it was good.

1) I got to do fieldwork in three different countries and I think made friendships through those experiences that will last.
2) I learnt a lot about my strengths and weaknesses - much more than 5 years in the civil service taught me.
3) I never would have dreamed that not only could I stand up and give a lecture in front of several hundred people but that I could even begin to quite enjoy it!
4) I met lots of great academics who I respect greatly. I'm not a fan of consumerist society and while some academics do epitomise the rat race, it is reassuring that some still care about truth, justice and honourable behaviour in the way they behave and expect their students to behave.
5) I still can't get over the fact that public bodies have paid for me to spend 5 years (PhD & postdoc) reading and writing.

Like many on this board, I'm not optimistic that I'll get a lectureship but while my time in academia has brought me little materially, it's brought me an awful lot otherwise. I know much more about what I value in life and I think my choices even outside academia will be very different to those I made earlier in my career. I just really hope that someone can stop the grimness that Mandelson and Willetts seem determined to inflict on universities whoever wins the elections. I'd like the next generation to have the opportunity of education not just training.

Ruby - something I forgot. When I did mine last year, it was during year 1 of a 2 year postdoc. I did manage to get it free of charge as I counted as a fulltime member of staff but I think some were paying fees. Also with my institution you had to be able to show a contract for a certain amount of teaching at the university as otherwise you couldn't have completed the course as the assessments included teaching observations etc. Depending on your situation, I don't know whether either issue would be a problem for you.

I'd imagine it's for students with disabilities. Either transcribing their dictated answers or reading out the exam questions for those with vision problems.

I've done one. You have to have a high tolerance for faddish educational theory, and I strongly suspect they were designed by people who haven't actually been near real students in a long time. But I quite enjoyed doing the pieces of coursework and if I were to ever get a lectureship, it would save time in the first year.
As to its usefulness in getting a job: my gut feeling is that it might be helpful for departments that don't enter the RAE/REF - the real teaching-focussed places but in my field at least, there never seems to be any jobs advertised at those places - they seem to really function almost entirely through hourly paid teaching staff. For depts entering the RAE/REF, then it's going to be publications and impact that matter above anything in the next year or so anyway. I saw a job process at my place last year and the sift seemed to be a) have you got a PhD in hand then b) were you enterable for the REF - anyone who couldn't meet both was out of the running and then they ranked by impact value of publications to get a longlist. It was only then that they started really looking at the details of the cvs and thinking about teaching etc. My HoD explained to all of us likely to be on the job market, that that was the only way of dealing fairly with people when you had 160 applications for a lectureship and had to give a reason to HR for rejecting each one. His advice was to apply like mad for postdocs to give yourself room to publish so that you had a chance of being competitive and not to get distracted by other things. Should add I'm also in w j gibson's field and it might not be as crazy in other fields.

Could you have your first sentence read something like 'The methodological choices in this thesis are informed by the debate on the merits of quant v qual. The research focuses on bla bla bla.' Then add a footnote that reads ' For an overview and discussion of this debate see appendix 1'.

All I can say from the perspective of being a postdoc who gets to attend staff meetings now is that being a lecturer in a Russell Group / 1994 group university is much worse than doing a PhD, when it comes to the expectations of long hours. Yes as far as I can see you are less isolated, as your e-mail never stops pinging with complaints from disgruntled students, administrators who have just redesigned that report form for the third year on the row and need the report redone by yesterday etc. But essentially, you're meant to do just as much research as a PhD student does (if not more) coupled with teaching, dealing with students, unbelievable amounts of quality assurance administration all while being shouted at by management for not hitting the 90% target for student satisfaction, failing to get every single PhD student out the doors in under 4 years regardless of those students' problems, and needing every item for the REF to be of international renown quality - anyone who couldn't make it should start looking for jobs elsewhere was the unspoken message. That's the summary of my faculty's provost's address to my departmental staff meeting last month. Oh and he's bullying a female lecturer for having the temerity to want to take her full entitlement to maternity leave at a crucial point in the REF cycle. Nice man... - apparently he's better than his predecssor, which speaks volumes for the quality of university managers. The department in question by any rational measure is doing very well by the way.

