Hi Sbcc. Congratulations on being successful in getting on a PhD programme! I too couldn't find a book specifically aimed at the humanities, but used a handful of them to help write my dissertation. Here they are:
- Unwritten Rules of PhD (as BilboBaggins mentioned; this is excellent for making you aware of your role as a PhD student, supervisors roles, insider politics and how to handle them, and how to build an effective network of support via use of tact, diplomacy etc. Also good for informing you about the *sins* a PhD student can commit due to being unacquainted with the nature of academia).
- How to Write a Thesis by R. Murray (all about the actual *writing* process: planning, drafting, different types of writing, their use, tackling mental blocks, etc. It's an in depth analysis of *writing* for the purpose of producing a thesis - doesn't deal with the other aspects of being a PhD student since the book is premised on the fact that there are already many books offering that sort of advise. It focuses solely and systematically on the writing process).
- The Research Student's Guide to Success by Pat Cryer (all comprehensive, and has some good tips on getting you thinking creatively about your thesis).
I second what Chrisrolinski said; I am in a Humanities department which combines Historians, Philosophers, Cultural Studies members of faculty and Sociologists. The somewhat interdisciplinary approach to their research (i.e. an awareness of the historical, cultural, intellectual and sociological or political dimensions to their research) makes their output more rounded, grounded in contect, and informative. As Chris suggested, sometimes a footnote would suffice to show you are aware of context and that your research is guided not only by this context, but by your awareness of what else was going on at that time (the period you are researching on) in the spheres of politics, culture, philosophy, etc. and you are aware of the interconenction of all these fileds and their impact on the subject matter which you are, say, now analysing. You may, for instance, cite Rousseaux or Englightenment thinkers influence' on subsequent political thought in Europe, and its impact on the French Revolution; or the impact of certain scientific theories of biological determinism on the widespread acceptance of Nazism and its claims to be based on science; likewise, the impact of Nazi politics, ideological propaganda on the philosophy of certain German thinkers of that time. Again, this need not guide the direction of you research explicity, but an overall awareness of the various dimensions to the period and subject matter which you intend to study will most definitely show that you have a sound and thorough understanding of the context within which you are working. Best of luck!

You can also try: http://www.scholarship-search.org.uk/pls/mon/hc_edufin.page_pls_user_studmoney?x=16180339&y=&a=220707

======= Date Modified 26 58 2010 18:58:40 =======
Hello,

I recently downgraded from being a PhD student in Humanities to an MPhil student due to lack of funds.

Anyone know someone or has themselves passed an MPhil exam who can please please let me know how strict they are with exam standards at MPhil level? That is, what are the expectations for an MPhil degree such that one can work to be given a pass? What will the examiners be expecting from someone applying for this level of award (instead of a PhD)?

I'd really appreciate your feed-back!

======= Date Modified 25 May 2010 18:02:21 =======
Reeeeeelax! You've got the hardest part over and done with; you submitted your thesis, remember? The viva is your chance to shine, to tell them all about the info your brain has soaked up these five years and which you're probably not even aware is there! You'll probably know more about your thesis than anyone else in that room. Be confident, polite and don't be afraid to take a few moment to think before you answer their questions. Do some yoga if you get the chance in the next few days, or go for walks and clear your head - anything relaxing.
As for the question of why you did it, try to imagine where you'd be and what you'd be doing if you hadn't embarked on the PhD journey - aren't you happier where you ended up now? Go back to the time that you were applying to do a PhD; why did you in the end choose this topic? Was there anything in your life / studies that led you to this area, or motivated you, perhaps, in your personal life? Make a list (empty your head), then sleep on it. The next day go over it and then if/when they ask you at the viva, you'll have a few ideas to guide your response. Good luck! Let us know how it went!

Hi Joyce - supervisors leaving to go to another university is always a disruptive and disorientating experience for everyone concerned - the PhD students, the colleagues that need to probably cover his/her workload temporarily until they've been replaced with someone else, and probably for him who's now somewhere new trying to fit in and familiarise himself with his new environment.

Why not go to see the Director of Studies (just a quick knock on his door) or email him to oraganise a meeting to discuss your submission for the board and also to organise a new structure for your supervision - you don't need to suggest a new supervisor at this stage; just stating that because of your supervisor's move away, you'd like to discuss how your supervision will (moving forward) be structured will in itself give him an indication that you want to know who'll be responsible for giving you feedback on your work. Having CC'd him might not be enough for him to realise that the other sup was busy with elections, etc. Go and see the director of studies directly and ask if there will be a second in-house supervisor also allocated to you in addition to the one who's left to cover in when the former is say too busy - I'm sure he'll catch your drift. He'll then be able to perhaps make suggestions for a new supervising structure (arrangement) to accomodate for the fact that your primary supervisor has left. It might be possible that the old one can continue to supervise you (externally) but that you can also be assigned an internal one to fill in the gaps & jump in at busy times like this when you've got deadlines to meet and need quicker feedback.

