Rick, structure is most definitely crucial to achieving a pass, but a 'thin' PhD is likely to be frowned upon by examiners in humanities and soc. science subjects. At the least, I've been told to produce 80,000 - anything less, and I've not produced enough research.

Marks in the 80s and 90s is pretty much unheard in my field. So you need to find out where your marks sit in your class to determine how good they are (I wish we used the bell-curve like Canada).

A good merit (i.e. 65% or above, or good B) at masters should get you on a PhD course, along with a first or good 2.1 at UG. However, at masters level your written work/dissertation should really be of a first/70%plus standard if you intend to do a PhD. If you can't pull 70s or come near the top end of the marking scale for your class in masters' written work, you probably won't like a PhD!

I waited approx. 6 mths for an offer and funding.

Why don't you phone up? Speak to whomever you approached to be your supervisor.

Also find out if there is a deadline for PhD applications - your application may not be considered till after a deadline.

(Is this not obvious stuff?)

Sorry, Juno! (not Jumo)

lol@ Jumo. Gillian McKeith also irritates me! Apparently she is under 50 - frankly she look like she's knocking on 70.

She only removed her 'Dr' when she was officially challenged. Until that point she claimed she had put in hard work to write her dissertation. Apparently, she did have to write something to get her faux PhD (maybe she sent the 'university' a recipe).


Dr Pamela Stephenson (the one who does that awful Shrink Wrap show on More 4) also has a dubious PhD background - her degree is also awarded from an unaccredited university in California.

Just to add, most students from both developed and developing countries will have only a 'small amount of income' - which means everyone is competing for any funds that are available.

You may stand a better chance in the US, where there are more funds available.

Yothean, unfortunately you are highly unlikely to gain any sort of scholarship for a masters courses (particularly for law). If you are to obtain funding, it is most likely to come from your own country.

Try 'directly' asking Essex for a list of scholarship providers, and visit the British Council website as they also have scholarships for international students.

The only scholarship that I can think may apply to you is Chevening :
http://www.britishembassy.gov.uk/servlet/Front?pagename=OpenMarket/Xcelerate/ShowPage&c=Page&cid=1065718181044

Try Googling: 'cambodia scholarships'

^ excuse the typos.

Lots of people up late tonight!!

Your word count (and production of), will for the most part depend on your discipline. I also try to knock out 1,000 words a day when I have deadline approaching, but to do that wordcount day-in day-out is probably too ambitious, and you'll end up with lots of waffle and not a lot of substance (at a rough guess, you'd end up with 250k in one year!).

I like to read and make notes in a structured form for about 3/4 days then write about 3,000 words (like Olivia says). Some PhD students will write 150-200k and then distill it down, and other write v. condensed and then have to flesh out the text later one (I'm in the latter category) - so wordcount varies greatly.

I agree with all the above.

I just wanted to add that it's very difficult to get a job in pharma at the moment (lots of outsourcing and redundancies going on), so you also needs to weigh that up (particularly if your post is permanent).

In answer to your question, basically no.

If you get a 2.1, you'll get a place on a masters course.

^^ my comments are not intended to devalue or suggest a science Phd is easier, but rather the lab work etc. should surely be the more time-consuming part of the PhD, rather than the actual writing-up.

Sorry, that should read quantitative data!

It all depends on the subject-matter though. For example, if you're a science student that has a mass of qualitative data that forms the findings and evidence of your thesis, I imagine it wouldn't take that long to disseminate that information, talk about the previous literature and draw your conclusions. In contrast, in a non-science PhD, particularly humanities and law, the evidence of the thesis is often presented in a more complex manner, and often does not have the structure of intro, lit review, findings, conclusions etc. but rather the argument and evidence has to run all the way through the thesis (at least for my discipline).

Liminalplace, I understand what you mean about the days passing away!
I would suggest you concentrate very specifically on one area, and try to removes all other PhD concerns from your head.

Also, I notice you talk about viva training. I attended a viva training course the other year and felt terribly deflated afterwards (I'm wondering if it was the same type of course!).The course was not bad, but the trainer paid much attention to a number of horror stories about the actual viva and failure rates e.g. 8 hours vivas and then failing etc, or vivas going on more than one day. He also, for the most part, portrayed examiners to be monsters, who really don't want to be examining. Personally, I felt quite panicked afterwards and found it hard to get back into my work.

I mentioned some of the facts from the viva course to my supervisor, and he dismissed them, and kindly informed me vivas are more likely 2-3 hours long.