The answer to this ultimately depends on how much weight you place on rankings. International students seem absolutely obsessed with rankings...

Remember rankings aren't going to reflect the quality of your supervision, facilities, etc. You can only really make an informed choice by visiting both uni's and speaking to potential supervisors.

What happens next year if SOAS is higher than Sussex?? But you chose Sussex because the previous year they were higher...

This issue concerning publishing work and then using that published work (word-for-word) in one's thesis, crops up an awful lot here.

While I agree publishing beforehand is a good thing, publishing a large bulk of a thesis before submission seems a bit illogical to me. First, the person runs the very real risk of self-plagarism. Second, if submission is looming near, is it not worth waiting until after submission to benefit from the examiners' comments before publishing? Then thirdly, as mentioned below, 'self-publishing' is often not peered reviewed and ultimately runs the risk of falling under the radar.

It seems a bit of a school boy error to me, but then things may work differently in the field of creative writing.

Another forum pass!!! So encouraging!

Well done Ju-Ju!!!(up)

IRtype, snobbery/elitist branding in academia is certainly not a new trend - it's been around for donkey's years in the UK. I'd go as far to say it's been around a lot longer than academic snobbery in the private sector.

Obviously, having a PhD from a top 10 institution will hold more sway when applying for a job (private or public), and many uni's will only employ academics from their own strata or higher eg. Oxbridge takes Oxbridge applicants, UoL takes UoL or Oxbridge applicants, and red-bricks take Oxbridge, UoL, red-bricks and so on.

No one is calling anyone 'f...... foreigners' here - we are talking about non-nationals who have no UK education, and/or non-nationals who are given the job when a domestic candidate of equal ability is available.

Conversely, I've found the private sector to be more open to graduates from a variety of universities compared to academic recruitment. Excluding some very elitist companies who only ever employ Oxbridge grads, the majority of big companies will recruit from a broader pool of applicants holding undergraduate degrees derived from RG uni's (the top 20, not top 8).

======= Date Modified 08 Jan 2009 13:42:06 =======
Ask your masters' tutors. Academics will write references for people from 10/20 years ago, and it's part of their job to write them (unless they have nothing good to say). I still use my undergrad tutor from a long time ago as a reference contact.

I'd plump for SOAS. SOAS has an international rep, and is part of the University of London. I don't know about Sussex's rep, so I can't compare. You'll also in smack bang in the middle of the information hub with the SOAS library, British Library and other UL colleges at your disposal.

However, you have to take into account who your supervisor will be; don't base your choices on reputation alone.

Am I reading right...you're already doing a PhD in Italy? Are you planning on a second PhD, or are you transferring?

I'm wearing a pair of khaki coloured Crocs today....actually I live in them.

Nuff' said on the scruffy front.

LOL....I got one, but had to get rid of it.

Actually I nearly dislocated my shoulder playing tennis.

It's excellent for getting rid of all that pent-up PhD frustration.

======= Date Modified 06 Jan 2009 09:38:56 =======
============= Edited by a Moderator =============

I don't see anything wrong with have an MPhil on a CV. Obviously, if you want an academic career it will look poor as they'll expect a PhD, and want to know why you didn't pursue through to PhD level, but for outside of academia there is no problem. Lots of people do just sign-up to research for an MPhil and not a PhD.

Also if there was such stigma attached to an MPhil, would Cambridge be granted those letters for their masters programmes? I would think not.

"What sort of person does a master's? " An unemployed one.

Yes, this sounds flippant, but it's a general running joke in British academia, and one that is very applicable to UK students. A proportion of UK students are in masters courses because a) they didn't get a graduate job, or b) they are undecided about their career....watch the numbers increase in the next few years!

A British graduate, unless requiring specialist knowledge or pursuing an academic career, doesn't really need a masters degree. Most employers (I can speak from a corporate perspective) do not see them as a necessary element for graduate employment. There is generally less kudos associated with masters or phd qualifications compared to other countries (with the exclusion of highly specialised degrees/MBAs etc.) so there is less motivation for a British graduate to pursue one.

If your sup is expecting a 'rough draft' then he/she shouldn't have a problem with receiving it in a 'rough' state. But, if he/she is expecting a 'draft' or 'first draft' most will expect a good standard of presentation with most references etc. completed.

Happy new year too!

What you can do with your PhD depends on your discipline. Some PhDs offer little value outside academia, while others do. What field are you in?

I'm a little more politically incorrect about the recruitment of foreign candidates in that I believe the system should be changed to follow the more protectionist practice seen in many other Western countries.

For example, in Canada, it specifically says on job applications that Canadian citizens and/or permenent residents will be prioritised for the post if they suitable. In this respect, they keep their home grown talent (to some extent funded by the taxpayer) in their own country, and prevent the brain drain. Foreigners who have gone thru the Canadian education system are not normally discriminated because if they have done their MA, PhD, postdoc in Canada, they are likely to have applied for permanent resident status.

This is in complete contrast to the way the UK works, which has a very open door policy for academics all around the worldwide, and this has led to a very screwy system where entry level British educated or (EU educated) candidates are competing with much more experience foreign candidates, and this often leads to British/EU candidates looking beyond EU shores to then be faced with the stringent recruitment policies like those employed in Canada. Personally, I wouldn't have a problem with this if the UK education system was privatised, but as students and academic staff are funded by the British taxpayer I strongly believe the talent of UK candidates should be fostered and prioritised over foreign candidates (assuming both are on an equal footing in terms of talent).

Of course there are valid reasons (in my opinion) why departments are now >50% or more non-national:
1. We are European.
2. The pool of UK talent is getting smaller as students opt for the private sector.
3. Experienced foreign academics offer RAE points.
4. Foreign academics will work for much less to get a foothold in the UK system.
5. Foreign academics (an internationalised dept) helps attract high fee paying international students.

Unfortunately, this is all leading to UK uni's failing to foster 'new blood' (UK/EU), which will compound the brain drain problem.