The fact that there is no support body is genuinely ridiculous. So much time, money and effort, and no protection of any kind? As you say, unions and associations tend not to have much to do with pg issues, and are really geared towards undergrads. I've heard from three people over the past couple of months tolerating situations which would have led to some sort of legal action in the workplace, yet they cannot do anything about it as post-grads due to the political climate within departments. Internal arrangements to deal with such matters are often a joke, too.

I cannot find details of fail rates either. The submission rates are interesting, the AHRC seems to acknowledge that the figures aren't what they would want - but how universities respond to their strictures on this can be somewhat alarming. I know one instance where an overdue AHRC-funded individual was ostracised, shamed and had resources withdrawn until they submitted.

Procrastinating a little, here :)

I was just wondering if there was any way to see things like PhD pass/fail rates broken down by university, and whether there was also a support body/union for research students? On talking to fellow research students within my own university, I'm struck by how the experience can differ from department to department. I'm also increasingly stunned by some of the horror stories regarding supervisors that I've read in here and heard from others.

A PhD is such a massive investment of time and money, I'm growing increasingly amazed that there is no official support body for students for when things go wrong, or to ensure that unis are keeping up their end of the bargain. Surely as post-grad fees become more important for universities they should be forced to release figures like these for comparison?

I managed 7 yesterday. I also work part-time.

I read about pomodoro technique ages ago, but only tried it out for the first time a couple of days ago after reading a post that mentioned mytomatoes.com on this site.

I have found it amazingly useful. I'm really bad at sitting at my laptop for hours, searching for new articles, but not really getting much writing done. Focusing on actually writing for 25 minutes at a time has really increased my productivity - plus it stops me from over-reading, which seems to be a real fault with me.

I wish I had used this from the beginning. I'm quite ashamed at what my concentration and workrate had actually dwindled to over the years. It's quite handy for spotting what times of the day are most productive for you, too. There are definite points when I would be better served getting up and doing something else.:$

*jaw on floor* I can't believe what I'm reading in here.

Wow - I just tried that mytomatoes.com thing, and it's awesome. 800 words in 50 minutes, instead of my usual 12.5 words and two games of spider solitaire! :-)

That gives me serious chills. My Zotero played up badly at the weekend, and I hadn't made a back-up. I think my life passed before my eyes :-)

They can get hot - but you should try and keep them as cool as possible.  Are the vents blocked? Most laptops have them on the bottom, which of course gets blocked all the time.  You can make little 'legs' for your laptop out of bits of cork or, as I've read elsewhere, beer bottle tops - anything to let the vents do their job. You can also get cans of pressurised air to clean the vents/fans out - they're probably pretty dusty.

Speedfan will help your laptop run its fans more efficiently.  You can also buy cooling pads for beneath your laptop.

Mine was getting to the stage where it was simply turning itself off due to overheating - speedfan and cleaning the fans saved it.

Hi Sneaks :-) This thread looks like a great idea - hope it will help to keep my productivity high!

Ady - http://www.almico.com/speedfan.php

Just submitted a draft of a big section to my supervisor, and now moving straight on to another section. Not going to over-think and get persnickety about this one - I want it complete and sent to my supervisor.

To Button - is your computer running too hot? Have you tried speedfan?

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.

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 :)

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