Incredible performance phdbug,

great to hear that you've received such positive remarks, the actual PhD and also the prizes.

You should be very proud and really celebrate your success!:-)

Hi Caroline,

although I am not German I think students in Germany apply for a PhD and then get a salary, or they are self funded.

There is a basic system called "Bafög", but I think this is for regular students only, I do not think it would be provided for a PhD. There is also a system called "Stipendium" (scholarship) , which a student can apply for. I am not an expert in this field but I get the impression that this is only very a basic amount of money. These "Stipendia" are provided by various organisations, profit and non-profit, and it may be an idea to look for them, perhaps by doing a google search. Good luck:-)

Dear Chris,

Probably obvious, but as structure it may help to remember:

1. What am I going to talk about? What is this thesis about? What is the question I want to answer?

2. Why is it important?

3. How am I going to talk about it? How will I present it?

(4. Debatable is to include in the intro what you have actually found.)



:-)

Hi Emmaki,
the amount of data can be daunting and it may be difficult to decide how to start to analyse this, especially if you have not done this before.

I think, simplified, a way of approach can be: familiarise yourself with the text, do you see certain issues which come back all the time? Or issues that you think are remarkable. You can provisionally mark them, go through the text again, see some more? Or have to adapt? etc. etc. I think relatively quickly you will get a feel of "categories" or "emergenging themes"

In all fairness it is very useful if you have strategy in mind before you analyse your data. For example if you were going to use an iterative approach between data collection and analysis (as in grounded theory), then strictly speaking you should have started the analysis process during the data collection. Also it may be useful to have another researcher, independantly, to analyse your data as well, and then to compare.
:-)

Hi Poppy, monkey,

I see the point of view of monkey, however in my opinion it is important to keep your co-authors on board. Obviously depends a bit on their position in the organisation. If one of them is the professor I think it would be wise to have the "all clear" before sending the paper for submission. Afterall the name of your co-authers will be on it and as such, in my opinion, must be happy with it before it is sent!
:-)

Dear Poppy

this is very frustrating. Fortunately I have quick reviewers and am happy regarding this. In your case I would phone them and politely ask for the feedback. If they are happy with the paper then that is fine, if they still want to have a look at it, agree a dead line and phone again if you have not heard anything when that has passed.:-)

Hi Bulbs,

I have used the Handbook of Qualitative Research from Denzin and Lincoln. In it the authors you mention (Miles and Huberman) have written a chapter on data analyis.:-):-)

Hi Jojo,

how about just "The context" or "The context of the study"
All your chapters have a short title, seems that "The context" fits quite well.

Are you able to shift things a bit? Perhaps move some of the methodological stuff from "The context" to "The theoretical framework"?

:-)

Dear Ting Ting,

research interests are, in my opinion, more general, more the areas you are interested in. For example research in diabetes etc.

A research proposal is a specific project which you have in mind and which has a more explicit form. For example: What is the best method to control diabetes?

:-)

Hi A116,

thanks for your quick reply.

How are you doing? Please let me know, another time as I understand you are in a hurry right now, how your research is going?

Kind regards,

Rick

Dear all,

just wondered what your views are on participant checking after focus group discussions. I have analysed most of my data and have made a draft paper.

I have read that a quality marker is that participants had been asked to provide feedback on the paper. If I would do that it would mean a lot of extra work (trying to get these groups together again, a virtually impossible task!) Any views on how important this is?

Well done Ruby,

you must be pleased, congratulations!!!!;-);-)

Hi Badhaircut,

incredible story, must be pleasing though that at he end things went your / your team's way.

Ever thought of writing a book about the saga?:-)

Hi Satchi,

I have used the scale starting with strongly disagree(1) to strongly agree (5). Not sure whether there are any strict rules regarding this.

I think in general it is best to use a questionnaire that already has been validated. To get published, I think this is important. If you have to develop the questionnaire yourself, I would use a validated questionnaire, which fits best with your research, as an example for structure. There are books which contain validated questionnaires regarding all kind of issues. Good luck:-)

Hi Drwhoknows,

yeah, very frustrating. I have a similar experience.

I think the first period is the longest, probably not another 9 months for reviewing the review. Unfortunately may still take some before the actual publication, yet the editor would normally indicate when it will be published, then at least you know that is will be published and when.

:-)