======= Date Modified 27 Sep 2011 20:21:50 =======
The question is in the title!

I suppose a little context is appropriate. I start my PhD next week after completing a Bachelors degree in May.

I graduated in Aerospace Engineering but my PhD is in a specific field of Aerospace that I didn't really meet during my undergraduate degree (my final year project was somewhat related, but it's a whole new field to me in most respects). Although it comforts me to think that even if it were a field I'd been introduced to in my undergraduate degree I'd probably still know next to nothing about it!

I feel a bit silly though because shortly after my finals I e-mailed my supervisor asking him to advise on any preparatory work I could undertake, and he made some suggestions (but also suggested that I take a long break first!). I even went into the University to meet with the post-doc who will be co-supervising and get some book recommendations.

However, for a number of reasons I didn't really get around to doing a lot of preparatory work. The books that were recommended were too expensive to buy, most of them weren't available in my undergraduate university library, and the ones that were proved quite popular so I tried and failed for a number of weeks to get a hold of them. And when I did get a hold of one of them (finally), somebody else requested it and the library asked me to return it after only having it one week.

In addition to that I've had a bit of a busy summer in terms of finding a new place to stay, getting my new accomodation fitted out with all the necessities and adjusting!

Anyway, had I not e-mailed my supervisor he would probably have no expectations of what I will know next week when I start (he seen my CV and interviewed me so he knows where I was at), but now that I've e-mailed him for direction on preparatory work, he probably expects more, and I haven't done much at all! So I feel like I've shot myself in the foot by appearing too eager to prepare, and then not following through with the prepatory advice that was given.

So I guess I'm just wondering what you guys think of that as a situation, whether it will be a big deal or not, and generally how much is expected of you in terms of your knowledge of the field when you start on day one?

My friend recently started his PhD in a similarly unfamiliar field (still within Aerospace), and it seems to me that his first few months are going to be with his head stuck in undergraduate textbooks getting a feel for the fundamentals - will this probably be the same for me?

Thanks in advance!

My BSc and masters were both in a pretty specific field (parasitology), but my PhD shall relate to pharmacology/structural biology, which I figure is pretty different.

I don't see it as a big deal. I'll read the relevant papers once I get access to them and take it from there. Though maybe it's easier to switch about in biology? Either way, it's not easy to stay within one field forever, especially these days with such high competition for everything, so I figure no one would expect you to be massively knowledgeable.

I really wouldn't worry if I were you, the first few weeks tend to be filled with tedious admin anyway and you have plenty of time to get into your subject matter. You will have better access to resources when you start and the whole "background reading" thing will be easier. I came to my RA position (in engineering) from industry and did next to no background reading. I've found academia to move so slowly that it didn't really matter anyway.

Once you've started you will have a better idea of what is relevant anyway. As long as you generally understand the fundamentals of engineering (that you learnt at undergrad) you will be fine.

Thanks for the replies guys!

In addition to this, I've recently found out that a few of the guys starting PhDs at the same time as me under the same supervisor are 30+ years old, with up to 10 years experience working with some of the biggest companies in the field, and I'm a 21 year old with no work experience, and a Bachelors degree which isn't even precisely related to the field, and haven't yet covered the fundamentals!

Still sure I shouldn't be worried?!

Well for me it's a bit of both. My MA in Modern History dissertation was on colonialism in India, and for my PhD I have chosen a specific issue to deal with. I of course have a thorough grounding in the whole colonial India aspect, but I am exploring this through a particular area I have had no previously knowledge of - family and kinship. I therefore have to learn all about early modern English society, the family, kinship in the context of commerce and imperialism, etc. So like yourself I have a grounding in the subject area, but have to learn about my specific topic almost from scratch. I would imagine most PhDs have an aspect of this as, by and large, the point of the PhD is to be exploring something original (unless you're revising previous theories, of course).

All the best,

Inferiority complex is massively common in PhDs, try not to develop one now. The guys in their thirties will be looking at you thinking "Balls, that guy/gal is young, their going to have so much more energy and commitment than me, everyone will just think I'm an old fogie trying to do a PhD at this age".

Never, EVER, compare your PhD or your situation to anyone else's. For a start you won't know exactly what their situation is and secondly it doesn't matter a jot. Just focus on your work (which you still have 3+ years to do!), try to enjoy it and remember you wouldn't have been selected to do it if you couldn't manage it.

I'm worried about feeling old rather than feeling young, and I'm only 24!

I figure since I'm Scottish and I'll be studying in England (where undergrad degrees are a year shorter), I'm more likely to be around first year PhD students who are a couple of years younger than me, especially since I did a masters degree then had a year of, well, bugger all (yay recession!!).

We all have things to fret about if we let ourselves. Though it can be fun to fee like the "baby" of the lab to be honest.

I am same as u ,First year PhD student.I completed my undergrad in June and got the PhD scholarship.My PhD project is irrelevant to what I did in undegrad.But it should be fine as I have a lot of time for background reading .....My only fear is time management :)

I returned from the outside world to do my PhD so maybe my perspective is a little different.

A good number of PhD students may well be entering PhD directly from degree (or Masters).  Whilst a little bit of background reading might not do any harm, the PhD period is going to be stressful no matter what preparation you do.  There's always going to be something to catch you out.

You cannot prepare for or approach a PhD in the same way as a degree and whilst you may be enthusiastic at this stage, I personally found that a new script had to be written as to approach for methodology and background research, and my writing style had to change (i.e. become more academic) to cope with the extra expectations of a PhD, the related journals and any presentations I did.  I had to be more analytical.

As the script for many is going to be rewritten once you start anyway, wouldn't it have been better if you took a decent break before starting your PhD so you'll be fresh when you begin proper.  I needed a good holiday between finishing my job and stating the PhD. 

If you do wish to do any preparatory work, wouldn't it be better to read one of the guides on 'How to get a PhD' so you know what to expect once you start proper.

This is just my take and again what is right for one may not be for another.

well i'm in the social sciences so don't know whether this is quite relevant but i know the general area around my research and had used the methodology that i am proposing before but zilch about the theoretical underpinnings which is slightly beginning to worry me. :)

I don't think you are expected to be an expert yet. if you were then you would not be doing the PhD on that particular topic now would you :)