Hi all

Tell me, is anyone else having or had trouble defining their title and questions to the thesis? It is such a conundrum for me at the moment, I thought I had a good title but my supervisors want me to be more specific, if I am anymore specific my title will become a paragraph. I have downloaded lots of phd's from the british library and most of their titles are pretty general - but I suppose my supervisors are leaving less to question in the viva if all is spelt out. Also I'm having trouble defining my questions, I was trying to get my lit review done first and looking for gaps in the research to where I was going to plot mine, but got really bored of this process, expecting my questions to jump out of the pages for me, so I dropped all my reading and note taking and started to be more creative, and just put pen to paper and wrote down whatever came to my head to see what I had in the way of questions at the end of this process - I thought the whole project would be more original if it was within my scope of querkiness. I dont know if there is an average time scale to having your title and questions defined, how long is reasonable - I started in jan this yr, but was doing the EdD and didnt change to phd until start of may. I just want to get my project passed ethics and approval so I feel I can move on with it - my supervisors dont know if there is a time scale to getting the forms passed, I had heard one year. I am taking too long? I am trying to be too original and complicated for this project, is there such a thing as keep it simple, even at phd level? Aslo looking at all the other phd's I have downloaded, I can only find distinct questions in about two thirds of them, the others seem wooly and unclear to me - but perhaps thats me not understanding the finer point. I wonder is it different if you are funded (I'm self-funded), are you provided with title and questions, or are you expected to go through this process as well. One of the reasons I went self-funded was because I wanted complete ownership of my project, I knew exactly the area and what I wanted to research (not quite the same as defining bloody questions though!!) and other funded places although interesting were not quite what I wanted to do. I also took my project to a few professors and although they were interested in it, the expectation of what was expected of me etc etc was restricting my freedom, my individuality (or was it my ignorance and stupidity) - I now wonder whether their strict instructions would have made it an easier process. Sorry I realise I am waffling on - is this just par for the course or am I placing too much emphasis on my questions and making everything more complicated than it has to be? Really grateful for any thoughts/advice xx

Java - three years in and only now getting down to the nitty gritty. Have performed exploratory case studies alright.

What I would suggest is a mixture i.e. your own ideas but you MUST back this up with academic reasoning. A lit review usually takes on way more than your research question, so a lot of it is redundant. At this stage you probably have a good idea of the area, so find papers in that specific area, pinpointing what exactly you are looking at (what are the main topics in your field that interest you!). Do a specific search using the key words and identify papers around that area, then state how your work will add to this and how you are going to do this. You do need academic reasons for undertaking this study. If you can't find articles near your specific field, this is good too as it means you are adding. But 9 times out of ten, you are picking a specific topic and tweaking it by using a different methodology/sample. Cliche-tacular but you are not re-inventing the wheel!

In other words, stop the 1st year general reading around the topic and sit down and write out what you want to look at. Find the papers in that. From that, you will then get an idea. You don't need a whole load of papers - just a few to back up your reasons. Then go to your supervisor with this document (it doesn't need to be a lit review - it could be a page outline of the proposed PhD chapters/headings with connected papers). He/she will then work on that with you. That said, there is no getting away from the lit review, but you are probably finding that it is getting boring and tedious looking at an entire area. And besides, it will change.

As for ownership of project, I don't think it matters - it has to go thro' the supervisor so ye must agree (and usually that means you making the compromises or having damning evidence on his/her proposal). Unfair I know, but thems be the breaks. Sorry for sounding grey and world beaten but a PhD is no place for creativity (I know, I am going to be hammered for stating that!), but it is a process to prove you can conform to research norms, not break them! When you are a professor with 20 post-docs, then start that process.

Having a good outlet outside the Phd work is a must for reminding yourself of your individuality. I am sorry for sounding a right crank, but it is a test of seeing can you make it thro' rather than content. To paraphrase SuperChicken ... "You knew the job was boring when you took it"

hmm, although I have a rough idea of my title - I don't think I will fully know until the end. My current one is based on a slight obsession with Jane Austen - and wanting to work her title into mine lol. even if its not relevant!

going by my experience its best just to get on with what the Sup wants, even though you won't probably use it in the end - keep em happy

Hi,

I totally agree with Bonzo. The key thing is to find a PhD that is manageable. It is not the place for creativity. That's what you do in the other aspects of your life (if you have any when you're doing a PhD!).

You should be conservative - not think that a PhD is going to enable you to be creative. It's not going to solve any problems in your life. It's about finding a current debate and contributing to that debate in a very small way.

But it depends on what you want from a PhD - if you do have a significant question - a personal question - you can address that in a PhD, but this route probably won't set you up for an academic career.

That's what I think - from personal experience, as is probably fairly clear!

L

I found it hard defining those too. I'm more or less self funded, well, fees only paid for me....

My title was really general for most of my PhD, just showing what the broad area I was looking at was, a bit vague and with no questions in it. Then when I had to think of the final title for submitting, my supervisor told me to go for the Ronseal effect, ie make sure it just does what it says on the tin, as the advert goes! I thought it turned out a bit clunky, you know, the 'an investigation into blah blah blah' type of title, but she said I could think up something more elegant for a book title in the future, but it didn't matter so much for the thesis, it just had to say what it was and be precise.

My perfectly formed (!!) research questions emerged quite late on in the research really... I sort of knew what I wanted to find out all along, but it took a session with my sup saying well, what *exactly* do want to find out then???? Then I had to write it up in one page. I didn't find it easy to pull focus on a massive project with all the ideas and literature I'd gathered, but it was useful to do. It seemed too easy, just boiling everything down into a couple of questions, but apparently that was it. I found it quite weird, as you have to make something quite complicated into something very simple and short, then go back and make it complicated and extremely lengthy again.

I'd have thought you could work your own individual ideas into any basic research questions, as it seems likely that several people could research the same questions in different ways and possibly come up with quite different theses. The PhD process does seem rigid and restrictive in some ways but it's just the PhD thing, it needn't restrict your freedom any more than having to stick to certain ways of formatting a thesis or using Harvard to reference books does. You can still produce an original thesis within those parameters.

I don't think you should agonise too much, it will take shape as you continue working and you gradually clarify bits as you think about them. Maybe you need more time for it to all simmer away in your mind, before it turns into the title and questions you're happy with!

Hi Bonzo, Sneaks, Louisa & Ruby

Many thanks for your replies, you have put my mind at rest that I am not being significantly slow or getting completely behind with my study.  I have however established a title and some questions, although I have not received approval from my supervisor yet, so... I just hope that I havent set things in stone too early and find it difficult to change later, but I find it hard to work unless I have a solid framework in front of me so I can fill in the gaps and also know which direction I am going in.  I'm sure I will be moaning sometime in the future if things arent going to my carefully laid plans.     :-)