Anyway the point of this, is as I am having doubts about an academic career anyway, I asked someone after this horrible meeting, why would anyone want to be an academic and put up with the sort of bullying that seems commonplace. She said that it really was only worth doing if you loved research - i.e. yes you go home to put your kids to bed, but then you get the books out again for a few hours each evening but that you enjoy doing that.

If you want to stay in academia, make sure you have a serious talk to either your supervisor (if you think they have a good idea of what the current job market is like - some older people don't) or one of the younger lecturers about what you need to have on your cv to be competitive in your field. In some fields you really do need to know exactly how hard it will be to get an academic job, so that you can act realistically. Remember there's a big time lag in some subjects between submitting an article and it actually being published. Then you at least know what you need to do. It is easy to get into a comfortable rut and then suddenly realise you're nearing the end, and haven't done much to make yourself employable inside or outside academia (don't neglect the need for a plan B), but in that last 6 months there really isn't much time to do anything other than write up. Having said that - the person I knew who did the most 'cv-building' stuff, got so carried away with it, that he still hasn't got anywhere near finishing his thesis, so there needs to be a happy medium.

Hi, I would make it a bit earlier. The queues for check-in/ immigration / security are pretty short especially compared with airports but as they do the immigration bit before you get on the train rather than on arrival (if I remember correctly), then it might be wise to allow a bit more time. They start boarding the train 20 minutes before departure and depending on what carriage you're in it can be a good 5 minutes walk from the waiting area.
I presume you're going to Brussels Gare du Midi - watch your bags in and especially around that station. It's normally fine but not the nicest part of Brussels.

Hi Aurelia

First and foremost, this is clearly not a sympathetic person particularly regarding your mother's illness - my sympathies on that - very hard to deal with. I have though got a few thoughts that might help if you are set on staying with this supervisor.

1) Try not to fall into the trap of assuming everything is aimed at obstructing you. You say you lost six months and are really back where you were in first year - might there be some justification for example in her saying best not to do extra projects, teaching, go to lots of conferences but instead try to get back on track? I thought when I read your second post that I could possibly see some logic in her stance there. I presume if you're in science, that your project is part of what her team is working on: if she's been on maternity leave, then you can bet that a lot of pressure if being put on her to catch up and produce results in time for the REF deadlines - this might be why she wants your project back on track. Why I'm suggesting you try to take a step back and look dispassionately at everything that's happened, is if you end up having to formally complain about her at some stage and include things that she might have very good justifications for in the eyes of her boss, then they can more easily dismiss your legitimate complaints too. Plus it might help you to figure out what things absoluetly have to change from your angle for you to complete the PhD and what you can reluctantly live with.

2) You seem to have four different problems right now: 1) your office location so feeling isolated from the team; 2) her manner of speaking to you and that you feel she's unfair in her assessment of your work; 3) your project being behind schedule and; 4) you feel she's obstructing your professional development with teaching / conferences etc. Tbh given 2 I'd probably agree with others who've posted about changing supervisor but assuming you're stuck: Could you possibly use her dissatisfaction with you to get concessions - perhaps go to her and say, you're clearly not happy with my work and I'm also worried about being behind, I think these things would help. I would benefit from better integration with the group - is there any way I can move upstairs next time a space comes free; I'd like to set milestones for the project that would include deadlines for conference presentations so that we are both clearer on my progress etc. I've found very calm approaches with requests for things you actually want framed as 'I'm acting on your feedback' can work quite well with this type of person.

Hope this is of some help.

Just a thought but have you tried having a nose around the modern languages department? Often that seems to be where all the adverts of international type activities / language exchanges etc can be found. And many people there will have lived abroad so they might be more 'open' to socialising with foreigners. This saved me when I lived in Germany (it took at least a year before Germans started inviting me to things - although some of my best friends now are from there - but I found the English Stammtisch run by the English department at least gave me a night out during the initial lonely period and I helped people with their English in return)....
Otherwise I'd also say language classes if possible as you'll find other newcomers.
Are there any bigger cities nearby? You might find a bit of an expat social scene somewhere bigger (often focussed around the 'irish' pub).
I also found trying to arrange for friends to visit me and me to visit them at weekends gave me something to look forward to.
My sympathy though - it really can be a horrible feeling.

