Hi Ema123

Are you still considering the new offer you've been made?

Sadly, this kind of behaviour is all too common in academia. Suddenly, hierarchy becomes something very salient and some people really show their character (or lack of it in my view!). So don't take it personally - it isn't you. Many of PGR students get made to feel like they are a waste of time by their supervisors.

As for them narrowing the scope of your project... this is probably a good and necessary thing. They can probably see the bigger picture and how much work will be involved better than you can, and so they are probably trying to help you refine your ideas to something manageable.

Tudor

See recent thread which might be helpful: http://www.postgraduateforum.com/thread-49910/

And doing this would indeed constitute academic dishonesty. : )

The funny thing is (to a research methods obsessed person) most research methods books and papers do not tell you what to do if you get rubbish inter-rater reliability on some coding or ratings. They might tell you what to do if you've designed the scale yourself and are piloting it. But if it's one you've taken from the literature (that has already managed to demonstrate good validity and reliability elsewhere), what is the best, least-biased thing to do?

I am convinced (and full of bias - but also I think I know the data better!) that I have rated the videos alright... I got myself to a degree of INTRA-rater reliability before I trained the second coder. But the second rater obviously has something different in her head when she rates the videos... (just like when she marks undergraduate students' work - very very conservative and not wanting to give the top ratings even when it meets the criteria). Grr, I am so annoyed!

She's away by the way which is why I am venting here and dithering about what to do. Hopefully she will agree to be re-trained and re-code her 15% until reliability is obtained.

I think Cohen's Kappa is appropriate for my particular rating scale, but thanks - I've had a look and will store this for other possible future ventures (I love methodology!).

Hi Satchi

Yes - it was based on 15% only. I think it might be that the training I gave wasn't thorough enough (we only joint rated one video and because it was fine we stopped there when perhaps I should have made us do a few more together). Plus she only actually did the ratings several months after I gave her the training. So I guess she may have forgotten the training a little (although the rating scale was quite self explanatory).

I'm a bit grumbly about it because I've nearly finished writing the paper and one of the key findings relates to that measure, so it throws the whole thing into jeopardy if we can't get good reliability. But I'll see what my supervisor says (she was the one who rated the 15%...)

Thanks for the helpful response.

I don't have any concrete evidence, but when I planned to finish my undergraduate degree without the honours, my academic advisor at the time strongly advised me not too if I intended to go on and do postgraduate study. So she viewed it as very important.

Hi there

Someone kindly rated 15% of my data (videos) using a global rating scale. I rated 100% of the data using the same rating scale. When I came to calculate inter-rater reliability using Cohens Kappa, it is low.

Obviously I don't want to re-rate all the videos again. Is it OK for me to retrain the second coder and get her to code her 15% again and then re-calculate reliability?

Would this be the standard procedure?

I think unless you have several papers where you are the first author you wouldn't be allowed to progress to postgraduate study without having completed your undergraduate studies.

Why do you keep failing the final year? It is worth pointing out that PG studies are a level up from undergraduate studies. So if you are struggling at undergrad, it is likely that you would struggle more at postgrad.

Do you just mean a place or a funded place? Having an MRes does not guarantee a funded PhD position. You still have to go through the whole application process (usually including an interview), where you'll be competing with a bunch of other people who have an MRes (or not) and various other credentials.

The MRes can definitely be beneficial though - as it is really a training course for doing research so places you in good stead for doing the PhD. Also, you could use it as a springboard for your PhD - for example, in your MRes dissertation you could work on a topic which you then build on in your PhD proposal.

You have to finish the course to be awarded the MSc. You would earn credits from whatever modules you had completed before leaving. Then if you started another course elsewhere you might not have to re-take the same modules again.

Of course not. It should be fine. I recommend honesty with the supervisory team. They may even be able to make some changes if they know what it is you're not happy with. At any rate, at this stage they will probably be able to recycle your funding (give it to someone else) so they will not be at a loss if you do leave.

I think it is good to raise these issues before starting. It is much better than dropping out later because you aren't happy.

Good luck : )

The same thing is happening in my UK university. While some people are losing their jobs, others are having their contracts changed to "teaching only", and new teaching only posts are being advertised. I think it is to do with the Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF) and it is probably somehow saving money too, if my uni has anything to do with it!

Don't worry, it is a normal feeling, I think. Re R and Python... I don't think they're really about IQ - some people just have a knack where others struggle. What resources are you using for stats? Have you managed to find a book you get on with? That can make a big difference.

I'm sure others will have more helpful things to say but I just wanted to write and say keep your chin up - it is normal : )

Tudor