# data[].attributes.body
https://qualitativeresearchers.com/process/writing-findings/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Writing Your Qualitative Findings Chapter | The Qualitative Researcher

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A comprehensive guide to structuring and writing your qualitative findings chapter, including organizing by themes, integrating participant voices, thick description, and connecting to literature.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Office Hours with Dr. Guy - Episode 6 - Gathering Quotes, Headings, Finishing Fast

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How to Write a Purpose Statement for My Dissertation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How to Choose a Theoretical Framework for My Dissertation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Your discussion chapter is where you start speaking like a Doctor

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Your PhD discussion chapter is your thesis’s intellectual centre. Think of it as the scholarly equivalent of a courtroom closing argument, where you summarise the evidence and make your case.

# data[].attributes.body
Via Colin Keogh on Linked In

# data[].attributes.headline
5 questions every PhD viva & upgrade panel asks. Prof Emmanuel Tsekleves 

# data[].attributes.subject
5 questions every PhD viva & upgrade panel asks. Prof Emmanuel Tsekleves 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
#dba #phdlife #vivapreparation | Emmanuel Tsekleves | 26 comments

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
5 questions every PhD viva & upgrade panel asks. Most candidates prepare for two. The other three are where panels send candidates back for major corrections. I sat on a PhD panel earlier this year where a senior healthcare director walked in with strong work and a clean methodology chapter. She walked out with corrections she could have avoided. Her research was not necessarily weak, but her defence clearly was. After 30+ panels, I see the same five questions keep coming back, in roughly the same order. The panel (for either your PhD or DBA) is not assessing what you read. It is assessing whether you can defend your own argument when we push back. Here are the five, with what we are testing on each. 1. Why this research, why now?
The significance test.
Make us care in 60 seconds.
“A gap in the literature” is a weak signal.
Specificity separates significant from decorative. 2. What is your gap, in one sentence?
The one-sentence test.
Three paragraphs of background is an intro, not a gap.
More than one breath means you have not found it yet. 3. Why this methodology?
Most theses break here.
The philosophy-method fit.
“My supervisor suggested it” is not a defence.
We can tell when you picked method first, then backfilled reasons. 4. What are the risks?
The maturity test.
“No major risks” is itself a risk signal.
We need three concrete risks, your plan for each, plus any risk that might change your methodology. 5. What will your contribution be?
The contribution test. The one that catches most people out.
“My research will describe...” is not a contribution.
A strong answer starts with a verb: challenges, extends, refines, proposes. The pattern across all five is that the panel is not testing whether your work is finished. We are testing whether your decisions are defensible. PhD / DBA candidates prepare for 1 and 2.
The panel decides on 3, 4 and 5. Which of these 5 would trouble you most in your own panel? Save this for your prep.
Repost for your research group. #DBA #PhDLife #VivaPreparation | 26 comments on LinkedIn

# data[].attributes.body
This is from a link referenced in the Mapping and Argument post

# data[].attributes.body
This is bloody brilliant ! I wish I had seen this years ago …

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Mapping an argument | Federation University

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Constructing a clear argument is essential for a successful doctoral thesis. A PhD thesis always conceals an argument within the claim it is making. When someone asks, “What’s your thesis about?” your answer will likely start with: “My thesis argues that [...]”.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
We know that steady everyday progress is a crucial factor in finishing a PhD. In previous posts, we have seen productivity techniques to support us in taking more of these daily steps. Yet, a lot of walking does not necessarily get us anywhere. We need to know that we are actually getting past key reference points, closer to our final destination. In this post, I propose a diagramming exercise to map out key obstacles, milestones and the "everyday fuel" that propels us past them in our journey towards PhD completion.

The idea for this exercise comes from the doctoral and supervisor workshops about progress that we have been doing since 2019, both in Estonia and in Spain. Despite the big distance (geographic and cultural) between these two countries, we noticed a common pattern. Doctoral supervisors that seemed to be "on top of things" in supporting their students to progress towards completing the PhD, mentioned in passing that they had a clear plan, a " map of the PhD" that they discussed with their students and helped them know how far they were from the destination. This got me thinking: is there a way we can help PhD students make sense and track their progress at a higher level, a sort of "10,000-meter view" of the doctorate?

In a previous post, I have talked about a diagram that helped me (and many other students -now doctors- around my old lab in Spain) to conceptualize, define and refine the main concepts and contributions of the thesis (the CQOCE diagram). Yet, that diagram provides no idea about the process until those contributions come to fruition. And it says absolutely nothing about the biggest risks and pitfalls to watch out for.

Enter the map of the PhD...

Mapping out the PhD... step by step

The map of the PhD will guide us in the long journey through uncertain terrain that is research. Think of it more like a medieval map, rather than a nice, modern map of roads and cities.

A map of this kind has three types of elements: milestones (reference points), obstacles (places to avoid), and fuel stations (inns and villages where we get the energy and nourishment needed to go from one milestone to the next). Below, I illustrate these elements with examples drawn from the workshops, but keep in mind that:

We need to come up with our own elements, for our own field, research topic and our own personal strengths and weaknesses.

Even if we brainstorm at the beginning many elements of each kind, it is useful to prioritize and simplify the map so that it contains only the 4-8 most important elements of each kind: the ones we need to focus on the most.

The Milestones

Brainstorm and select what are the most important reference points in the PhD process. These are events or actions that will happen only once or rarely during the doctorate, which are crucial to know that our thesis is going somewhere. Examples could include:

to write and present the thesis project,

to complete the literature review of the thesis (including a synthesis of the main gaps detected in it),

to perform a research/lab process reproducibly,

presenting our results at a conference,

designing a study that is considered feasible by the supervisors,

having your first journal article published,

having the CQOCE diagram of the thesis be considered final/stable by the supervisors,

completing a draft of the analytical overview (sometimes called kappa) of an article-based thesis,

doing a research stay abroad

... or anything else relevant for our particular thesis. The order of these milestones may or may not be important. The milestones should probably have scientific or learning relevance (rather than being bureaucratic in nature, like the yearly attestation process happening in some doctoral programs, where the contributions/content is not really discussed). Also, try to come up with milestones of different kinds (i.e., do not just put "write article 1", "write article 2", ... etc.).

Here be Dragons (aka The Obstacles)

Again, we can brainstorm and select the most important, concrete obstacles and challenges that might prevent us from finishing the PhD. These can be internal (i.e., related to our particular personality, tendencies, or the nature of our thesis project) or external (i.e., economic or social factors, or unpredictable but probable events that may influence our progress). A nice way of brainstorming these challenges is to do (alone or with a group of fellow students) a "premortem of our thesis". Our initial brainstorm can be pared down to the 4-8 challenges that we deem most likely to happen, catastrophic, or difficult for us to overcome. Example obstacles could include:

Procrastination (internal)

Too much stress or anxiety (internal)

Vague or non-existent thesis project (internal)

Overwork and burnout (internal)

Poor post-PhD outlook demoralizing us (internal)

An experiment provides bad results (external)

Technical problems in running an experiment (external)

Getting too little (or too much?) guidance/supervision (external)

Toxic department/laboratory atmosphere (external)

A global pandemic cancels our research stay (external)

The Fuel

So far, we have been talking about clearly meaningful but infrequent events that either give us a big push forward... or send us down a cliff. Yet, between these milestones months apart, there is the everyday. The PhD is a long-distance race, and such distances are covered one step at a time, day after day, getting up and doing more of the right things and less of the not-so-good stuff.

Following the medieval journey metaphor, I see these everyday actions as the inns at the end of a day's march, providing a bed and a dinner, which enable us to recover and continue walking the next day. These are much more frequent, often smaller, actions or habits we take on and do every day... or things we put in our "not-to-do list". Be it through doing or not doing them, they help us avoid the obstacles and make sure we hit the milestones. I'll say it again, these can be very personal.

