tt_dan, I'd chase it if its gone beyond the time they set you. Chances are its got lost or stuck with a reviewer they need to chase.

I think its quite common for you to get a second R&R from a journal, so you get another chance. BUt I've heard people get 2 R&Rs and then a rejection which must be extremely annoying, particularly if you'd revised it specifically for the way the journal wanted it which may not be relevant to other journals.

it prob depends on your discipline. At the moment I'm working with a lot of Greek, Swedish and Dutch people. I wouldn't have a hope of going to their universities and understanding a word!

Main goal today is to write the results section. Well edit it. Basically trying to get a 10,000 word qual chapter down to the 6,000 word journal limit AND include a lit review!

Basically I'll be deleting a lot of quotes today :p

You'll also need a fair idea of your epistemology/ontology which although it doesn't have to, should probably link with your methodology.

E.g. I used template analysis with my qual data because I come from a post-positivist discipline, but was adopting a pragmatic approach in my thesis. Template analysis meant I could use existing theory to drive my thematic analysis (like you would in post-positivism) but also be reflexive about what came out of my data, explore the context in a rich qual way - more like a constructivist position.

You don't have to talk about this stuff in your thesis, but you should have a solid idea of what you're doing and why otherwise you'll look like a twonk in the viva.

I've done the method section.

Think I'll spend the next 2 hours planning out an essay I have to write for teacher training and writing a list of lectures I have to plan for next year!

I'm going to wait on her changes and see exactly what she has in mind. I think sometimes she hypes it up so a 'complete re-scope' can literally mean just changing a word e.g. 'incidents' to 'events' which in her mind changes the whole nature of the study - to me its just a word.

I'm also seeking other peoples opinion, I've told her I'm sending it out to specialists in the field I know and my viva examiners who offered to check potential publications.

I'm also the one who submits it to a journal, so I can always 'do the final edit' before sending it in :p

Epoisse

its more she gets an idea in her head about what my research is about (when its not!) usually this will be based on a paper she's already put out so she'll say "I think this is the same issue we did in this paper...." and then runs with it without letting me say "erm no, it definitely isn't!", so when I send her another draft without any changes, she'll just keep going with this idea that it has to be what she says :-s

She won't read the emails either. Last week I sent her a draft of a paper and in the email said "I think I want to aim this at XYZ journal"

She then phoned me to tell me it needed rescoping (I know she'd only skim read the 1st page) and then asked me what journal I wanted to aim it for.

I'm just gritting my teeth - trying to get the three out she has to be named on, so I can then have more freedom about how I write.

I need to write a methods section for my paper today. I'm really struggling trying to write my PhD studies up for publication. My supervisor is just so demoralising. I spend 2 weeks making what I think is a good paper - she doesn't read it at all and comes back with what she *thinks* its about and declares a complete re-write :-(

I know she doesn't read it because she phoned me up at 11.30 a few days ago saying one of my papers needed to be completely re-scoped to emphasise Point XX that she had read in an article. She said "have you read the article, I really think you need to include it and talk about Point XX"

I had cited the article she was talking about, approx 10 times in the article and my entire discussion is about Point XX :-(

I said this, but she just ignored me and hasn't got back to me. Finding it very frustrating and as I go onto other studies to write them up, all I can think of every sentence is how she is going to rip it all apart and declare a re-write necessary. She never tells me *how* I can improve or *why* it needs changing though, she just puts changes all over it without checking with me that she's on the same wavelength.

In the past her changes are the ones that have got me rejected from journals. Her changes to my thesis were the ONLY things that came up as negative in my viva. I trust my own gut, but can't go over her head as her name is on the papers. RAH.

Anyway. I'm trying to remain positive. So today's goal is to write up the method section of my current publication attempt

I used to chair a committee for a postgrad conference. It was actually funded by the bigger affiliated (i.e. 'proper' ) conference so it really was about showcasing postgrad research and encouraging people to get used to presenting and I think it tended to make a loss most years!

if you go with the friend doing it, I wouldn't tell the conference organisers - they can get sniffy about people not turning up for posters, which I can understand cos you'd get loads of people just sending in the posters and no one there.

I have a colleague who was in the same situation, she asked a friend to stand there and hand out business cards for her in lieu of answering questions - worked fine and she got a few enquiries.

You could also just ask the friend to pop it up and pin a plastic cup full of business cards on the board with it, so they don't even have to stand there!