Hello All,

I'm a social science based PhD student and am trying to write my final chapter (after this, I - hopefully - only have my intro and conclusion to write). My problem is ... I'm finding that this is the hardest chapter I've had to write to date. It's supposed to be an analysis chapter of interviews with kids (I've already done one of these), but I'm finding my interview material is very 'thin', and I'm in a position where I have to work with what I've got (there is no way I can do more fieldwork).

My supervisor has said that all of the work I've done to date is good, but I'm convinced that my analysis will read like an 'A Level' analysis. I'm now seriously considering submitting what I have and just going for an MPhil.

How do I know if my analysis is up to 'PhD level'? Recently, whenver I look at books I end up crying - my work is nowhere on a par with the stuff I read!

I'm convinced my work just isn't good enough (regardless of whatever reassurance my supervisor gives), and am worried I've spent 3 years of my life only to eventually end up in a position where I'm told ... You've failed!

I'm angry at myself to, because now I'm at this stage, I can see all the faults in my work and would have approached the project completely differently if I had my time again.

I just wish I knew how good a piece of work has to be to be able to qualify as PhD worthy.

dear Goods, you can always get a MPhil but you definitely wont get a PhD if you will not try. If your supervisor says that your work is good, and you have past all 1st and 2nd year interviews or whatever you have had in your university while doing your Phd, your work must be a PhD level. Writing up is very depressing because we have to give up our 1st year fantasies about 'the paradigma'shifr we will make in our Thesis and accept that , well, in fact, it is just a small piece of a research.

Could you expand on these "faults"? Do you feel you don't have enough data or quality-wise inappropriate data?

Otto - By 'faults' I mean ... I'm now looking at books where the studies are interview based, and thinking ... god, if I had my time again that's the area of research I would have looked at (e.g. specifically looking at kids attitudes to a particular topic). Mine is a lot more 'broad' - i.e. I used unstructured interviews and therefore had to go along with what the kids identified as important to themselves - I hope you are following the general gist of what I'm saying.

Also, yes, what the kids said is very 'thin' at times, and therefore making putting an analysis together off the back of their responses very difficult (... I must confess, when I see kids responses in books, I am also slightly dubious about these at times, as the kids are always much more coherent than kids I've experienced in my study!).

I'm just worried that my work isn't 'academic' enough. I understand that I have to trust my supervisor on this one ... but I just think my results aren't very good (and come across that way to the reader).

Verdy - I've only been through a transfer viva (which I passed), and (honestly) didn't find that much reassurance about the standard of my work.

I see. Don't give up. Your supervisor has the experience. Try to make it sound more academic. After all, kids are kids and that's the reality your are studying. Reality does not always sound academic, if you know what I mean.

i'm sure you'll get aPHd!

Thanks for the encouragement Otto - sometimes (as I'm sure you understand), it's hard to keep going with it and believing all will be ok.

How is your write up going? (I'm assuming you are writing up to)

I'm only at the MPhil/PhD transfer stage but I know exactly how you are feeling. 99% of all PhD students feel like that, especially when it comes to the last few months before thesis submission (at least that's what they told me).

You sound EXACTLY like me when I was at your stage! Believe me, I posted on here with virtually IDENTICAL concerns before my viva. It's so easy to look back and say "what was I worrying about", but trust me, you WILL get through this and your work WILL be good enough. The very fact that you are questioning your ability and your work quality makes you a good researcher. You are reflective about your analysis and your particpants. This can manifests itself as "I'm not good enough" but it is an integral part of the research process and makes you human! Far better than coasting through being unconcerned then being told that you're not up to scratch.

Think of your findings as positive - no-one else has done what you've done. Maybe the previous work was TOO academic and that's not what's needed in your research area? Think about who your research is relevant to, who's going to benefit from it. And trust me, you ARE good enough.

Without really knowing enough to comment, I'm going to anyway (related field by the sounds of things). I read a (very user-friendly) book by Neil Mercer (genius) a year or so ago and it really helped me with understanding children's talk and relating it to theory. It was called 'The Guided Construction of Knowledge' - it may be worth having a look, if you haven't come across him already.

Kronkodile is so right, everyone feels like that at this stage (and TBH, I'd be worried if they didn't!!). Every student I've known (myself included) has been convinced that their thesis is the biggest pile of pants ever written. It's completely normal to feel that you could do a much better job if you could only start again but that's what Postdoc-ing is for! The PhD is a period of research training and, despite the marathon efforts we have to go through to produce it, the thesis is not our magnum opus, nor does it need to be. The key thing is to recognise it's flaws and be prepared to justify them, whilst acknowledging that there might be better ways to approach the same problem in future. Believe me, it's when you think your thesis is flawless that you have a big problem!!! Best of luck

Hi Goods,

I agree with what the others have said.

There maybe an other element as well: One can see the PhD as a (very) steep learning curve where one starts at a level below and at that stage needs to make decisions which at a latter stage ("Up the curve" if you like) they would seem suboptimal. However you are only able to see it that way because you have been through the PhD process and looking back at it. It is with any "Could be better decision" one makes: Once you know the consequences and had the opportunities to reflect on it you wonder why you have done it that way....

Also "Being a perfectionist" (what most academics seem to be?, and I do not mean this negatively) is often a major cause for stress and feeling down. It might be helpful to say: "Now I know I would do things differently, when I started I have made decisions which I judged to be right" This is OK and I am OK...

hiya
i totally understand what you mean. I was talking to a prof abotu this. She said - it is totally normal because the PhD is a constant reflective process. But when you feel like that - try and think back to what you were going through and thinking when you made the decision that you did. There were reasons behind it and only you are able to defend it. Good luck with it - believe me I understand hwo you feel.

Thanks everyone for your encouraging words. It's always reassuring to hear about other people's experiences.