People often focus this "fuel" part too much on events that they cannot control. That sort of fuel is a sure recipe for getting stranded in the middle of nowhere. An example could be "get a paper accepted", as opposed to "submit a paper we are happy with" - the latter being much more under our control. While there can be a certain element of chaos or randomness in getting to milestones, and in the obstacles that pop up on the way, our fuel should be as much as possible under our control (e.g., focusing on our own behavior, rather than other people's actions or judgements).

Also, make sure that fuel is frequent enough: daily is best for developing habits, but weekly could also work. If we decide to leave a less-frequent fuel piece in the map, we can think of it as a sort of "occasional turbo boost "... we still need most of our fuel to come from more conventional, frequently-available sources.

Example fuel items may include:

(Feedback during) Regular thesis-oriented meetings with supervisors,

Discussing our work with external researchers,

Writing results reports after each study,

Reading research in our area regularly and writing syntheses/reflections about them,

Writing new concepts regularly in our lab notebook,

Solving particular technical problems,

Learning new lab techniques,

Writing regularly,

Teaching others a method we know,

Taking time off with family/friends regularly,

Any habits related to exercise, good sleep or nutrition

A few additional notes on the mapping process

That's it! Now we have all we need to start mapping out our PhD. Do it using pen and paper, or copy this Google Drawings template I created.

Update (23.06.2022): We have now added a "map of the thesis" template you can copy to our PhD Toolkit (under the "Conceptualizing your dissertation" section).

A few more ideas about how I would go about doing it:

We can do this exercise alone, but it would be even better to do it together with other PhD students in our area/lab/department (that's what we do in the workshops I mentioned at the outset).

Every research area (and sub-area, and sub-community) is different. Also, every person is different: we all have different strengths and weaknesses that may play out during the PhD. Hence, even if we do a map together with others, we may want to tweak it for our own particular case later on.

No matter how good our initial map of the PhD is, it will probably benefit from suggestions and feedback from colleagues and supervisors (especially, more experienced researchers that have seen many doctoral processes in our area). We could show them the whole map, or just ask a few questions about its elements: what is the most common reason you have seen PhD students fail? what habits helped get you through your PhD? what would you say are the most important milestones in a PhD in our field? Etc.

The map is just another tool to help us reflect about the PhD. I would use it sparingly, maybe just at the beginning of the PhD (or in the first meetings with a new PhD student, if you are a supervisor), or in less-frequent reviews and self-reflections (e.g., once a semester). If we focus on this goal-oriented view too much or too frequently, it runs the risk of making us excessively obsessed with the destination... while the PhD is also a process to enjoy in its own right!

We could take the map metaphor further (what would be the equivalent of alternative routes? or scenic spots? or ...), but this is the simplest exercise I could come up with that still provides a complete idea of the dissertation process.

Just do it. See if it helps you decide what to focus on for the next stretch of the way.
Did you try out this exercise? Did you do it alone or with fellow students? Let us know how it went (you can even share links to your resulting maps), in the comments area below! Header image by Wikimedia Commons

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We know that steady everyday progress is a crucial factor in finishing a PhD. In previous posts, we have seen productivity techniques to support us in taking more of these daily steps. Yet, a lot of walking does not necessarily get us anywhere.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Introduction

Relational-Cultural Theory (RCT) brings relationships to the forefront of human psychology. It examines the complexity of human relationships, using concepts of connection and disconnection, as well as recognizing and exploring the social implications of psychological theory. The cultural aspect brings into focus the influence of larger culture and power differentials on the quality and nature of relationships and the subsequent effects on healthy coexistence.[1] This essay will examine the relational lens that Relational-Cultural Theory brings forward in the field of psychology and the ways in which it informs and intersects with conflict transformation and peacebuilding.

Background and Guiding Assumptions
"Connection and relationship with others is seen as essential to understanding the self and to its making and remaking."[2]
Relational-Cultural Theory (RCT) developed alongside the rising feminist movement in psychology in the 1970s. The development of the theory can be credited to the collaborative efforts of a group of women psychologists working at the Stone Center at Wellesley College including Jean Baker Miller, Judith V. Jordan, Janet Surrey, and Irene Stiver. The focus of the Stone Center's original work was on women. Amidst mounting pressure for women's equality, they explored women's experience living in oppressive, patriarchal systems, specifically in response to the United States context of the time.[3]

The cultural aspect of RCT was an addendum to the originally conceived relational theory, suggesting that relationships cannot be isolated from the larger culture. One of RCT's core tenets is to name oppressive systems and give voice to marginalized populations, including both men and women. The psychologists of the Stone Center were driven by a desire to call attention to the influence of systemic power differentials on the disruption of connection at both the individual and societal level.[4] The scope of relational theory, in this way, extends beyond personal, intimate relationships, to consider the overarching structures that shape wider relational patterns. An underlying goal of RCT lies in exploring how societal structures can better contribute to peaceful coexistence.

Relational theory takes as one of its assumptions the inherently social nature of human beings.[5] Based on the belief that individuals are socially constituted by relationships, RCT seeks to understand the complexity behind relationship formation. The theory proposes that our relational nature drives us to "grow through and toward connection".[6] Jean Baker Miller coined the term 'growth-fostering relationships' to represent relationships in which active participation by all parties leads to mutual development. These types of relationships contribute to healthy functioning and flourishing. Miller proposed that 'growth-fostering relationships' encompass five essential attributes, or the 'Five Good Things', as listed below:

1. Sense of Zest or Energy

2. Increased Sense of Worth

3. Clarity: Increased knowledge of oneself and the other person in the relationship

4. Productivity: Ability and motivation to take action both in the relationship and outside of it

5. Desire for more Connection: In reaction to satisfaction of relational experience[7]

RCT holds that "we grow toward an increased capacity for respect, having an impact on the other, and being open to being changed by the other" in developing these kinds of relationships.[8] Growth-fostering relationships require mutuality, which describes the shared participatory process of relationships, rather than denoting sameness or equality between peoples. [9] It acknowledges the reality of diversity and inevitability of power differentials, while describing a path not only toward healthy coexistence, but also mutual empowerment.

The significance of this concept of mutuality lies in the conviction that its absence results in the development of psychological problems and contributes to the rise of violent conflict.[10] RCT asserts that experiences of disconnection which disrupt or deny our inherently relational nature greatly contribute to a state of human suffering. Alternatively, experiences that support our drive toward connection lead to increased pro-social behavior. This idea of mutuality has many implications for conflict transformation, such as the vital need for healthy reconnection.

Neuroscience Support

The development of neuroscience has helped support the common adage of RCT: personal is political. "Neuroscientific data is demonstrating that the brain grows in connection, that we come into the world ready to connect, and that disconnection creates real pain."[11] For example, the Social Pain/Physical Pain Overlap Theory proposes that the experience of social pain, inherent in disconnection, and physical pain share similarities in their biological experience. This theory brings to light the real consequences of pain that social separation and rejection cause, and helps to support the RCT assumption that connection is not simply a desire, but a profound human need.[12]

Neuroplasticity, or brain plasticity, has shown that the human brain is not a static organ, but actually changeable over the course of a lifetime. This discovery gives hope for the capacity of individuals and societies as a whole to change.[13] Neuroplasticity has positive implications for already existing theories. For example, attachment theory describes the importance of a healthy and secure caregiver-infant relationship to the social and emotional development, including empathic capacity, of the infant. Although the harmful developmental effects remain in the absence of such a relationship, neuroplasticity suggests the possibility of healing the damage caused, and thus revitalizing empathic ability after this early development stage.[14] The prospect of developing empathy later in life is crucial for RCT because it holds that mutual empathy is required for the existence of 'growth-fostering relationships'. Every person, then, has the capability of improving his or her empathic possibilities and, therefore, potential to experience healthy relationships.

