[stands up and applauds Chrisrolinski]

It always amazes me when others see fit to comment on the use or validity of someone else's work. I would never dream of doing that - but hey, I'm a good researcher with a good supply of tact and diplomacy .

Now major corrections. This also can vary immensely. I have only know 2 people in a period of about 5 years get this option.

This usually involves re-writing several parts, perhaps adding another chapter in. The examiner might think that a major approach/theory has been omitted, or the methods are flawed in some way, but not badly enough to make the work redundant. Basically it's a result that says - "this research IS up to PhD standard, it's worth more than an MPhil, it's inovative and original - but it needs this extra work to make it more robust".

It's also worth stating that the 2 cases I know of had extenuating circumstances throughout their PhD's too. One was in hospital for a long period of time, the other's supervisor died suddenly while he was midway through, and the replacement took a different approach.

The terms "major" and " minor" corrections can mee a whole range of things within their own separate definitions. I'll try and summarise thought as best I can. (anyone else who thinks differently please say!)

OK - Minor corrections. These can range from anything in between typos/making labels clearer/grammar, to adding paragraphs in, re-writing small chunks, adding info in the appendix, etc. Some minor corrections are so minor I known them to be optional - in otherwords permitted to remain within the final thesis. Other minor corrections are insisted upon before a final version is printed.

I got the latter, was given 3 months to do them (originally one month but I asked for 3!)They included re-writing a long sentence, adding more info (about a side of A4) about my analysis, plus amending all the typos. There were about 6 things altogether.

Usually, yes. As to whether everyone has one, I am not sure, but those of us on here who did found it very useful.

This sounds like a major issue for you, Yick. From your initial post I admittedly thought it was apathy on your part (apologies for that assumption) but now that you say your behaviour is different with other staff members and that you feel "tense and uncomfortable" i realsie it is more than that.

as 404 says, can you elaborate a little on what's changed? Can you pinpoint what it is about others that makes you feel at ease in contrast to your supervisor? How far are you into your PhD? Are other students uder his supervision? Could you perhaps talk with them and discreetly find out if they feel the same?

I agree with the others. The only time I've known people do such courses after a PhD is for a career change (e.g. a PCGE to go into teaching). Either that, or they do one to attain recognition from a professional body which they would otherwise not have, even with a PhD (Psychology is an example - people can have numerous quals in the discipline, but if they are not from British Psychological Society accredited courses, the society does not recognise them, in which case further study is necessary to gain registration.) These are the only types of circumstances in which I would recommend undertaking a further postgrad diploma/masters.

Hey, you are NOT being stupid! You were very anxious pre-viva and that is not just going to go away overnight. One thing I've learned about the whole PhD expereince is that there are several feelings that you are "expected" to feel, but don't. Like submittiing the thesis. Everyone assumes you'll be euphoric but it's actually quite anticlimatic.

I think the viva is the same. When you've spent a while scrutinising your abilities, questioning your work, it's a hard habit to break. I didn't feel like this immediately afterwards, but I was in a heavy data collection period for my current job and also attended a conference, so literally didn't have time to dissect my viva performance. My advice to you would be to throw yourself into additional activities if you can - maybe look through you thesis and seewhich parts you can submit for publication? (after all it has now been examined and passed!)

wonderful news! congratulations!!!

How long did it go on for?

I can uncross everything now

**I felt like "got caught"...He talked to me 3 times! (Although it's like "How're things going?" "Hi!" ... etc.) However, I don't want to speak to him at all!**

Something isn't adding up here. If you feel like you have "got caught" it sounds like you've got something to hide. Have you fallen behind with your work? If not, and you just "don't want to speak to him at all" then you're going to have a difficult time doing your PhD! Like it or not, supervisors are pretty vital to the whole doctoral process. Avoiding them is not display good practice - or manners. If he has done something to offend/affront you, that's a different story, but from the limited information you give he sounds like a pretty reasonable bloke who is merely making polite conversation. I would suggest you do the same, if only for the sake of your PhD progress.

Personally I think it's great to have a friendly supervisor. I know others who would certainly be glad of yours.

Wonder how fluffy's gettng on? Surely it's not still going on?

My fingers and legs are so crossed I shall end up in A & E!

GOOD LUCK

I'll be sticking around afterwards :)

I only discovered the forum when writing up I wished I'd known about it alot earlier. And I'm more than happy to help others as it has been very tough for me.

I will be going in summer There are lots of us graduating with PhDs from our department so it will be really good fun! My robe will be purple. Only disdvantage is that the PhDs are awarded first, so then we have to sit though the masses of undergrads.

Jewel, I was talking to a friend who did her first degree at Oxford and she said she actually had to wait 2-3 years to attend the grad ceramony after her degree had finished - something about becasue they don't have masses of room and everyone wants to go. Is that right? If so I hope you don't have to wait ages to graduate

To an extend I can see what Otto means with direct reference to conferences. I think it also depends on the value that the conference organisers apply to poster sessions. I've been to some great ones where they have generated good discussion. There have been some crap ones too where the poster session was basically over lunchtime. Everyone concentrated on their food and wandered round the posters as if they were in a museum! And the poor presenters had to squeeze lunch in whenever they could!

From a personal viewpoint I found producing posters invalauable when it came to looking at how my research had developed. I did about 4, all at various stages of the PhD. Effectively they were like a visual "crib sheet" that enabled me to see key stages of how my project had progressed. I made some A4 versions of them and showed them to my external when I was asked if I wanted to add anything at the end of my viva. They went down well.

Hey , good news!

What will your research be on?