======= Date Modified 16 Mar 2012 12:34:27 =======

======= Date Modified 14 Mar 2012 14:36:02 =======

It depends on the circumstances and the potential interest in your data.

1) If you want to publish work from your thesis to journal for which you'd not receive royalties, it doesn't matter whether or not you sign the agreement to put it on the University Open Repository or on Ethos. You will not gain financially therefore there is no benefit from withholding your thesis.

2) If you plan to sell on information from your thesis as part of a book or collected works that may gain you royalty payments, or sell the information on to a third party, then I would restrict access as people will not pay if they realise they can download the core document for free. This latter course of action you might consider if you believe there will be a very high level of interest in your data.

3) Apart from this, the only other practical reason for restriction is commercial confidentiality for a fixed period (say five years) if an industrial sponsor has been involved.

4) I know some others consider their work as private and personal and restrict it for that reason. Others perceive that their intellectual property might be put at risk if they chose to make the data available (including my direct predecessor on my project) even if interest is minimal, however, this can be addressed by publishing the work to journal.

----------------
Unless the reasons are financial or commercial, I don't see the point in restricting thesis access as a large collection of data gathers dust and never sees the light of day as a consequence. All the work contained therin has thus been done for nothing in my opinon.

I settled for making it publically available, but also publishing the key data to a reputable journal ensuring my copyright and intellectual property rights were protected. My name was associated with the work in print and could thus be proven as such.

If I'd thought a significant financial return was possible from sale of the information to a third party, or by book or collected works , then I would have restricted access. I did a little investigation to see if this was possible, however, people are loath to pay up if they think they get the information for free making this option a non-starter if your audience is a niche interest.

Ian (Mackem_Beefy)

Given the oversupply problems of PhD graduates out there compared to available suitable position, I think the last square of this says it all!!!

http://www.wearthesis.talktalk.net/phdgame.pdf

I note the ample opportunities to go to square 33 before you finish. :-)

Ages ago, I wrote the following blog based on my experiences of a PhD. I was asked plenty questions by prospective students, so created said blog to help them.

http://www.wearthesis.talktalk.net

1) Annual stipend for a funded PhD is roughly equivalent to minimum wage these days, but competition is hefty. I only got £8,000 a year when I did it. You may get an additional industrial sponsorship if a commecial organisation is interested in your project, though this may mean extra work on your part (i.e. regular reports and presentation of information).

2) I looked after various kit in my department and did some informal student supervision towards the end and into post-doc. This I did not get paid for as I elected not to formally do extra duties (tipped off not to due to workload).

3) Once properly underway, up until the end of the experimental period (science-based PhD) I guess ~9 hours a day (not including a little home-based work). However, this would increase if I was preparing for a conference or involved in paper preparation. During write-up I did some seriously long hours and I spent two years doing 12 to 16 hour days (weekends included - gaps in experimental work had to be filled in as well).

4) My supervisor normally saw me 4 or 5 times a week. He kept a close watch on projects, however, I got autonomy to push a substantial chunk of the project in a direction I thought would get substantial results. He went off on his own tangent and it all worked out quite well in the end.

5) I tried to join the athletics union, however, injury ended that plan. I also tried to take a German language course, however, workload ended that after the first year.

6) Initially, yes. I did a first post-doc in the department where I did my PhD (overlap of PhD into post-doc due to write-up - fairly normal). The second post-doc at another university saw that come off the rails (project leader had poor people skills) and because of the second post-doc, I appreciate the problems others have posted up on here (supervision, lack of direction, conflict with colleagues, etc.). I'm back in the real world at a lower level than before the PhD (the second post-doc did a lot of damage).

7) Yes, I thoroughly enjoyed the PhD even though the hours were killers at times. I got to do things and use some cool pieces of equipment I never though I'd get the chance to. I would not do anything different if I had the time over again and would still do the PhD if placed back in time and offered the chance to reconsider my choices. I would, however, not have taken the second post-doc if I had my time over again. But that's hindsight for you.

8) Work to study (science-based role to PhD, not consultancy) was straight forward for me. The one real problem was changing my writing style to an academic one (i.e. short report with basic facts to extended report with reference information). Going back to the real world and a fast paced job after the second post-doc I'm finding harder. A PhD does affect your mindset and approach.

9) I overran by about a year. It is possible to finish on time if you're structured in approach with given predetermined goals reached by certain fixed deadlines. However, the nature of a PhD is you're very likely to change direction due to new findings as you go along and your projected time scales thus become meaningless. I would say more people overrun than don't. Bear in mind you don't get funded during the overrun period unless you start a post-doc whilst you're finishing (and you have that work to do as well as your PhD write-up).