Mutual Empathy

Mutual empathy is described as an "openness to being affected by and affecting another person."[15] This relational process involves both emotional and rational aspects. The element of respect is seen to play a critical role in fostering mutual empathy. The four major components of empathy include:

1. The capacity for emotional response

2. The mental capacity to take the perspective of the other

3. The ability to regulate emotions

4. The level of awareness of self and others[16]

Relational theorists emphasize the need for understanding that, just as disconnection is inevitable in relationships, experiencing empathic failure is unavoidable. Empathic failure, however, can lead to great reconnection if awareness, trust, and authenticity are present. [17] Having empathic understanding does not imply only having positive emotions, but rather committing to a fuller understanding of one's own and another's experience.[18] The other is seen as a dynamic, whole being, rather than defined by a single attribute or action.

Various strategies have been increasingly employed in both therapeutic and conflict transformation efforts to teach and enhance empathy. Skills can be taught at the cognitive level such as active listening, paraphrasing, and appropriate articulation of feelings. Activities such as dramatization, role-playing, self-presentation, and imitative play can be employed to develop the affective experience of individuals in relation to others. There is also a growing exploration of the use of art in the cultivation of empathy between peoples.[19]

Dance movement therapy (DMT) illustrates one example of an empathy-building intervention. DMT often uses mirroring activities, aiming to increase body awareness of self and other and contributing to the building of empathy through a non-verbal mode of interaction. David Harris, a DMT practitioner, has shown the possibilities of using this type of intervention in peacebuilding contexts through his innovative program with ex-child soldiers in Sierra Leone. Harris utilized DMT to rebuild empathic capacity in the ex-combatants to further their personal healing and aid in their overall reconciliation with the local community.[20]

Another example of an intervention with a focus on building empathy is inter-group dialogue. Inter-group dialogue processes are used, increasingly with youth populations, to increase empathy for differences while bringing focus to group commonalities in order to increase connection and overall group unity. For example, Seeds of Peace is a non-profit organization that brings youth leaders from conflict areas together in camp intensives that promote dialogue and relationship-building to enhance future coexistence.[21]

Empathy allows for more effective and sustained interactions between people and institutions. The enhancement of social empathy could greatly improve conflict transformation efforts for it provides the "ability to understand people by entering into their situations in ways that reveal inequalities and disparities and then to act to effect social change."[22] Relational theorists also point to the potential of infusing a sense of empathy into policy-making and social programs, fostering a greater tolerance for differences and enhancing consideration of the 'other' in decision-making.[23]

Separate-Self Paradigm to Relational

Relational theorists seek to challenge the separate-self paradigm embedded in political and social values, predominantly found in the West. This paradigm views individuals as autonomous and socially isolated beings. Autonomy, from a separate-self perspective, is equated with complete independence. Personal strength is congruent with self-sufficiency. Belief in inherent human selfishness and separateness leads to the acceptance of hyper-competitive behavior and an overemphasis on self-development.[24]

RCT highlights the contention between this separate-self paradigm and its guiding assumption of our inherent relational nature. The theory considers the traditional development view that humans move from full dependence as infants to full independence in adulthood to be misconceived.[25] Rather than moving toward total independence, RCT defines autonomy from a relational perspective, allowing for the simultaneous development of self and development in relation to others. It recognizes that even in adulthood, humans are shaped by relationships.

Relational theorists counter the common argument that the acknowledgement of human interdependency implies a sacrifice to individual agency. Jennifer Nedelsky, states, "I embrace the notion of the unique, infinite value of each individual, and the value of interiority, and the value of the ability of individuals to shape their own lives. But I reject the liberal variants of these values that fail to see the central role relation play in each of them."[26] The demonization of interdependency within a separate-self paradigm is seen to greatly limit the healthy functioning of individuals and groups of people as they operate under systems propagating disconnection.[27] The concept of relational autonomy allows for the simultaneous need for self and others. Autonomy, when conceived relationally, allows for the naming of non-mutual relationships and encourages the pursuit of transformation at both an individual and societal level.

Social Implications of Theory Development

RCT has highlighted the importance of theorists, across disciplines, remaining cognizant of how their development of ideas may, albeit unconsciously, substantiate and sustain normalized power differentials.

The values of separate self have been infused in theories of human psychology. Traditionally, theories of psychological development have further perpetuated harmful power stratifications by individualizing problems. RCT suggests that 'pathologizing' individuals due to weakness and helplessness diverts attention away from the overarching social conditions underwriting the development of psychological problems. The oppressive relationships institutionalized within a society have direct impact on the interpersonal relationships between its members.[28]

RCT seeks to broaden psychological theory by moving beyond its focus on individual intervention, which has largely resulted in superficial treatments that ignore the root causes of disturbance. A shift to relational thinking allows for the deeper analysis of when and how individual psychological problems are reflective of larger socially destructive patterns.[29] With this expanded awareness, models of therapy start to hold potential for societal transformation.

What if the ultimate goal for psychotherapy evolved into creating space for widespread participation in 'growth-fostering relationships'? RCT guides us to view treatment beyond the relief of individual symptoms, to the promotion of reconnection with others. Reconnection is made possible by transforming the social conditions causative of the individual pain and disconnection.

Domination / Subordination
"The autonomy of all cannot be an autonomy of independence and control."[30]
Relational theorists argue that the illusion of independent autonomy fosters an environment in which relationships characterized by domination and subordination can, and are even encouraged, to take place. The ever-present dominant-subordinate systems around the world, characterized by political and cultural inequalities, have a significant impact on overall human functioning and flourishing. The mechanisms used by dominant groups to marginalize others involve disconnection and disempowerment.[31] The RCT concepts of condemned isolation and the central relational paradox highlight the complexities of these ongoing unjust relationships.

Condemned isolation describes the "experience of isolation and aloneness that leaves one feeling shut out of the human community. One feels alone, immobilized regarding reconnection, and at fault for this state."[32] Shame and isolation are tools used by dominant groups to maintain an unchallenged, privileged status. The condemned experience leads to the internalization of dominant beliefs. Marginalized peoples adopt feelings of unworthiness, leading to further withdrawal from larger society and even each other.[33] This cycle of imposed degradation and self-degradation serves the interests of the dominant group, and is often an under acknowledged process.

The central relational paradox of RCT further illuminates the engrained status of a subordinated individual or group of people as they adopt strategies of disconnection out of a need for self-protection.
"In the face of repeated disconnections, people yearn even more for relationship, but their fear of engaging with others leads to keeping aspects of their experience out of connection. The individual alters herself or himself to fit in with the expectations and wishes of the other person, and in the process, the relationship itself loses authenticity and mutuality, becoming another source of disconnection."[34]
Far from thriving in growth-fostering relationships, the subordinated existence consists of learning how to simply survive within an oppressive relationship. The engagement in inauthentic relationships for survival undermines any sense of autonomy. Those who have been suppressed lack the opportunities for developing skills that enable autonomy.[35]

Opportunities for developing autonomy are given to those within the dominant group. The illusion of self-sufficiency ascribes their success to individual attributes, relegating those in the subordinate group to the prescribed identity of dependent, weak individuals.[36] Ironically, much of the dependency is a consequence of the intentional stripping away of agency. Adopting a relational lens exposes the systemic inequalities that set up these fixed relational images. RCT describes relational images as the expectations and fears we have formed in our minds based on our past experiences in relationships:
"As we develop these images, we are also creating a set of beliefs about why relationships are the way they are. Relational images thus determine expectations not only about what will occur in relationships but about a person's whole sense of herself or himself. These often become the unconscious frameworks by which we determine who we are, what we can do, and how worthwhile we are."[37]
Just as isolation and shame hold the subordinate in a lesser position, socialization leads to ambivalence, denial, and the unquestioned belief in meritocracy among those in the dominant group. This describes the presence of what RCT refers to as 'controlling images', in which the objectification of marginalized peoples becomes entrenched psychologically in both the dominant and subordinate groups. [38] This state of inequality between peoples gives rise to the existence of many intractable conflicts. Additionally, the persistent non-mutuality and disconnection experienced has a demoralizing intergenerational impact. The question that relational theorists might pose would be, given the prevalence of hierarchy in our human societies, how might relations be structured to make autonomy a collective experience shared by all?[39]

