Hi,

First post - brought about by feeling at the end of my tether. I'm a part-time Arts PhD student, with a deadline in September. I've got about 50,000 words done (lots needing done to it, though), but I just feel so chronically unsure about the quality of my work. Although I technically have a second supervisor she never sees anything, so I'm reliant on my main supervisor. She does meet up and offer feedback, but as my PhD has gone on I feel she's been remiss in other areas (networking, encouraging me to publish, etc - stuff your supervisor should tell you about) - and it's made me doubt her judgement a little.

There's not really anyone I can talk to in the dept about it - it's very small and political - and if the relationship between my supervisor and me got damaged in any way I'd be screwed.

Sometimes, when I look at my work I just feel like I'm drowning in a sea of half-drafted stuff that I'm just not sure about. She wants me to push/use one of her pet methodologies (it's a bit of a controversial one). While I could use it as part of my methodology, I think my conclusion would be that it comes with a lot of provisos and needs to be rigorously criticised. Maybe it would be better just to espouse the theory and just argue the point? Act the part?

Finally - I'm petrified of failing.

tl,dr - I feel like a fraud and want a second supervisor.

Any advice appreciated

Firstly I'd ask your second supervisor to look over your work. If they're your second supervisor then they should be doing something useful to help.

Also at this stage it's ok to trust your own instincts. I had quite a big argument (good tempered, but still!) with my supervisor about my conclusions. He was convinced right up to my viva that the examiners would want them to be significantly rewritten. But I decided to stick to my own judgement, and put my view across. And it's ok for you to do that.

The last few months are very hard though (I was part-time too, over 6 years). You probably have more doubts than at any other time of the process. Just keep going, a small step at a time. And you'll get there.

Good luck!

I too had very similar worries at the same stage. Being part-time makes it harder, but you already have much written to work with. Your second supervisor should be able to help you, and is there for situations like this when you are struggling with your main supervisor. The fact that the methodology could be criticised may not be an entirely bad thing. One of the main aims of a thesis is to show that you can think critically about your own work as well as others'; this can be harder to demonstrate when everything is perfect. You also have to discuss future studies and what you would have done differently. I know of an excellent PhD (not mine) that was full of criticism for the methods used and the examiners said it was the best they had read and praised him for not over-defending it. You should go with your gut feeling - it is your thesis.

Thanks Dizzy and Bilbo for responding to my rantiness :)

Bilbo, I think the 2nd supervisor should be more involved too, and I would love her to be more involved - but I've found the system where I am is extremely uneven. Some seem to take equal involvement, some as a back-up, and others are just there to tick the boxes. I tried to tentatively put it to my supervisor at my last meeting that we should give her a draft of something at least. I think I'll reiterate it this week. She is a specialist on the topic of these couple of chapters - so it seems mad not to have her opinion. The overall atmosphere within my department is very clique-ish and competitive, and it has been absolutely poisonous in terms of sharing work and ideas. She has barely exchanged two words with me throughout my entire course.

I'll probably feel happier about trusting my own instincts once I get feedback from my 2nd. An added complication is that I'm mildly ocd - so my self-doubt is probably a bit magnified and I can pick endlessly at my work.

I'm so relieved to hear you say that it's normal to have doubts at this stage. I always feel that everyone else seems so confident about their work.

Dizzy, the idea that the methodology can and should be criticised makes me feel so much better :) There are just so many areas of this methodology which I feel need work, and if I can spot weaknesses, I can't help but feel examiners would too. I'd be happier if I could just say this outright in the thesis - as you say, recognise the limitations.

As for the second supervisor - as I said to Bilbo, I think second supervisors are a great idea - the problem seems to be that my dept is not using them properly. I'm going to push the issue as diplomatically as I can with my supervisor. I would trust my gut instincts more with more feedback.

Thanks guys :)

Having just got rid of one supervisor, after getting some intervention from the director of the faculty, who was very annoyed about their lack of any support at all, and having still no feedback from the other one, I'm in a bit of a limbo situation, having just been given a new supervisor - and being part time doesn't help at all. I too was wondering if I am getting anywhere, especially as my research is now taking a slightly different direction to the original and is no longer so closely linked with the ideas of my remaining original supervisor, so much so that it might even be said to be very critical of their approach. but I have decided it is my thing, not theirs and they are only there to guide, not push, so I am going my own way now, which might not appeal to them, but appeals to me!:$ My advice is if you are not comfortable with it, don't use it, you could note that you have considered it, and the reasons you feel it is not useful, and leave it at that.

Hi :) Just wanted to update this thread in case it is of use to anyone else :)

Well, after weeks of vagueness from my first supervisor about how my second supervisor should probably 'have a look' at my work, things are no further forward - with a basic acceptance that they are not going to look at it. My second has additional responsibilities now elsewhere in the department (due to promotion), and is even more unlikely to spend any time going over my work. To top if off, I talked to a couple of other people who have had this person as a supervisor and heard total nightmare tales. Basically, they warned me that this person is capable of totally tearing my work to pieces and wrecking my confidence at this late stage. So, the point of having a second supervisor in my department is basically just to sign progress reports *eyeroll*.

Looking back at this post now, I think so much of my concern boils down to confidence. My supervisor is quite amiable and relaxed - which is nice, but I think that has made my mind work overtime as to whether she is being too relaxed with the standard of my work. Add in poisonous politics which mean you can't run your work past anyone else, and you get problems.

Joyce - I'm really sorry - I only just spotted your reply! I hope you don't think I'm horribly rude. I hope things are going better for you now. Like you, I've decided to go my own way within my work. The academic who produced the methodology my supervisor wants me to use has more or less requested in his work that it be 'tested' in a number of different contexts - so I feel what I've done is valis. Plus, this methodology hasn't been applied to my area before - so I'm hoping that will count as original work.