It is 1000% normal to have no real direction in year one - also 1000% normal to find the thumb-twiddling aspect of early PhD-dom annoying as all hell. I think the folly is assuming PhDs are similar to undergraduate degrees, where everything is laid out and you just simply have to tick boxes X, Y, and Z to pass. I've definitely felt frustrated because things were moving at a snails pace and I had nothing to show for my time - but, again, that's normal. It's more about building a solid foundation for research than doing actual research.

...which leads onto my next point. It's also normal to not 100% understand everything in your field yet! As far as I'm aware, nobody really expects a first year to have a full handle on everything. When your supervisor asks you to do something you don't understand, have you tried asking for clarification? I get nobody likes asking for help, but any supervisor worth their salt would rather have a student who admits when they are struggling than one who suffers in silence. At the very least, I think you owe it to yourself to proactively address the issue of not understanding stuff before quitting.

I don't know if this helps, but my technique with papers is to skim read and then ask myself how the paper fits into what I'm currently doing. Honestly, 95% of the time, the answer is a big fat "I have no idea" and I move on, making a mental note the paper exists, but also not worrying about understanding it in depth - and that's not a bad thing, because then I'm focusing my efforts on absorbing the 5% of papers which are relevant. Again, literature searching is a skill you will develop with practice, and when your research does take shape, you will have a far, far better feel for which papers are worth focusing on.

That said, if you really are unhappy, no shame in quitting.

Hi,

I'm in the process of applying for a PhD next year and at the point where I need to put down referees - very kindly, a couple of my old lecturers offered to do it back when I was in University earlier this year.

It has now been about 6 months or so and I'm wondering whether or not to send them a quick reminder email and a heads up that I'm applying. The format of the application is they'll get an automatic email asking for the reference, but I don't know if it would be in better form to personally contact them first.

Bear in mind these are busy academics :P

Thanks

Hi,

It would help me out a whole bunch if someone could get these two papers for me please -

Structural basis for outer membrane lipopolysaccharide insertion

Structural and functional studies of conserved nucleotide-binding protein LptB in lipopolysaccharide transport

(first or second links if you stick it into google)

Thanks :)

Yeah, thanks for the advice; I've been to see my lecturers/phD advisors and they've told me to be proactive and try to contact academics in advance of applying, preferably before the positions are posted. I have a lot of free time right now, so I'm working to get my application stuff sorted well in advance.

I don't think it's me trying to get specialist funding, it's more about registering my interest in phD opportunities sooner rather than later - although, it would be nice if I could negotiate funding for a specific project (sadly, I don't think I have enough experience/academic credentials for them to take that much of a risk :P).

As I understand, it lends a good impression if you're self-driven enough to seek out available projects, instead of simply waiting for them to be posted. Also can help you stand out and, to be honest, my application needs about every leg up it can get.

I'm still not sure how many people to contact in total - I don't really want to overwhelm myself, but at the same time, I need to open up as many avenues as possible. I guess that's more for me to decide, but if anyone knows the 'standard' amount emails typically sent, that would help to give me a benchmark.

UK and chemistry. I want to do something in drug design, however, the availability of these kind of projects tends to vary. Funding can be a little hard to come by, so I think there is a danger in limiting myself - that said however, I don't want to make a bad impression by obviously fishing for funding! I'm not going to email absolutely everybody in the department, just those involved in drug design.

At the moment, I have sending 1-2 emails to smaller departments in mind and 3-4 to larger ones, but I don't know if the latter is a bit much. At any rate, I don't think sending a single email per University is a good idea.

I'm in an ok position because doing a phD self-funded isn't completely out of the question, however, I want to open up as many options as possible.

I am about to graduate and I plan to apply for a phD (not this academic year, but the next). As a part of my application, I would like to contact individual researchers about upcoming opportunities (i.e. before they are posted), but I'm not sure how many emails I should be sending. I know I'm probably thinking about this a little early, but I was just wondering if anyone could give me advice.

Also, is it frowned upon to send emails to multiple members of the same department? Obviously, I want to hedge my bets, however, I also don't want to come across like I'm simply 'fishing' for funded projects; I don't know if it's better to cast the net as wide as possible or to try and be more selective.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.