Resistance and Transformation

Moving toward resistance and transformation requires overcoming the strategies of shame and isolation employed by oppressors. Resistance and transformation in oppressive systems requires sustained and strategic efforts to challenge the social norms and structures that degrade relational values. Below is a list of beginning strategies for resistance which suggest a means to escape shame and isolation and a path toward transformation:

1. Naming the Problem and Noticing Who Makes the Rules

2. Complaining

3. Claiming Strength

4. Developing Communities of Resilience and Courage[40]

One of the most powerful ways to resist and transform disconnection is to name it. Increasing awareness of relational patterns and images empowers people to imagine alternate patterns and images that would better serve them. Complaining enables those in unjust relationships to denounce them and seek change. The third step involves communicating the shared benefits of moving toward a system that promotes relational values, which involves the shifting of attitudes. Finally, especially in cultures of persistent violence, having a community, or support system, is crucial for strengthening the resilience and courage that the process of resistance and transformation demands.[41] One way to disable the dominant group's power advantage of isolation and shame is through community resistance. Enormous power can be drawn from concerted group action.

As people move out of isolated self-protective strategies to engaging constructively as a collective group, it is of equal importance that the group maintains mindfulness in action. The goal of moving toward a power relationship marked by mutuality must remain central. In this way, the resisting group is not attempting to disempower the dominant group, but rather disempowering the non-relational values that undermine mutuality and agency.[42] This mindfulness requires the practice of empathy and a willingness to reconnect even with those who have been a source of disconnection and disempowerment. Authentic change requires that all parties are eventually open to relational movement.

Relational Movement and Waging Good Conflict

RCT suggests that relationships are not static, but actually very dynamic in nature. Healthy relationships naturally move along a continuum between connection and disconnection throughout their existence. Although humans desire connection, moments of disconnection cause fear and vulnerability when they are not named. An internal defense mechanism is often activated in order to protect oneself, which leads to even more disconnection. This fear creates a tension with our desire for reconnection. As relationships mature, each party can develop his or her awareness. With increased awareness, parties become more attentive and responsive to the movement of the relationship and the confidence in the relationship is improved. The moments of disconnection become less an experience of insecurity, but rather an opportunity to strengthen the relationship in working toward reconnection.[43]

Understanding that disconnection is natural and inevitable corresponds with the idea shared among conflict theorists that conflict is not only inevitable, but also an opportunity for growth.[44] The negative connotation often associated with conflict is largely due to the destructive consequences seen and experienced as a result of suppressed conflict. There is, however, a constructive way to 'wage good conflict'.[45] "Disconnection and conflict should not be mistaken for failures in or roadblocks to reconciliation, but rather recognized as possible pathways for transforming misunderstanding to empathy and building bridges between strangers and enemies through collective relational struggle."[46]

Implications for Peacebuilding

The ever-increasing globalization that marks our time in history brings with it great potential for change in relational awareness and dynamics, along with great danger in perpetuating inauthentic, non-mutual relationships. As our social relations extend further, the pool of people in which we interact becomes not only larger, but also increasingly diverse. The need for strategies of coexistence and mutual connection has become more essential to the well-being and ultimate growth of the human race.[47] The role that disconnection plays in conflicts around the world, both within and across borders, must be brought to the forefront of awareness. Both relational theorists and peacebuilders alike espouse the primacy of relationships in humans' lives. Peacebuilding, at its core, aims to build sustainable, just relationships. As John Paul Lederach wrote:
"Peacebuilding requires a vision of relationship. Stated bluntly, if there is no capacity to imagine the canvas of mutual relationships and situate oneself as part of that historic and ever-evolving web, peacebuilding collapses. The centrality of relationship provides the context and potential for breaking violence, for it brings people into the pregnant moments of the moral imagination: the space of recognition that ultimately the quality of our life is dependent on the quality of life of others. It recognizes that the well-being of our grandchildren is directly tied to the well-being of our enemy's grandchildren."[48]
It is within this space of moral imagination that the creation of a world in which the pursuit of development does not sacrifice human connectedness becomes possible. The reality of our global interdependency can only be denied at a cost that affects each and every one of us. We must adopt, what Evelyn Linder terms, a new global culture of 'connected individualism.'[49] This implies a widespread attitudinal shift, which would require support mechanisms within societies to promote and enhance a new relational culture. Incorporating a relational view to policy-making, infusing the rise of a human rights culture with a relational lens, engaging in a relational approach to decision-making and the implementation of power structures, and inducing structural changes that reflect positively on interpersonal relations within a culture are all approaches that could provide this support.

Relational theorists assert that individual freedom implies a sense of responsibility that may too often be overlooked. Adopting a culture of 'connected individualism' would entail a coordinated, collective effort of people at all levels, of all backgrounds to participate in an increased moral responsibility.[50] Peacebuilding requires steadfastness. The absence of immediately visible change should not thwart peacebuilding efforts, for patterns of thinking and behaving are deep-rooted. The intersection of RCT and peacebuilding principles and interventions provides a rich space for further exploration of research and concrete intervention strategies in moving forward.

Returning back to the adage, 'personal is political', it is imperative that the psychological realities of human existence no longer get relegated to the sidelines as a private matter. Relational theorists posit that denying our multidimensionality in public interactions ultimately impedes the presence of 'growth-fostering relationships'.[51] Naming the pervasive inauthenticity and disconnection that saturates many social structures, and thus impacts personal lives, is the first step toward transformation. Let us imagine a way in which the centrality of relationships in our lives and the reality of global interdependence no longer serve as impediments, but as seeds for sustained growth and change toward peaceful coexistence.

Bibliography

Banks, Amy. "Developing the Capacity to Connect." Journal of Religion & Science. 46. no. 1 (2011): 168-182.

Birrell, Pamela and Jennifer Freyd. "Betrayal Trauma: Relational Models of Harm and Healing." Journal of Trauma Practice. 5. no. 1 (2006): 49-63.

Comstock, Dana, Thelma Duffey, and Holly George. "The Relational Cultural Model: A Framework for Group Process." The Journal for Specialists in Group Work. 27. no. 3 (2001): 254-272.

Comstock, Dana, Tonya Hammer, Julie Strentzsch, Kristi Cannon, Jacqueline Parsons, and Gustavo Salazar. "Relational-Cultural Theory: A Framework for Bridging Relational, Multicultural, and Social Justice Competencies." Journal of Counseling & Development . 86. no. 3 (2008): 279-287.

Eisenburger, Naomi, and Matthew Lieberman. "Why it Hurts to be Left Out: The Neurocognitive Overlap Between Physical and Social Pain." The Social Outcast: Ostracism, Social Exclusion, Rejection, and Bullying. (2005): 109-130.

Gerdes, Karen, Elizabeth Segal, Kelly Jackson, and Jennifer Mullins. "Teaching Empathy: A Framework Rooted in Social Cognitive Neuroscience and Social Justice." Journal of Social Work Education. 47. no. 1 (2011): 109-131.

Harris, David. "When Child Soldiers Reconcile: Accountability, Restorative Justice, and the Renewal of Empathy." Journal of Human Rights Practice. (2010): 334-354.

Jean Baker Miller Training Institute, "Glossary of Relational-Cultural Theory Key Terms." Last modified 2013. http://www.jbmti.org/Our-Work/glossary-relational-cultural-therapy.

