I have finally started data collection and I am transcribing my first (three hour!) interview at the moment, and it is taking me forever! I definitely want to do it all myself because the methodology I am using requires me to be reflexive, and I am finding it very useful to go back to the interviews and remember them as I transcribe them. But it would be useful if it didn't take so long, as I am also working on chapters and a conference abstract! I overheard people in the office last week talking about transcription software, does anyone else use this? At the moment I am just using my voice recorder and typing it up in Word.

Or does anyone else have any other suggestions to speed up the process a bit?

Thanks, Natassia :-)

I doubt there is a difference between distance learning and on-site masters programmes, although if anything it might be slightly stricter for on-site admissions. I would email the person responsible for postgraduate admissions and ask them - you might just be able to transfer your place to the other course without reapplying for it.

I live near KT1! If you're going to all these places then you might be better off getting a one day travelcard for each day you're in London - off peak it's about £8 I think and you can go anywhere in zones 1-6 all day, using the overground, buses and the tube. I think that will be cheaper than an oystercard, but then I'm not sure what zone Chelmsford is in so you might have to buy another ticket for that trip.

Yes TFL would be your best bet - if you have an iPhone or Android phone you can get an app as well - I've always lived in London and still use it sometimes!

Also are you sure it isn't NW9? No such thing as NM9 in London, and NW means North West.

No experience of this myself but I do know that when I have marked UG essays and they go through Turnitin (or similar software, I presume doctoral theses go through this as well), they are allowed a certain margin. I queried an essay as to me it was full of material that clearly was not the student's own work, and it was only 3% (of what I don't know), and that wasn't considered to be plagiarism. That was only a 2500 word essay, so in an 80,000+ thesis I don't think a few sentences will be an issue, if it gets picked up on in the first place.

Fabulous, thank you. If you would like another distraction, I have another one:

Laurier, E. 2006. Putting the Dog Back in the Park: Animal and Human Mind-in-Action. Mind, Culture and Activity. 13 (1): 2-24

I will be marking about 50 4000-word portfolios in the next few weeks so I understand... I hope you're getting paid well for this!

Nx

If anyone can get hold of this seemingly rare paper I'd be very grateful...

Adler, P. A. and Adler, P. Resort workers: Adaptations in the leisure-work nexus. Sociological Perspectives, 1999. 42 (3)

Thank you,

Nx

My supervisors are fantastic and I really appreciate the support they give and of course the detailed feedback. I just never think I am good enough for them. I think that ultimately that is quite motivating as I try to improve all the time, but that also rests upon a lack of confidence and a working relationship that is probably a little too unbalanced.

I think that I do need to develop a thicker skin, I am quite sensitive really and would feel uncomfortable about telling them how I feel in case I burst into tears! I have a meeting nect week and hopefully it will be okay, I do think it's easier and better to meet in person rather than receiving comments over email.

I think this is part of the PhD process, I am beginning my fieldwork and heading for my transfer so this is a stressful stage, they just want me to get through it in one piece.

Thank you both for the advice, it is reassuring to know that others have to go through quite a few drafts before a chapter is 'perfet'. My supervisors seem to expect me to go from comments on the first draft to perfection, and when there quite a lot of comments, that is a big ask I think. I just constantly feel like I'm not good enough for them, but that is probably part of the process.

They're having a feedback meeting about my literature review today and then they're going to email me, probably in the next hour. I'm feeling quite sick to be honest.

======= Date Modified 01 May 2012 16:08:35 =======
Hi, I m redrafting my literature review at the moment, according to very detailed and helpful feedback from my supervisors. Looking at their comments and from what they have said in supervisions, they don't think that I engage with the literature deeply enough, although when I do I do it quite well. They have no problems with the ideas that I generate with the literature, they say that I am "very good" at this, but I seem to move on from them too quickly. The worrying thing is that they think this indicates a lack of understanding of certain areas, naturally I'm really concerned about this and trying to rectify it.