Hi Blair. Yes, I had the worse interview ever for my PhD - and it took them ages to get back to me due to *slow* admin - but I got the place in the end. You'll hopefully hear from them soon. But do keep an eye out for the *slow* admin once you get there - I soon realised that it was the running theme. Nothing to worry about, just make sure you're the one who's organised, etc.

Hi, Sorry to hear about your ordeal! Can't you try to make some improvement to the articles, and try to send it to another journal? It seems like your UBS is basing his judgment (and the options he's offering you) on the say of one journal. Try another journal, if this is an option and do as much improvement on the article as you can. Also, is there someone else other than your UBS and IBS, a mentor, someone you met at a conference and showed enthusiasm about your work, etc. who knows enough about your field to take a look at your thesis and articles and give you their opinion? They might be able to see things more objectively and perhaps suggest some constructive do-able changes. It'd be a shame to give up all that work without trying different options which may in the end get you your PhD. Best of luck.

======= Date Modified 14 May 2010 15:12:45 =======
Don't feel bad Emaa. I am a master procastinator myself, and I have recently come to the conclusion that since starting my PhD, I have developed a www. addiction! Ironically, my thesis is on a subject related to procastination and its widespread among student!

First thing I did to rectify this was get myself an 'Appointment Diary'. I asked myself about my intellectual high & low times (e.g. do I lose interest in the summer - as someone here does; do I grasp complex ideas better in the morning, etc.). I then start breaking my tasks up - as Sue said below. I'm useless after lunch, so I just do boring admin and photocpying jobs in the early afternoon; I'm an internet addict, so I don't turn the internet on until I've crossed off everything on my To Do list (but I do slip every now and then - like today!!!); my mind is like a sponge in the morning and can absorb ideas better, so I read complex things in the morning; and after 6pm I'm just good for noth - I seem to work better when it's light than dark, so I just cook, watch a DVD, and read a novel before bed (or some sort of - please don't laugh - self-help, motivating, time management, easy reading book - all the 'You Can Do It!' Wah Wah in these books actually helps me!). Try getting a diary & make a list of things for each day (start small so that you can get a kick out of achieving things, then do longer lists as time passes by & you've mastered managing yourself and your time better).

======= Date Modified 14 May 2010 14:51:40 =======
Dear Missscully,

Don't give up - I was in exactly the same position a year ago and I managed to change things around.

Sneaks is absolutely right: when my supervisor ignores me, I've learnt to translate this as "I need to see some serious work done". I only saw my DoS three times over the course of 6 months, and he was generally not interested in chatting about things; he told me outright "We chat after I've seen some proper attempt at a first chapter; or a detailed outline of your thesis". Don't take your DoS reaction personally, and there is NOTHING wrong with you - we all have to cross that first threshold.

In addition to the difficulty I had formulating what I wanted to say, or where I could begin with the writing (which was in part just a normal process that most PhD students go through, and in part brought on by my having read too much and thought too little) I had the emotional change to deal with: I had come from a full time job where supervisors told me exactly what I need to do, how and when - my priorities and tasks were all laid out for me. I was now in a situation where I had to do all that for myself, and I had to get my head around the change. The first 6 months was definitely a lonely and painful time for me. But as soon as I started playing around with a few potential plans for my thesis, and got down to writing a draft of my first chapter, things didn't get better. After that (the 8th month), my supervisor was all smiles, so excited, treating me like I'm a valuable asset, and I felt that - finally - I'm excited about my work because I have a rough idea where I'm heading.

The online theses database Sneaks has suggested you look at is the first place to start (my DoS asked me, before anything else, to look at other passed PhDs so I know what I should aim at) - this will be of great help to you. You'll then have a clearer idea of what you're aiming out, and will be able to start a plan of how you need to get there. Follow this - as has Sneaks been suggested below - with a meeting with your DoS asking what you could do to help you with your plan, outputs and tasks you need to achieve, and ask politely what she would recommend you do.

I usually find my Supervisor far more responsive when I email him an agenda ahead of our meeting, stating exactly what I've done, and what I (in bullet points) need him to assist me with - in other words, what I hope I'll achieve from the one hour slot which he has assigned to me, amidst his very busy schedule.

Above all, don't give up. This happens to all of us. As I'm sure everyone on this forum will tell you, starting is sometimes the hardest part!