Jean Baker Miller Training Institute, "The Development of Relational-Cultural Theory." Last modified 2013. http://www.jbmti.org/Our-Work/the-development-of-relational-cultural-theory

Jordan, Judith V. "Recent Developments in Relational-Cultural Theory." Women & Therapy. 31. no. 2-4 (2008): 1-4.

Jordan, Judith V., Linda M. Hartling, and Maureen Walker. The Complexity of Connection. New York: Guilford Press, 2004.

Lederach, John Paul. The Little Book of Conflict Transformation. Intercourse, PA: Good Books, 2003.

Lederach, John Paul. The Moral Imagination: the Art and Soul of Building Peace. New York : Oxford University Press, 2010.

Lindner, Evelin. "Dynamics of Humiliation in a Globalizing World." International Journal on World Peace. 24. no. 3 (2007): 15-52.

Llewellyn, Jennifer. Being Relational: Reflections on relational theory and health law. Vancouver: UBC Press, 2012.

Miller, Jean Baker. Toward a New Psychology of Women. Boston: Beacon Press, 1976.

Morray, Elisabeth and Belle Liang. "Peace Talk: A Relational Approach to Group Negotiation Among Arab and Israeli Youths." International Journal of Group Psychotherapy. 55. no. 4 (2005): 481-506.

Nedelsky, Jennifer. Law's Relations: A Relational Theory of Self, Autonomy, and Law. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011.

Schirch, Lisa. The Little Book of Strategic Peacebuilding. Intercourse, PA: Good Books, 2004.

Seeds of Peace, Last modified 2013. http://www.seedsofpeace.org/

West, Carolyn. "The Map of Relational-Cultural Theory." Women & Therapy. 28. no. 3-4 (2005): 93-110.

[2] Jennifer Llewellyn, Being Relational: Reflections on Relational Theory and Health Law, (Vancouver: UBC Press, 2012 ): 90.

[4] Judith V. Jordan, Linda M. Hartling, and Maureen Walker, The Complexity of Connection, (New York: Guilford Press, 2004): 3-6.

[5] Jennifer Llewellyn, Being Relational: Reflections on Relational Theory and Health Law, (Vancouver: UBC Press, 2012): 4.

[6] Judith V. Jordan, "Recent Developments in Relational-Cultural Theory," Women & Therapy, 31, no. 2-4 (2008): 2.

[9] Judith V. Jordan, Linda M. Hartling, and Maureen Walker, The Complexity of Connection, (New York: Guilford Press, 2004): 3.

[10] Carolyn West, "The Map of Relational-Cultural Theory," Women & Therapy, 28, no. 3-4 (2005): 103.

[12] Naomi Eisenburger and Matthew Lieberman, "Why it Hurts to be Left Out: The Neurocognitive Overlap Between Physical and Social Pain." The Social Outcast: Ostracism, Social Exclusion, Rejection, and Bullying (2005): 37.

[13] Amy Banks, "Developing the Capacity to Connect," Journal of Religion & Science, 46, no. 1 (2011): 178-179.

[14] Karen Gerdes, Elizabeth Segal, Kelly Jackson, and Jennifer Mullins, "Teaching Empathy: A Framework Rooted in Social Cognitive Neuroscience and Social Justice," Journal of Social Work Education, 47, no. 1 (2011): 113.

[16] Karen Gerdes, Elizabeth Segal, Kelly Jackson, and Jennifer Mullins, "Teaching Empathy: A Framework Rooted in Social Cognitive Neuroscience and Social Justice," Journal of Social Work Education, 47, no. 1 (2011): 112.

[17] Judith V. Jordan, "Recent Developments in Relational-Cultural Theory," Women & Therapy, 31, no. 2-4 (2008): 2.

[18] Carolyn West, "The Map of Relational-Cultural Theory," Women & Therapy , 28, no. 3-4 (2005): 105.

[19] Karen Gerdes, Elizabeth Segal, Kelly Jackson, and Jennifer Mullins, "Teaching Empathy: A Framework Rooted in Social Cognitive Neuroscience and Social Justice," Journal of Social Work Education, 47, no. 1 (2011): 110-123.

[20] David Harris, "When Child Soldiers Reconcile: Accountability, Restorative Justice, and the Renewal of Empathy," Journal of Human Rights Practice (2010): 334-354.

[22] Karen Gerdes, Elizabeth Segal, Kelly Jackson, and Jennifer Mullins, "Teaching Empathy: A Framework Rooted in Social Cognitive Neuroscience and Social Justice," Journal of Social Work Education, 47, no. 1 (2011): 117.

[23] Karen Gerdes, Elizabeth Segal, Kelly Jackson, and Jennifer Mullins, "Teaching Empathy: A Framework Rooted in Social Cognitive Neuroscience and Social Justice," Journal of Social Work Education, 47, no. 1 (2011): 123-125.

[24] Jennifer Nedelsky, Law's Relations: A Relational Theory of Self, Autonomy, and Law, (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011): 118-123.

[25] Judith V. Jordan, "Recent Developments in Relational-Cultural Theory," Women & Therapy, 31, no. 2-4 (2008): 2.

[26] Jennifer Nedelsky, Law's Relations: A Relational Theory of Self, Autonomy, and Law, (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011): 36.

[27] Pamela Birrell, and Jennifer Freyd, "Betrayal Trauma: Relational Models of Harm and Healing," Journal of Trauma Practice, 5, no. 1 (2006): 60-61.

[28] Pamela Birrell, and Jennifer Freyd, "Betrayal Trauma: Relational Models of Harm and Healing," Journal of Trauma Practice, 5, no. 1 (2006): 60-61.

[29] Dana Comstock, Tonya Hammer, Julie Strentzsch, Kristi Cannon, Jacqueline Parsons, and Gustavo Salazar, "Relational-Cultural Theory: A Framework for Bridging Relational, Multicultural, and Social Justice Competencies," Journal of Counseling & Development, 86, no. 3 (2008): 279-287.

[30] Jennifer Nedelsky, Law's Relations: A Relational Theory of Self, Autonomy, and Law, (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011): 306.

[31] Jordan, Judith V., Linda M. Hartling, and Maureen Walker. The Complexity of Connection. New York: Guilford Press, 2004: 129-146.

[33] Jean Baker Miller, Toward a New Psychology of Women, (Boston: Beacon Press, 1976): 6-12.

[35] Jennifer Llewellyn, Being Relational: Reflections on Relational Theory and Health Law, (Vancouver: UBC Press, 2012): 17.

[36] Jordan, Judith V., Linda M. Hartling, and Maureen Walker. The Complexity of Connection. New York: Guilford Press, 2004: 4-5.

[38] Jordan, Judith V, Linda M Hartling, and Maureen Walker. The Complexity of Connection. New York: Guilford Press, 2004: 129-146.

[39] Jennifer Nedelsky, Law's Relations: A Relational Theory of Self, Autonomy, and Law, (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011)

[40] Jordan, Judith V, Linda M Hartling, and Maureen Walker. The Complexity of Connection. New York: Guilford Press, 2004: 22.

[41] Jordan, Judith V, Linda M Hartling, and Maureen Walker. The Complexity of Connection. New York: Guilford Press, 2004: 22-25.

[42] Jordan, Judith V, Linda M Hartling, and Maureen Walker. The Complexity of Connection. New York: Guilford Press, 2004: 21-22.

[43] Dana Comstock, Thelma Duffey, and Holly George, "The Relational Cultural Model: A Framework for Group Process," The Journal for Specialists in Group Work, 27, no. 3 (2001): 254-272.

[44] John Paul Lederach, The Little Book of Conflict Transformation, (Intercourse, PA: Good Books, 2003); Lisa Schirch, The Little Book of Strategic Peacebuilding, (Intercourse, PA: Good Books, 2004).

[45] Jean Baker Miller, Toward a New Psychology of Women, (Boston: Beacon Press, 1976): 125-134.