I am really trying to improve my writing by adding more detail where they have asked for it, I read things very closely and make notes etc. so I don't think it is a lack of understanding. When we discuss these concepts in supervison I have no problems in terms of understanding and ability to communicate, I just can't seem to write very well. I feel stupid and as if I am letting myself and my supervisors down.

I'd really appreciate any advice about this, or about getting over bad writing habits more generally.

Thanks in advance, Natassia

Hi, I am in the social sciences as well, just over a year in to my full-time PhD (started in January 2011). Are you full-time or part-time? Have your supervisors given you any indication that they think you should change your topic as well?

Like others have said, it is quite normal to change your direction when you are starting to put your project together, however I think that once you have started collecting data, you should stick with your topic. Have you done any data collection yet? I haven't changed the topic of my research as such, however I have decided not to research some areas that were in my original proposal, as I had too much and it wasn't forming a coherent narrative. So I haven't made any drastic changes, just prioritised things I suppose.

What you are proposing sounds rather drastic, would it involve totally rejecting most of the work you have done so far? What are your reasons for wanting to change topic?

Natassia

Thank you, my supervisors were basically happy with my first draft, I just have to make a few amendments then I can submit it, hopefully it will get through the panel first time.

I am finishing my ethical approval form today and will be emailing it to my supervisors this evening so they can check it before I submit it. Of course everyone here is going to have different experiences with ethics due to their research and institution, but I'm just interested to hear how the process worked for everyone else, and hopefully it will be useful to me and others in my position.

At my university we have to submit a form online to the ethics panel, who have a meeting and return with their verdict. There are few guidelines about the form, we are just advised to stick with a template. It asks for an abstract, introduction, methodology and analysis, participant information, the purpose of the research and the expected outcomes of the research. I do not have to go through any external agencies (e.g. NHS) with my project, although I am using human participants. They will all be aged over 18.

I am aware that this is a form and not the methodology chapter for my thesis so I am keeping it rather brief, although my selected methodology is fairly new and contested so it will have to be explained clearly. I think my form will be about 4500 words, does that sound like enough?

Any advice on obtaining ethical approval would be appreciated, I really want to get through this is one piece!

Natassia

I agree with the other responses as well, I think that criticism is something that is very easy to get wrong, and so it needs to be thought through properly so that you don't make yourself look foolish/argumentative. I'm not a particularly confrontational or confident person and would never criticise anyone's work/presentation in front of people, even if I believed myself to be correct; although I have wanted to in the past. I think that unless you are a respected academic and/or an expert in a field, your criticism will be taken with a pinch of salt. But that is just my opinion.

In terms of my supervisors, I don't really criticise anything, I just offer new ideas - sometimes they do contrast with theirs but most of the time it leads to an interesting and productive conversation. They seem to like this and have complimented me on my maturity with listening to feedback etc.; I think that the relationship you have with your supervisors is important and also quite fragile so it would make sense to be very careful with opinions and criticism. As time goes on and you become more of an expert at certain things than your supervisors the relationship changes, but it should always be respectful and without unnecessary confrontation.

Thank you for the helpful replies and sorry it's taken me so long to respond. I'm going to tell my supervisors that I'm interested in entering when I have a supervision on Tuesday, hopefully they'll be supportive and have some suggestions as well.

Ady - yes my research topic is quite innovative as in it is in a very new area using an equally novel (and problematic) methodology. So it may be better to focus on my methodology then, to be honest I'd never thought of that. I was thinking of trying to tell some sort of story; this would fit as my methodology involves analysis of narratives. I am also an insider researcher so I was going to bring that into it as well, making it slightly more personal and subjective.

The difficulty is that it is a competition that runs across the university, so my poster will be up against those from all the other departments. I imagine this would make judging them quite difficult, I haven't seen the judging criteria yet. I also have a very talented graphic designer friend who I am going to try to get on board!