Can't write - want to write
I need to show my supervisor that I can write a high standard piece of work but so far she says I'm not even up to MA standard. Everyone says I am very capable of doing the work. So why can't I do it. I'm beginning to worry that I may not make it into my final year. I think one of the problems is that so far all the work that I have been asked to do is for review panels and I end up writing things that I didn't really want to do or didn't feel ready for then have to cobble it together when I would rather be doing something else. I don't know how to get my motivation back and actually produce some good work. I feel I am asked to write something and given two or three weeks which I don't think is long enough because I need to do more research into areas as I haven't concentrated on those bits yet. My supervisor for my first year was crap and never asked me to write anything apart from my lit review which she didn't even know what it was and then told me it was OK, only for my panel to say it was rubbish. My supervisor now is fantastic and she is trying to help me. We are having a meeting on Thursday and I need to think about why things aren't going so well. I know it won't make any difference now but can I say that I feel I am behind because my other supervisor was no help? Personally, during my first year my mum died, I bought a house and then split up with my husband, and recently I have just moved 150 miles from my uni so have a lot of travelling to do (not every day!). I know these are excuses but they may explain why things aren't going well and I need to now look forward but I'm having a crisis of confidence.
Pamw, ((hugs)) :)
Listen, this sounds stupid, but the answer to this, is to write. Scratch it out. Write. and Write. and you'll get it. My strategy was always this: I know I couldnt start writing at the sophistication of 25 yr experienced profs. BUT, it does help to read across journals, mainstream ones and make a note of these things:
1. What is the way in which people STRUCTURE their thoughts? For instance, which literature reviews do I find the most exciting: the answer is usually those rare creatively themed ones that manage to straddle diverse differences and locate a way forward. Lit Reviews can be so creative, so interesting, so engrossing, if imaginatively done.
2. Second, what is the way in which people write about their colleagues. Note the ways of neutral reference, implicit agreement, explicit agreement, vehement disagreement and guarded disagreement. This helps in the way you develop you own critique.
3. ALWAYS a great strategy, as my supervisor reminds me EVERY time she reads something I write: WHO is it you are arguing against? WHO did they argue with? WHERE are the debates and disagreements and then, how do come together and make sense in what you wrote. THATS how you make sense of scholars and scholarship.
For me, these three tools ALWAYS provide a route. I start off sometimes with a mind map, noting scholars arguing stuff, moving them around on my writing pad....shifting people around the 'Room', every new article adds a new category, or sometimes deletes an older one.
If I am not too familiar with the broad area, I note down 5 studies I find engrossing, and ask what were they asking (Research question), how were they proposing the answer (method), what did their results show (evidence) and what is their ONE central argument (debate). And I do this for all 5, and there you are....you find a pattern, and themes to write an effective review (or even a great chapter).
Some of my friends do the same, but not with graphical aids like me....thye think better in the flow of writing...for me, I need to PLAN out my writing...before I start it....
Hope this helps
PBug
Pamw - in a similar situation here. Last weeks meeting with the supervisor started with "Oh I don't think you are of PhD standard", which really went down well. After rearing up, I think I defended myself admirably (never fight a cornered rat!!).
I have the same problem though - can't write for nuts! I think the first thing to do is get rid of any preconceived idea that we can write and learn to write the academic way. There are a few things in my opinion to get this done
1. Read the journals that you will be submitting to. Form a template from a selection of these papers.
2. There are several quick papers covering writing styles - I have recently read "Fourteen Steps to a clearly written technical paper" by R.T. Crompton, Jr. and other docs ("How to write a paper" by Mike Ashby). Both are on the web and serve as quick reminders to some obvious but overlooked hints. Take one or two and make them a road map. Maybe strengthen this by having one/two accessible texts. The one thing I picked up was to keep sentences short and in doing so, thro' the use of various punctuation marks, will not lose the attention of the reader, who by know is noticing that this is quite a long sentence in its own right.
3. As PhDbug rightly said (should that be "write"ly - sorry!!!), get writing! Our work will be rejected and ejected numerous times before deemed acceptable, so I guess its only practise makes perfect.
The points above are quite obvious but, as Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, there is nothing more deceptive than the obvious.
You will have to take a lot of criticism in this PhD - just remember, it ain't personal (or at least when given back in the correct manner). Have some form of mechanism to deal with those post-review blues, as no matter how black-hearted the person is, criticism stings everybody for a while. Just need to shake it off, take the positive notes and be constructive. I find either music, a good game of soccer or a walk does the trick. You are well capable of doing the PhD - not being cruel, but look about you in the office/lab. Are the other people (without demeaning anyone) there super geniuses or of another species? You'll get thro' this - just use it to spur yourself on.
2 things I suggest
One is the "Flowers Paradigm", a four stage progression from writing a rough draft to a polished edit. https://webspace.utexas.edu/cherwitz/www/ie/b_flowers.html
link to an overview description
Two--Bryan Garner, 'Legal Writing in Plain English'--don't be put off if you aren't doing law, this is easily used in a variety of disciplines, the goal is clear writing, it has great tips on how to edit and make your document flow.
Well, the more you read good journals on the topics you are working on, the better you writing thoughts would be. In addition, make a habit to write frequently. Practice makes perfect, even though it is hard in the research world. Take my case for instance, I got three supervisors to deal with. Once my first draft of article passed with my director of supervisor, then the other supervisor, the reputable Prof(UK terms;)) not US) would amend the draft. In fact, he would correct the article back to sound like initially i wrote it. Maturity will makes you to come to a conclusion that, the whole research resembles to a half full glass of wine/wtr.... If your supervisor sees and would like to see the half full portion of the glass, thus, good comments you will get. If the same supervisor happens to see only the other half empty portion, thus, negative comments will follow. As a researcher, don’t worry with all this comments, however, try to get constructive comments from all the supervisors. Finally, write your work with your own style meeting the supervisor or journals requirements. Whatever it is, stay put, it is just a phase of research life. Like river tides, this phase too will pass away. Cheers;))
Pamw - there are various other means to get the vocabulary together and not lose the head. Things like Toastmasters or debating societies might be useful to getting a bit more confident about expressing yourself and developing that skill (and there is a bit of a social aspect as well). Of course, you will then have to bring that back to an academic context. Presenting at conferences and meeting with the other researchers in your field might be useful.
I suppose this is a bit of a digression but it serves two puposes
1. You get more of a feeling for what the academic community is actually looking at and a means to discuss ideas before commiting them to paper - also it opens up the option of co-authorship (an overlooked option in my view)
2. It just demonstrates that there isn't a world of difference between yourself and other researchers - if they managed to do it why can't you!
That said, I must get onto getting to a conference myself soon.
Hurrah, I have just had a draft chapter returned by my supervisor and I had felt it was make or break time. But she says my written work has improved and I've taken into account all the things she had been criticising before. She even said 'well done'. It's only a first draft but I feel I've turned a corner now and I can write to PhD standard.
Interestingly it was the first piece of work which included my ideas on my subject rather than a lit review, or a case study I was forced to work on which wasn't really relevant. I managed to research and write it much faster than other pieces I'd done, so hopefully my panel will now let me get on with my research rather than making me do stuff they want for the panels. I think I have shown that my ideas and research are actually valid and maybe even interesting!!