[46] Elisabeth Morray and Belle Liang, "Peace Talk: A Relational Approach to Group Negotiation Among Arab and Israeli Youths," International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 55, no. 4 (2005): 503.

[47] Amy Banks, "Developing the Capacity to Connect," Journal of Religion & Science, 46, no. 1 (2011): 169.

[48] John Paul Lederach, The Moral Imagination: The Art and Soul of Building Peace, (New York : Oxford University Press, 2010): 35.

[49] Evelin Lindner, "Dynamics of Humiliation in a Globalizing World," International Journal on World Peace, 24, no. 3 (2007): 39-52.

[50] Jennifer Llewellyn, Being Relational: Reflections on Relational Theory and Health Law, (Vancouver: UBC Press, 2012); Jennifer Nedelsky, Law's Relations: A Relational Theory of Self, Autonomy, and Law, (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011).

[51] Jennifer Nedelsky, Law's Relations: A Relational Theory of Self, Autonomy, and Law, (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011): 158-199.

Use the following to cite this article:
McCauley, Melissa. "Relational-Cultural Theory: Fostering Healthy Coexistence Through a Relational Lens." Beyond Intractability. Eds. Guy Burgess and Heidi Burgess. Conflict Information Consortium, University of Colorado, Boulder. March 2013 < http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/relational-cultural-theory>.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Relational-Cultural Theory: Fostering Healthy Coexistence Through a Relational Lens

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By Melissa McCauley March 2013 This piece was written while the author was completing a Master of Arts degree in Peace Studies at the Joan B. Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies at the University of Notre Dame. Lindsay McClain Opiyo and David Miranda O'Brien acted as peer reviewers on this piece.

# data[].attributes.body
I have been following Inger for years and am also a patreon

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Publishers often send me academic writing books to review. I happily look through every book, but if I think I can't wholeheartedly recommend it, I just don't write a review. I don't want to crush a fellow author's soul. The rejected titles sit sadly, in small piles of guilt, on the bottom of one of ...continue reading.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Just like the horse whisperer - but with more pages

# data[].attributes.body
This is bunch of other useful links that I pulled together

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This is my collection of lovely links to really helpful sites that will help along the PHD journey... I hope ....

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
These are my favourite YouTube Clips to help with PHD Studies !

# data[].attributes.body
https://finishyourthesis.com/my-story/

# data[].attributes.body
This is a really helpful resource from Dr Katy Peplin

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
this is a blog - it’s like a newsletter except you don’t have to sign up with your email for it. i’m an OG blogger - i believe in providing quality writing for free in a stable web location!

# data[].attributes.body
Elizabeth is fabulous. I have followed her blog for years and have many of her resources. She has a community called Momentum which is really helpful.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Qualitative PhD Writing & Research Support | The Degree Doctor

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Qualitative PhD research support. Get clear, structured guidance to strengthen your literature review, methodology, analysis and discussion - and finish your doctorate with confidence and clarity. PhD Survival Guides. Resources on qualitative methods such as Braun and Clarke’s Reflexive Thematic Ana

# data[].attributes.body
Vikki is amazing. She is like a force of nature and has a super human ability to list so well and ask all the right questions.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The PhD Life Coach helps PhD students and academics stop feeling overwhelmed, overcome procrastination, build a healthy work-life balance, and achieve their goals.

# data[].attributes.body
This is a podcast that I have been following for years. Emma's episodes are all amazing

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It can be hard to know where to turn during a PhD, especially as universities can often feel like pressurised environments where it seems important to always been seen to be at your best.

Hosted by Dr Emma Brodzinski PhD (supervisor, examiner and once part-time PhD student), The PhD Life Raft focuses on sharing insights and experiences around some common issues like anxiety, procrastination, precarity, imposter syndrome, and work-life blend (spoiler alert - yes, it is OK to take time off at the weekend!) Emma talks to students, supervisors and experts in the field of wellbeing and mental health and share actionable tips and additional resources.

The PhD life raft sadly can't offer any quick fixes, but it does offer a space to discuss pressing issues; explore possible strategies; and provide sources of support for your journey.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It can be hard to know where to turn during a PhD, especially as universities can often feel like pressurised environments where it seems important to always been seen to be at your best.

# data[].attributes.body
I've signed up for this course, not got through it yet

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Dissertation Academy - Dr. Miguel Moital

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This website is using a security service to protect itself from online attacks. The action you just performed triggered the security solution. There are several actions that could trigger this block including submitting a certain word or phrase, a SQL command or malformed data.

# data[].attributes.headline
How to use Zotero with Scrivener Part 2 (Catherine Pope)  

# data[].attributes.subject
How to use Zotero with Scrivener Part 2 (Catherine Pope)  

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How to Use Zotero with Scrivener - Part 2

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Why Zotero 7 broke Scrivener integration and what to do about it. Honest review of alternatives including Quarto, Zettlr, and Obsidian, plus why the RTF/ODF plugin won't return.

# data[].attributes.headline
How to use Zotero with Scrivener Part 1 (Catherine Pope)

# data[].attributes.subject
How to use Zotero with Scrivener Part 1 (Catherine Pope)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Learn how to integrate Zotero and Scrivener using the RTF Scan method. Step-by-step guide to add citations and bibliographies to your academic writing workflow.

# data[].attributes.body
I came across this and am finding it helpful to dip in and out Tony Lynch English Language Teaching Centre University of Edinburgh © 2014

# data[].attributes.body
This is really helpful :)

'The Academic Phrasebank is a general resource for academic writers. It aims to provide you with examples of some of the phraseological ‘nuts and bolts’ of writing organised according to the main sections of a research paper or dissertation (see the top menu ). Other phrases are listed under the more general communicative functions of academic writing (see the menu on the left). The resource should be particularly useful for writers who need to report their research work.' This site was created by John Morley.

Academic Phrasebank is the Intellectual Property of the University of Manchester.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Academic Phrasebank is a general resource for academic writers. It aims to provide you with examples of some of the phraseological 'nuts and bolts' of writing organised according to the main sections of a research paper or dissertation (see the top menu ). Other phrases are listed under the more general communicative functions of academic writing (see the menu on the left). The resource should be particularly useful for writers who need to report their research work. The phrases, and the headings under which they are listed, can be used simply to assist you in thinking about the content and organisation of your own writing, or the phrases can be incorporated into your writing where this is appropriate. In most cases, a certain amount of creativity and adaptation will be necessary when a phrase is used. The items in the Academic Phrasebank are mostly content neutral and generic in nature; in using them, therefore, you are not stealing other people's ideas and this does not constitute plagiarism. For some of the entries, specific content words have been included for illustrative purposes, and these should be substituted when the phrases are used. The resource was designed primarily for academic and scientific writers who are non-native speakers of English. However, native speaker writers may still find much of the material helpful. In fact, recent data suggest that the majority of users are native speakers of English. More about Academic Phrasebank.

This site was created by John Morley.

Academic Phrasebank is the Intellectual Property of the University of Manchester.

Copyright © 2023 The University of Manchester

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Academic Phrasebank is a general resource for academic writers. It aims to provide you with examples of some of the phraseological 'nuts and bolts' of writing organised according to the main sections of a research paper or dissertation (see the top menu ).

# data[].attributes.headline
Doctoral Programme PhD in E-Research and Technology Enhanced Learning | Debs OER Journey

# data[].attributes.subject
Doctoral Programme PhD in E-Research and Technology Enhanced Learning | Debs OER Journey

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Doctoral Programme PhD in E-Research and Technology Enhanced Learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
One of my crazier ideas at the moment is that I would quite like to start a PhD somewhere around the area of Technology Enhanced Learning / Openness / Collaboration etc .. (I have to get through the last bit of my MA in Online and Distance Education first mind you ) so I'm...