I think there are always going to be a lot more people starting PhDs than there are academic jobs available - it's been like that for at least 20 years now. It's a similar scenario to the people doing legal training - nothing like enough training contracts and pupillages to employ all the would-be barristers and lawyers. The problem is that there are a lot of myths about academia being a nice, easy job that may have been true in the 1970s but certainly isn't now. Staff morale where I am is unbelievably low because they are being told to do more teaching, more admin, more and better research with less resources and increasingly teaching students at all levels with serious academic weaknesses. Oh and now have 'impact' and do 'engagement' whatever that means.
What concerns me too though, having worked in government before my PhD, is that I often hear older lecturers in particular telling their PhD students (in Politics) that they'll easily get govt / NGO type jobs. THis just isn't true, unless you're doing a very applied type of thesis that has involved a lot of interaction with those sorts of bodies. Otherwise you're like any new graduate - you need relevant work experience or to be good at getting through grad recruitment schemes.
But what do you do to solve the problem? Do you insist that you have to have a 1st class degree and distinction at Masters level before you're let near a PhD programme? Refuse to let people self-fund so that at least the financial risk is not so great? I can see problems with those ideas.

Pepita,

Seriously, do not waste your money on a lawyer at this point. They might well take a lot of money from you, but all recent court rulings have been to just refer people to this body http://www.oiahe.org.uk/ saying that you need to work through the mediation procedure first. Before the OIAHE will investigate your cae and reccommend a settlement, they insist that you have exhausted the formal complaints procedure at your university, so that if you haven't done that needs to be your first action. Be aware that you are very unlikely to be able to derail the careers of your ex-supervisor and his colleagues, and that your best outcome would be probably an apology from the university and a small amount of compensation. Have a look at the sample cases on the OIAHE site on PhD complaints to get an idea.

I think the OP's advice is good actually. We all need a plan B that's workable in the present climate, and one that you can see yourself doing. Having watched a few folks do this now getting bitterer and bitterer, I'm increasingly sure that it really isn't a great idea to hang around the fringes of academia on odds and ends of part-time teaching. It's badly paid and exploitative. Nor are series of fixed term research contracts much fun unless you have a well-off partner / parents. I think you need to give yourself a certain amount of time to get a permanent academic job, and the appropriate time varies for each subject depending on norms of postdocs etc, but if it doesn't work out by that deadline, walk away and go for plan B, however hard that might be.

OP - I'm in a different field of Politics to you but in case this helps you at all: I went into the civil service after my MA but still knew a crowd of people who carried on to do PhDs at London universities. They were finishing up 2000 - 2002. Only one got a permanent lectureship in the UK (a couple got things in their home countries) and the rest had to look elsewhere. These were people who'd been module leaders, had edited books, good articles, edited Millennium etc. The Politics market was bad then and it's really bad now. I think IR theory is now as bad as political theory to be in jobs-wise, unless you can clearly show that you can research and teach security studies/ IPE/ some sort of public policy as a back-up. The impact bit of the REF is really not good news for theorists looking for jobs. But it really is less about you and more about sheer luck. It's serendipity that gets someone onto the job selection committee, who is really into what you research, and makes a case for you above a hundred equally qualified people (and frankly that is from what I've heard is pretty much how it is for permanent Politics posts last year).

I am clearly an idiot, as I knew how bad it was before I started from my friends, and still gave up a good job to do a PhD and now postdoc. It sounds like you didn't or were convinced you would be OK. It's not worked out and you feel rightfully bitter about it. I have given myself until the end of this academic year to get a lectureship and then I'm calling it quits and looking elsewhere myself too. The only thing I can say that might make you feel better, is about my friends who didn't get academic jobs nearly a decade ago: after a tough few years, all of them are now in very satisfying and decent jobs and earning more than academics do. They're fairly content with how the cookie crumbled. I hope it will be the same for you.