All the best! (up)

======= Date Modified 14 May 2010 11:03:09 =======
I think regardless of what they say in their manifesto (after all, governments don't always apply what they initially state in their manifestos once they have been elected into office) it'll be a case of "playing it by ear". Labour decided to make huge cuts to research funding despite the fact that this was not in their manifesto - whenever there's an economic crash, certain non-economically viable research areas are the first to get the brunt of it; same thing happened 20 years ago. Their priority is the economy, they want quick recovery so they'll cut out whatever the majority of voters would consider of secondary importance to everyday life. Hence their methodology has been clearly stated as "cutting public funds with the exception of front line public services"; so Police, armed forces,  etc. won't see cuts, but other areas will. It's all a little vague because it depends on what the current government will consider "front line public service" For example, we don't know whether social services, and social care will be effected by the cuts or not.

Whatever their manifesto and whatever their aims, in the end, the economic state of the international market and the UK is so volatile that even the government themselves understand that they are shooting in the dark to some extent. If Greece falls despite European funding, and this created the much feared domino-effect with Spain, Portugal, Italy, and Ireland to follow, then UK would be (as some economist say) next in line. Then we can be sure that one of the FIRST places they will cut funds is ALL across research - for now they'll cut funds from research - that's for sure - but perhaps not as drastically (and especially not in economic "impact" generating disciplines e.g. engineering, sciences, finance, economy, etc.) as it would be if the market and the pound continue to fall.

I know this might not directly answer your question, but I guess what I'm trying to say is that no one really knows the answers - not even Cameron - because the market has a life of it's own! But we can know that there will surely be cuts made to funding - how much, and how drastic, we just don't know. It doesn't matter which government would have come into office, in the end, they would have had to do the same: save the country from going bankrupt by cutting back on what's not essential in the short-term.

Unemployment is on the rise (announced at 2.51 million unemployed last week), university applications have multiplied by 50% because there are no jobs, so people want to go to uni; all the while cuts are being made in research funing. It's going to be an academically competitive few year that lie ahead of us where only the best-of-the best (and the very lucky ones) get funding.

Sorry for the bleak outlook. I really hope that I turn out to be wrong on this one. Let's keep our fingers crossed to that!

Hi Sneaks,

My school has a detailed list of criteria for each grade - i.e 40-50% essays are x, y, z, 56-60% are a, b, c, and 60-70% are...and so on. This means that I compare each essay to this standard guidline/criteria, and not to how the other students in that year/group have done in their essays. The reason for this is that giving a mark to student A on the basis of what studentc B & C have done is a 'relative' system - what happens if all the students in one group are extremely good, or extremely bad; do we give a 70% for an essay that relative to last year's group would've got a 55%? Your school or Undergraduate Administrator should be able to provide you with a clear list of grading criteria so you can mark fairly and with ease.
I also read essays twice. Once to correct spelling, grammar, style, etc. and make comments on ideas and content (I write a provisional mark on a post-it note), then I re-read a second time (at least the following day, or much later so as to allow time to pass between the two readings) and see if the provisional mark should be changed.
I group my essay in accordance to topic/essay question (but that's just personal preference since I like to stay on the same subject one at a time). I never judge an essay - as some of your colleagues do - by looking at student ID numbers purely because some students may come accross as not so good in classes because they're shy (and not necessarily because they're bad students), but they may be very good at writing essays.. Also, I see that a student's quality of writing can tend to defer based on what topic they're writing about, what else is going on in their lives when they were writing it, etc. This means that the same student can get an A today, but a C next term, and a B the following!

======= Date Modified 12 May 2010 13:55:32 =======
Your university will have a list of all the sources/types of funding. If you haven't done so already, then check the scholarship/funding web-page at your university. If this doesn't work, find out which department at your uni assists PhD students in looking for these funds - there is always someone at evey uni who's job it is to give students advice on funding. If still no luck, then search on Google for scholarship websites/data base websites - e.g. http://www.scholarship-search.org.uk/pls/mon/hc_edufin.page_pls_user_sch_inst_list?x=16180339&y=&a=220707&alphav=A

Good luck!

======= Date Modified 10 May 2010 14:47:21 =======
DrSeeker, please don't lose heart - it's still early days. Academic jobs are indeed scarce but not impossible to get hold of for someone who can show the right sort of resilience. As someone once told me: "In the end, it boiled down to which one of us [i.e. those who had gone on to obtain their PhDs in that department] had 'staying power'. I applied to over 80 positions, and did several part-time jobs before I landed my permanent contract. In the end, it was well worth the wait!" So carry on what you're doing; just keep applying & finish your PhD - you're so near the end now, there's nothing left! Also, ask your Sup for more support: ask him/her if there are any mailing lists which people in your field regularly post on & which you can join? Any websites he/she can receommend that advertise post docs & jobs in your field? Any thing else he recommends you can do to boost your CV & application (e.g. more publications, etc.)? If he's unhelpful, then ask someone else in your department politely over a cuppa! You're on the right track, just keep going!