# data[].attributes.headline
Doctorate in Education (EdD) | Debs OER Journey

# data[].attributes.subject
Doctorate in Education (EdD) | Debs OER Journey

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This is the next one I have been looking at although this one is an EdD so structurally different ... Its good old Open University of course though so I would be on familiar territory ... &...

# data[].attributes.headline
PHD Educational Research PHD Student Blog at Lancaster

# data[].attributes.subject
PHD Educational Research PHD Student Blog at Lancaster

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Lancaster's Educational Research Department (or EdRes for short) is one of the top six research-intensive Education departments in the UK (REF, 2014). Aswell as conducting world-leading research, the department boasts over 200 PhD students located across the world. Given that a large number of these students are studying at a distance this blog has been...

# data[].attributes.body
Dr Andy was really helpful in recommending the Lancaster One to me.
https://twitter.com/DrAndyHollyhead

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Padlet Sessions | Padlet's New Features in November

# data[].attributes.body
These should be hyper links that will open new 'break out room' style padlets so that you can jump to the right bit ( or just scroll across the various columns 🤗)

1. Advice in General

2. Blogs

3. Contribution to Knowledge

4. Coaching and Support

5. Data Analysis

6. Literature Review

7. Part Time PhDs

8. Planning and Organisation

9. Predatory Journals

10. Podcasts

11. Writing

12. You Tube

13. Viva Prep

14. Zotero

15. Z Weird Random Stuff

# data[].attributes.body
#phd_debbaffled

# data[].attributes.body
From the brilliant Ceceile Badenhorst

# data[].attributes.body
Braun and Clarke 2006

# data[].attributes.body
Nicole Kipar

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Coding qualitative data for categories and themes

# data[].attributes.body
Indiana University
https://libraries.indiana.edu/sites/default/files/Develop_a_Research_Question.pdf

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Yes, I know nearly everyone says you need to get organised - but that's because it really is true. Getting yourself well set up for the long haul will save time - and your sense of being in control - later. Attending to the organisational basics at the get go will provide the structure you will need from now on. So....

Get your office space together
If you are working from home, get the best chair you can afford. I have a reconditioned Aero which was quite expensive - but you can pick up Aeros on Ebay for not too much more than the crappy knock off versions. Butof course your chair doesn't have to be like mine there are lots of other decent chairs out there. But there are some awful ones too - so check the chair options out, particularly if you are prone to back/neck problems when you sit for any period of time. Or you might be one of those people who want a standing desk... if so, get it installed now!

Position your desk where you can get natural light - and air - if at all possible. I wrote my PhD with the Australian sun over my shoulder. My current desk is under a skylight which I can open when the English weather is acceptably non-rainy.

Get some bookshelves with room for the key texts you are going to accumulate over the coming period. Make a separate space for library books so you don't get them muddled up with those that you purchase.

Get the best computer you can afford - with a decent size screen. Depending on the nature of your research, you might also need a laptop, or you might be happy with just a laptop and dock. I think you can't beat writing at a desktop, but not everyone agrees. Make sure what you get allows good secure storage options. It's also good to have ready access to an cost-efficient printer.

You'll want to keep files, and some could even be hard copy, (yes still paper), so you may want to get a filing cabinet. I no longer use filing cabinets but I do find a plastic filing box useful on some occasions. And do load up with the kinds of stationery you like most....

If you are working in a university space try to make sure that you have these things too - a good computer, chair, printer and light and air. Ask to move rooms if you are given a cupboard and you can see something better is available!

Do whatever you need to make the space feel like the kind of place you can spend some hours each day.

Get yourself onto bibliographic software straight away
There's lots around to choose from. When I started my PhD, there was only Endnote and indeed, most universities still provide just Endnote. I like Endnote myself, but then I have been using it for a very long time. Endnote does pretty well all of the things that other newer software does, including importing libraries and storing pdfs. But it costs money and some people really don't get on with it. There is free software out there, as well as other low cost versions that do a good job. If you have time, take some of the options for a test drive to see what you prefer.

If you aren't familiar with this kind of software you really just need to know that that it functions like a set of electronic library cards - it's a data-base in which citation details, key words, and your notes about each publication - and often the publication itself - can be stored. The data base is searchable. Rather than physically rifling through piles of files and lists of publications, you simply enter a search term and get an instant response. The primary benefit of a bibliographic tool is that you cite as you go, and your reference list is automatically compiled at the same time, in whatever style you choose. At the end of a PhD, this citation and reference function will have saved weeks of your life.

My top tip is to ensure that you enter the details of publications in a consistent style - I have found that using sentence case works best, rather than title case - most versions of bibliographic software add in capitals efficiently, but seem to be less consistent when it comes to taking them out.

The key issue is of course not what type of software you use, but that fact that you use it, and use it straight away. It is a real drag going back to the things that you've read to enter the details post hoc. Get into the habit at the start of entering everything you read in your chosen system.

Finally, start a couple of 'keeping track' files...
The first file is for ideas about your research topic. As you get going in the PhD you'll feel the need to get down the thoughts that just pop into your mind, you might want to experiment with an idea or try out a few versions of your question - so put these notes into one place. maybe with sub-files if you're super-orderly. This ideas file might be in a note-book, or it might be on your computer. Whatever format, keeping these research 'working-out' ideas together is a good idea. t's easier to look back through your file to find an idea you once had, rather than go hunting around for that odd scrap of paper. You might also record in this file questions you have for your supervisor, and questions you might ask other PhDs.

The second file is for the key points that you get from your reading. This is not the notes of each individual publication, but is a record of the ways in which you are thinking about the literatures as a whole. How do you understand the origins of a particular idea? What appear to be some key debates in the field? Who seem to be the key figures? What things are you surprised about not finding? How do two sets of literature speak or not speak to each other? Building this 'helicopter' view of the literatures is crucial in the PhD, as it is the way in which you have to establish the position you will take in the field, and to the field.

You might also be the kind of person who diaries, so get your researcher journal going at the start - make one place where you can record your personal reflections on the process. It's good to start a diary-type journal at the PhD beginning, and not when you are having your first crisis. Capture the sense of excitement, fear and curiosity that marks the start the doctorate so you neither forget how you felt nor why you wanted to do this big piece of research in the first place.

Well, that's the beginning of my list of basics. Coming next, something on routines.... but perhaps you have other things that you think are essential organisational activities at the start of the PhD? Additional tips are very welcome.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Yes, I know nearly everyone says you need to get organised - but that's because it really is true. Getting yourself well set up for the long haul will save time - and your sense of being in control - later. Attending to the organisational basics at the get go will provide the structure you...

# data[].attributes.body
Ruth Wetherall

Also link to main article here https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1350507618799867

# data[].attributes.body
Thesis Whisperer

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Confused about this 'gap' in the literature that you are meant to find? This post is by Associate Professor Martin Davies; Principal Fellow in Higher Education in the Melbourne Graduate School of Education and a Senior Learning Advisor working with HDRs and staff at Federation University. He has written six books, including Study Skills for International Postgraduate Students(2011) and (with Ronald Barnett) Palgrave Handbook of Critical Thinking in Higher Education(2015). He completed double doctorates in Philosophy in 2002 and 1996. You can find out more about Martin on his website. You can read a review of one of Martin's books here or read a previous post on doing a second PhD

What distinguishes a PhD from an airport novel, a corporate annual report, a parliamentary submission, a comic, or a racy Mills and Boon romance novel? They are all writing genres, but they are all very different. The defining requirement of a PhD is finding, articulating, and filling a research gap (hereafter, The Gap). Without this, the purported thesis is a mere collection of words discussing a topic. And this is never enough for a PhD.

But how does The Gap fit into your overall thesis? What is its job? How does it relate to the thesis outline, the introduction, body and other key thesis components? Importantly, how do you find one? These questions are seldom answered to the satisfaction of newbie PhD students.