I have heard of early submissions, however, if you hear of people passing with minor corrections after two years you almost certainly have to be talking about a certified genius. Some Universities forbid submission before two and a half years.


Hope that's of help to you.


Ian (Mackem_Beefy)

======= Date Modified 08 Mar 2012 09:19:34 =======
=== POST REPLACED ===

Three months in the first instance is not long. I not really sure what to advise here, however, the cushy days of PhD are over and some form of permanance at least allows some sort of planning for the future. The angle I'm taking here is perhaps taking the permanent job until something else comes along that is better and permanent.

That said, there is a possible opening here that could lead somewhere and do you turn it down when you've already had an uncomfortable spell on the dole?

It's a decision only you can make.

Ian (Mackem_Beefy)

======= Date Modified 01 Mar 2012 13:02:01 =======
Learn't how to write in 'thesis style' or ask what style was expected. This would have saved me months of work during write-up. More attention as to how other theses were written would have helped here, especially my predecessors'.

Also set a standard structure for analysis and characterisation of samples (magnification on SEM, temperatures to sample at, etc.) as this probably have saved me another month and a half I used up to gain production quality graphics.

The main problem I had was me and my primary supervisor having different ideas on how the project was going to pan out. That said, he was a good supervisor and I managed to work the key bits he wanted into my thesis quite comfortably.

Ian (Mackem_Beefy)

Oortiz makes a fair point and I would be minded of what he says. Normally, I would agree with his sentiments.

However, renewables and green energy (wind as well as solar) is very much a growing sector and in this case, Fady may have a point. If an academic career is not for you, I'd be tempted to look into it and what prospects are available by making the switch. If anything, I'm minded a mixture of the two may improve employability.

Do not take the decision lightly, however, and ensure you have looked into such a switch of subject properly. If you do find you've made a bad move later, I would try to get a few journal publications out of your PhD work so a switch back to Materials is not impossible. Also beware of the professional / continual student tag that may be applied to you by potential employers in the future.

Ian (Mackem_Beefy)

There are people who've submitted in less than three years, however, the norm is to spill over into a fourth year. You have to plan well and be extremely structured to do it in less than three years or be a certified genius.

Some Universities do not allow submission in less than two and a half years.

I would advise anyone on a funded PhD to see out the three years before submitting to ensure they have their thesis right. Otherwise, you could risk major corrections.

Ian (Mackem_Beefy)

======= Date Modified 22 Feb 2012 13:30:45 =======
I'll reiterate what others have said by saying whilst it is an exam, it's also a discussion over your findings, what you did to identify the findings and come to the conclusions you did.

The examiners will have a good knowledge of literature and they will want you to demonstrate you do also, simply because the expectation in a PhD is that you have reviewed previous work in order to establish the originality of your own work. They will want you to ensure that whatever work you have done adds something new to the knowledgebase. That is the basis of whether or not you are awarded a PhD.

I'm not 100% sure about what you mean by saying "no contribution". I assume by this you mean the examiners are saying that they feel your work doesn't contribute anything new. If so, you succinctly address the key points within your thesis that demonstrate that your work is original and does contribute something new.

As regards the second question, you do need that when doing a PhD you are pushing the boundaries of knowledge in that field. If you are continually saying you don't understand, then that will bring into question how thoroughly you have reviewed other's literature and gained a background understanding of your subject area and especially if key literature has been missed. However, once or twice shouldn't be a major issue, especially if you can argue that their question addresses an aspect of your subject area that has yet to be covered by yourself or other literature. You may also make the remark that their comments are an idea for further study.

There's always the chance one of them will have knowledge of a piece of more obscure literature you have missed as regards your second question. If so, it's probably easier to admit to that (or alternatively argue why you thought a piece of literature wasn't releavnt if you do know about it) and if they request it's inclusion in any corrections, to agree to that.

Until you walk into the examination room, you don't know what you're going to face. Provided you've been thorough with your preparation and have revised material (both within your thesis and other related areas) you're reasonably expected to know, you should be okay.

Whatever you do, do not try to bluff you're way through if you don't know an answer. Also, there's no harm in discussing your point of view and reasoning with an examiner if it is different from there's. Use wording such as "I understand what you are saying, however, ..."


Ian (Mackem_Beefy)

Wales has a separate repository.

You might also want to check individual University repositories, which will at least have recent theses in them.

Ian (Mackem_Beefy)

Way back for Masters, I was interviewed in May for September entry. If you've any chance of funding (increasingly difficult to find for Masters these days), you need apply sooner rather than later regardless of where you want to go.

Ian (Mackem_Beefy)