I'm self funding, and haven't even tried to obtain any funding, partly because at my age it is unlikely that anyone would even consider it, partly because I don't want to go full time as I like my job and it fits in well with part time study (up to a point anyway) partly because I want to work with the supervisors I have, but mostly because the area is one that on the surface is unlikely to have the wow factor - although the results will make people sit up and take notice - I hope :$. The whole thing was inspired by my supervisor and the work I did with him during my MA, and as I have said to him and to others it is through him that I have both seen what needs to be uncovered and have the help to make it known to a wider audience. - my goodness that sounds either quite pompous or quite dramatic I hope it will be that latter! I can just about afford to do it, so may be lucky in that respect, but I couldn't afford to give up my job as there is little hope of getting anything permanently academic (too old) although there are other things that I can do in this area which my supervisor wants me to do. It is unfair to suggerst self funded people are not as good as those who get funding, it can well depend upon the area of your research, if there is an off the shelf topic you can do, or even maybe where you are based. Some people. like me, have had several different career changes and conducted research in all of them with different, but maybe equal value to PhDs, approaches. Well done to those who have managed to get funding, but also well done to those who go it alone.

I am funded but I am on a scholarship that is for those who just missed out on the 'big' scholarship. What it means is that I get 3/4 of the 'big' scholarship given, and then I have to work in the department for the other 1/4. I was told I missed out because for the 'big' scholarship you need to have an A+ average at undergrad to even be considered. I never thought I would want to do a PhD as an undergrad so I was out having way to much fun and working too many part time jobs to ever get an A+ average.

Anyway one day I was having a discussion with this girl who is on the 'big' scholarship and she was moaning about her funding not being enough. I explained what my funding arrangements were and she asked why I ended up getting that one. I explained and she said 'Well how on earth can you be capable of doing a PhD?' I was speechless! Goodness knows what she thinks of self funding students. She is, by the way now in year four and showing no signs of submitting. It's funny how people think they can just neatly rank the capability of others to do a PhD on account of how much money they attracted, and whether or not they got an A or a B average at undergrad level.

In my opinion success at PhD level is about so much more than being fully funded and having previous capability to perform well in exams. Having said that, I know having funding can certainly help make the PhD experience a lot more comfortable. I have huge amounts of respect for those who self-fund PhDs. I struggle as it is managing part time work and getting it done. I think it must take incredible motivation and self discipline. Anyone who looks down on self-funding students is just small minded and arrogant n my opinion.

v v tired (peak of fieldwork and teaching and projects) so few words

Blanket rule for me in life: if you have something (talent, inherited money, funding money, experience, whatever), if you have something, and think you're better than others who don't have it, you have a real attitude problem. It needs to be sorted or pointed out to you in your face.

In this case, person concerned has funding money and thinks those who havent got it are crap. Same thing, they are idiots.

As far as the thing abt not having stuf while grwoing up goes, I fully agree. But would also add, there are many who didn't grow up with financial difficulties but had traumatic childhood/adolescnence for other reasons (medical, social, familial etc etc). finances are one part of it.

I spent my teenage being a kid who could buy what she wanted. Doesn't change the fact that my teenage yrs saw me handling a pretty hellish family life. To be honest, for a while I even thought those who do well, with lovely homes intact, get it easy, and I am richer by experience i.e. I felt the same way as Maria's colleague feels.

That's when someone pointed out to me that if you got something, and others dont, or other way round, it doesnt make them/you better or worse.

My two pence.

Hi guys, you have some interesting perspectives on this. I personally think it's a shame (and typical) that the fact of whether or not one is funded contributes to the competitiveness that we find in academia. No one can help what kind of background they come from, and so it's a shame that this causes bitterness and snobbery. I am self-funding, and I very rarely think about who else is.

I don't know any self funders who have rich parents. Most struggle to fund themselves and are often part time. I alway feel sorry for them as their supervisors couldn't care less because its their money going down the toilet as they struggle to progress (due to lack of supervision). I think supervisors think that if people self fund there is a bottomless pit of money, compared to a research grant that has a time limit.

i totally agree with you Sneaks and i hate supervisors with that type of attitude.

I must be really lucky because my supervisor isn't like that at all, he's very into getting things done as soon as possible.

There was a bloke in my department who was a teacher, desparately trying to self fund. They made him take the research methods modules, and because he was only part time, it worked out that to take the research methods modules required would take him the first 2 years of his PhD and as the lectures take up the entire day, there would be no extra time to actually start the PhD. THe last time I saw him he was struggling and looked really depressed about the lack of progress. i haven;t seen him around for a while, so assume he's quit. I really feel sorry for him though as he was so keen! And it makes it worse that I managed to talk myself out of the modules as I had a lot of applicable experience that discounted the use of the taught material.

If you are a mature student doing a ful time PhD like me, with 2 young chidren, a part time job, a husband and self-funded you wouldn't even realise who is self funding or not. All you want to do is get on with your work. I think this boy referred to by Maria1, is just that, a boy, with no responsibilities. Spends his free time poking his nose into other people's affairs. Shame on him really.

Hi Bug, I didn't see any of what you are saying in Destiny's post; she/he was just saying that this particular individual has too much time on their hands and lacks maturity. I have no responsibitlities other than myself and I did not see a scrap of what you are suggesting in Destiny's post. I agree with her, this individual is a boy who understands little of life, and I'd think the same thing about anyone who made such crass judgements about other people.

======= Date Modified 15 Nov 2009 12:05:08 =======
Yeah well Bug, when you get to middle age you'll truly realise that, unfortunately, immaturity and being a boy and such like have bog all to do with numbers on a birth certificate. :-(

I am self funding. I started my PhD distance learning overseas, and then when I transferred to on campus study, I was part way through and not eligible for uni funding unless I started at zero again, which I was hardly likely to do. I guess as well, me being non British, and coming from a country where self-funding is very much the norm, I just do not "feel" the bite that people intend when they make self-funding comments. I usually counter with how fortunate I am my own government had made student loan funding so widely available even for post grads to go over seas, and what broad horizons that gives me/gave me in my choice of study, and act a bit pitying that their choices are so limited...:P That tends to shut people up about the whole thing.

The most talented and highest achieving people I know, be it in academia or elsewhere, tend to be humble, helpful, gentle folk, not limelight seekers. In part perhaps they can be humble, helpful and gentle because they have nothing left to prove, to themselves or others. On the other hand, perhaps opportunities came their way because of their non limelightseeking personalities. and those opportunities could have boosted them. Face it, networking and etc has a lot to do with what doors open, and people who alienate themselves from others with bad attitudes might find it harder to get those doors open.

Or you could always address anyone who has the cheek to want to discuss money with a long stare down your nose, and say, "I never discuss money. I find it very crass." :P

Apparently even having a Ph.D doesn't make you smart...