Put it this way, if your work is good, you will aim to publish it - right? so every experiment you do should be a piece of that paper - in that resepect you are constantly dissecting whether it fits, if its novel enough (has anyoune else published it), what it means, what the next stage is etc etc.

In other words critical analysis of what you are doing - all the time

don't wait for someone else to tell you its wrong - very often - and I suspect you felt this even before the panel - you know its wrong, or pointless etc and you have to be willing to face up to it and fix it

This all seems very negative, on you, but its not. Its just a learning curve, PhDs are hard but they can be good once you get a handle on what you are doing

S

Thank you guys. This has helped a lot.

My supervisor is young and enthusiathic and not all that experienced with supervison. I think that I'm pretty lucky to get so much of her time, but it is my responsibility to make the most of it.

For one of the panel's questions I actually answered "I have done this because my supervisor told me so". No wonder they picked up on the independence issue. I have taken a week off to ponder those things and make some sort of plan of where to go from here with the project. I have a paper that I'm about to submit for publication and IF it gets accepted that will hopefully lift my spirits.

yea that would do it ;) you pretty much walked in to that one then!

learning experience blah blah blah!

Anyway, if you are about to publish, you are doing very well

it'll all be fine

good luck for the rest of your PhD

S

LostinOZ - i think you are being too harsh on yourself. i failed my first year upgrade. i could have quit. i didn't. i tried again and passed it and now am writing up, 2.5 years into my PhD. just have a bit of confidence. who cares how you passed? you passed - and that means you are good enough to finish the PhD.

Yeah jojo. I'm now getting into the spirit of I passed YAY! lol

Friends were going to throw me a party if I paased and since I technically did, they are doing it (even though I told them about the negative comments). I kind of feel like a fraud celebrating but might as well get drunk ;)

If you are about to publish at the end of your first year, you are obviously doing very well. Just take on board the comments of the interview panel and you'll be fine.

Sometimes you need to think just why they made these comments. Instead of it being a negative thing, they might think that what you have started could be really good, and they just want to make sure you focus on it in a way that will make it a really excellent piece of work and not just a pass. They always push the ones that they think can go far don't they

I like Joyce's attitude. I think that when you are pursuing your phd, you have to keep a positive attitude. Only then you can last through.

Also, I believe that whatever comments that the panel, you either take them with a pinch of salt or try to work hard to improve on your work...as someone else has commented in the above discussion. Moreover, your supervisor seems nice.:)

Hi LostinOz, I have had a similar experience with a supervisor so I slightly disagree with some of the comments on this aspect of your concerns. She had never supervised before and was brought in to replace my main supervisor who was on sabbatical. I worked very independently because she didn't really know what I had to do - she didn't even realise I had to do a literature review. I had to show her stuff I had done for my MA to explain. Anyway, I sent her drafts of the review and we had a couple of meetings where she said I was on the right track. She didn't make any major criticisms though. As my supervisor, who has published a lot herself, I accepted this feedback.

Then at my 1st year panel, my work was ripped to pieces by her and the other two members. I've had to completely re-write it but now with my proper supervisor back in place which has made me see even more how useless the first one was. But as with you, you do trust what your supervisor says on certain things and for feedback on work what else are you supposed to do. That aside, the fact she said one thing to me privately and then the complete opposite at the panel was extremely annoying. If I'd known what I was doing wasn't right then I would have changed my perspective earlier, saving me lots of time.
The most interesting thing though is that because I am part of a wider project we get AHRC feedback on reports sent to them, and the AHRC have actually expressed concern that I have been getting proper supervision and training because I have had a replacement supervisor.

It's no criticism of her personally but I found it very reassuring that the concerns were there as if I fail the interim panel next week, I think I may make a complaint about the supervisor (other people I have spoken to have suggested I would be within my rights to do this). Having the back-up of an AHRC report would definitely strengthen my case.
Sorry for going on so much but LostInOz, I think there are times when you can criticise your supervisor for not guiding you. Obviously you need to work independently but if the supervisor can take no blame for anything, then what is the point of having one, if anything they say should not be relied upon.

PamW, I was told by my supervisor that my work is "first rate" and this was obviously so far from the truth. There wasn't even a hint of criticism. I thought that guiding you to if you are on the right track is exactly supervisors job. Of course, I have no way of knowing what she said in front of the panel as I was asked to leave at some stage and supervisor and the panel made the final decision. She also repeatedly told me things like that my chances of failing viva are ZERO, and I was extremly close to failing. I'm stunned by her lack of judgmenent and her failing now to take ANY of the responsibility.

Furthermore, when I thought of some possible questions before the viva she gave me the answers that I ended up repeating and were ripped to pieces by the panel. Now she is saying that I should have gone and reasearched answers myself. I trusted her when she confidently gave me the answers, I mean she should have told me beforehand that I should go and research the answers and I would have done exactly that.

What now makes me mad is that now she wants to appoint even more junior people than herself (that are her buddies) to be additional supervisors. Her point is that they would have more time for me than senior people. But I already have had more than enough time with her and what I need is some QUALITY supervison even if meetings are once a month or so.

LostinOz, ok- now that's different. Your supervisor did not give you the necessary level of guidance and still put the blame on you. Can you change your supervisor? Are there any other supervisors who have similar research interests as you?