Hi guys,

I hope you are all well.  I need some advice. I am currently enrolled on a 1+3 Mres and PhD course sponsored by my uni.  I have a complete waste of time supervisor who knows nothing of my field and does not hold a PhD. I have raised complaints to the uni but have failed to receive an alternative.  Anyway, before conducting my first dissertation I received the green light to go ahead with what i was doing, from literature review, methodology and sample. To my surprise I failed.  On addressing all the issues, sample size and method etc (which like I said were prior agreed) I presented the new work to my supervisor who informed my lit review "proposal is great, i'm happy, go ahead", and my questionnaire, population and stat tools to analyse were "great and should produce some robust data". I have just received the mark back and again I have failed...both markers (who i am almost certain completed the forms together) state the sample of 188 respondents is thin (my proposal suggested a min of 156) and tools used were odd (I was helped with an stat tools expert!) and objectives were too ambitious (he emailed me telling me they were great before hand) .  I have emails to confirm what my supervisor had to say (based on my worries before starting i wanted to ensure written proof) the only section he never reviewed before submission was the findings!!

The problem i face now is being kicked of the course and scholarship and not even receiving my MRes which i have spent the best part of 2 year completing, gaining access to some top companies and meeting with some top CEOs.  How should I address this, has anyone been through something similar? .

your help is greatly appreciated.

Thanks.

That's really harsh - I'm afraid I don't know much about the 1+3 Mres and PhD system so can only be of limited help. Have you discussed this with the postgrad tutor or someone similar in your department and got their views? I find the 180 degree turn by your supervisor to be a bit odd unless he didn't read the stuff you gave him properly - it's good you have a written record of this so you can argue your case. I think you need to find out what yout rights are - have you tried asking at the students' union - they should have a welfare office who handles such cases or checking where you stand with the university (e.g. asking at your research office).

Is the stats expert from your discipline? I find that stats is done differently depending on who use speak to and statisticans are very set in their ways so if your field uses them differently it's best to go to someone who knows what you are trying to achieve in your subject to get a handle on the stats. I suppose the number of samples depends on what you are trying to achieve and the level of detail you are aiming for. This seems like an ok number for social sciences but not for science which requires a higher level of repeatability.

Hope this helps and good luck (up)

Hi Doodles,

Thanks for your post. I have an appointment with the Course head on Thursday, so I will see what he has to say. I'm glad you replied actually, because what I'll do before then is, as you mentioned, go to the student union and find out what my rights are. In terms of the Stats expert she has an economics background whilst I'm in the area of HRM, so not the same subjects. I didn't think of that, but we used the tools to achieve results methodically with the backing of statistical authors!! Surely this brings something new to the field and if it doesn't surely its not enough to fail a paper :-(

The sample size is good based on the previous research, and again I had originally proposed 156 which was said to "produce some robust data"! I just don't get it!

Thanks for you advice, and I'll keep you posted as how this week pans out.

Thanks.

I'm glad to hear that. You'd have thought that bringing new methodology to the field is a good thing as it's original research. Has it been tested as I find people can be funny about such things and do cling onto established ideas.

Anyway good luck and let us know how you get on

Hi Doodles,

I sent a 5 page complaint which questioned if my supervisor could have even marked the dissertation given his strange 180 turn, providing them emailed evidence of his prior support and the weaknesses of the comments made. Anyway, I had a meeting with the head of the MRes programme yesterday where he apologised for the "mistake that had occurred", and that actually the assessment sheet was not for my work, it was given to me by mistake, and that the work had not actually been marked yet.

There is something very strange happening, for example I turned up a couple of hours early to the meeting as I had other things to do, but as I went in I found both the head of the programme and my supervisor together discussing my case, when they seen me the atmosphere went extremely awkward, faces red, and "oh we were just talking about you, i'll see you in an hour yeah"!

It feels like they are plotting to kick me of the course and I don't know why. The problem now is that they have a chance to address all the points I have highlighted on my complaint letter on the 'new assessment' of my work. The only thing that I can think of is whether the Government cuts affect the ESRC funded students or the universities funding them!! I haven't got a clue but there is definitely something not right about this whole ordeal.

Anyway, my supervisor is going to mark it over the weekend and let me know on Monday, so we'll see what happens then!!

Very stressful times!!

Take care.

Fingers crossed during the weekend then!

Thanks Niekyvanveggel.