Finding, articulating and filling "The Gap" is critical to thesis writing and marks it as a distinct writing genre. You can get to The Gap by thinking of the process as a series of narrowing "conversations":

The general area is a particular conversation among academics in the field of study

The specific area is your focus on a particular part of the bigger conversation (a sub-set of the larger conversation)

The Gap is what you notice needs to be said in the conversation that has not been said before or that needs addressing in more detail

The research question/hypothesis/aim asks something to address The Gap in the conversation

The thesis statement is your proposed answer to this question posed to address The Gap in the conversation (or tentativeanswer if you are at Research Proposal stage).

To this we can add a Thesis Outline: a courtesy statement or statements to the reader of where your thesis is going and the shape and structure it is going to take. (You owe them this if they are going to plough through 80-100,000 words for you.)

All this can be viewed as an increasingly narrowing triangle moving from the general topic to the specific issue, thence to The Gap, as illustrated in the diagram below:

A common question might be how "The Gap" relates to the Literature Review of the thesis. Your literature review has to be effectively in two parts:

The first part-the Introduction-provides sufficient reviewing of the literature to establish that The Gap is significant and worth investigating (otherwise they won't read further). I call this the "Hook literature".

The second part-the Literature Review proper-elaborates on the literature to further expose The Gap addressed in the Introduction. This expands on the Hook literature in much more detail (i.e., at chapter length).

Here's a good example of the "Gap" in context. The gap is highlighted in bold and is followed by the thesis outline sentence and the thesis statement sentence (these appear in reverse order):

Prior research draws on the diffusion of innovation framework to explain organizations' innovation and innovation-related behaviour (see for instance, Rogers, 1983; 1995). This framework has received widespread validation using different types of innovations, and is referred to as the traditional framework of innovation diffusion (Gallivan, 2001). Attewell (1992) and Gallivan (2001) criticize the diffusion of innovation theory, arguing that it does not explain the pattern of the actual use of complex technology. This is because the main focus of this traditional framework is on factors which lead to the adoption of IT. Moreover, Attewell (1992) emphasizes the role of organizational learning and knowledge discovery to successfully implement and use complex technology. A few studies have recently begun to incorporate Attewell's suggestion to investigate IT assimilation as an organizational learning process (see, for instance, Fichman and Kemerer 1997; Boynton et al. 1994; Armstrong and Sambamurthy 1999). These studies draw mainly on Absorptive Capacity Theory.However, there are three main problems with these studies(1)They fail to meet oneof the main conditions of the absorptive capacity theory, that is the intensity of effort(2)They use a static perspective on organizational knowledge. Such an approach is criticized in the knowledge management literature (Nonaka 1994; Cook and Brown 1999). (3)They provide inconclusive evidence about the role of the top management team on IT assimilation. (OUTLINE) These three problems will be discussed in detail in the next section.This study will overcome these problems by explicitly considering knowledge creation mechanisms. It will be argued that knowledge creation mechanisms will allow for a real test of the absorptive capacity theory. These mechanisms will enable the dynamic process of organizational knowledge to be captured, and to clarify the role of the top management team in the organizational IT assimilation journey. (THESIS STATEMENT) The remainder of this thesis is organized as follows. Section two discusses the motivation for the study. Section three discusses the theory development and research model. Section four develops the hypotheses. Section five describes the research method, sample, operationalisation of the constructs and measurement of the variables, and data analysis strategy.

Naturally, the hardest part of thesis writing is finding The Gap. It can take years! Fortunately, some tricks and techniques can help.

One is the Tracing a Path technique. On a piece of A3 paper draw a series of boxes. Each box contains name(s) from the scholarly literature, e.g., Jones and Harris (2013); Jamerson (2012); Fredrickson (1999), and so on. Once you are done draw a considered red line through the boxes, as in the image below:

If your considered red line goes through the middle of one of the boxes, you are heavily drawing on that literature for your thesis. If it scrapes the edge of a box you are marginally focussing on it. If it bypasses a box entirely it is not central to your interests. Then group the literature. Discard the literature that is not relevant to what you are doing. Now work backwards to find what The Gaps are in the literature you have assembled. Choose one that is academically interesting. Repeat as often as required, and as your reading becomes more focussed.

Another approach is the Venn Diagram technique. Plot your interests as a series of concentric intersecting circles as show below. The circles ideally represent narrowly-focussed areas of study (not broad fields like "Education"). Keep doing this until you know where you project intersects with the literature on the various areas indicated by each circle. Use as many circles as you need. (I owe these examples to Natalie Bowker from Massey University.) You should be able to put a cross where you are working, and this will form the major literature for your thesis, and the focus for your Gap-finding activities. See the diagram below:

Another technique is the Page 98 Paper technique (so described as it is on this page of Rowena Murray's 2002 book: How to Write a Thesis). The idea here to write a cryptic one-pager encompassing all of the following elements

1. The general topic is ... (25 words)

2. My research question is ... (50 words)

3. Researchers who have looked at this subject are ... (50 words)

4. They argue that ... (25 words)

5. Smith argues that ... (25 words)

6. Brown argues that ... (25 words)

7. Debates centre on the issue of ... (25 words)

8. There is still work to be done on ...(25 words)

9. My research is closest to that of X in that ... (50 words)

10. My contribution will be that ... (50 words)

The Gap is [8] of course, but this can't be understood independently of surrounding context. The strategy of the Page 98 Paper is that colleagues, supervisors and significant others are more likely to read a thesis in miniature than a weighty chuck of a chapter. But it is also useful for Gap-finding as it forces you to find one.

The Table of Contents Technique requires a bit of positive imagery. (It's best tried with a glass of your favourite tipple.)

Imagine a few years from now when your thesis is done and dusted. (You can be early in the first year of your candidature for this technique to work as long as you have done a bit of reading.) Now imagine your thesis has been through the examination process. You did well. The reports are outstanding. Now, imagine how the Table of Contents looks on this fine piece of work.Write it down just as you imagine it complete with major parts, sections and sub-sections (include sub-sub-sections if you like-within reason).

Now work backwards and establish where The Gap is amongst all the assembled headings and sub-headings in this highly structured masterpiece of scholarship. There must be one or it would not hang together! Do this as often as required, and at minimum every six months or so while you are writing your thesis. (I established my final Table of Contents on the island of Crete whilst on a doctoral travelling junket. I took a dip in the Med just to celebrate.)

Variation: Write down all your headings and sub-headings on small cards. Shuffle the cards. Now, put the cards in a natural order as though you were explaining their arrangement to an uninformed friend. What's The Gap you are filling? Again, there must be one for this order to make sense.
Thanks for your hard won insights Martin (there's not many people with two PhDs - for good reason!). How about you - was the process of finding the Gap confusing? Does it still elude you? Interested to hear your thoughts in the comments. Related Posts 5 ways to tame the literature dragon Wormhole literature How to become a literature searching Ninja Love the Thesis whisperer and want it to continue? Consider becoming a $1 a month Patreon and get special, Patreon only, extra Thesiswhisperer content every two weeks!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Confused about this 'gap' in the literature that you are meant to find? This post is by Associate Professor Martin Davies; Principal Fellow in Higher Education in the Melbourne Graduate School of Education and a Senior Learning Advisor working with HDRs and staff at Federation University.

# data[].attributes.body
The Thesis Whisperer

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
We often talk about 'searching the literature' - but how do you actually do it?

Literature searches are one of those skills that we assume students already have when they get into a PhD. As a consequence we rarely make time to explicitly teach the skills, so it's probably not surprising that I meet many students who feel like they aren't doing it 'right'. Many of these confused students are too afraid to ask for help from their supervisor. I think the fear comes from the feeling that you should know, even if you have never been properly taught.

This fear, by the way, is a good example of the effects of what my friend Dr Mary-Helen Ward would call the 'hidden curriculum' of the PhD. The hidden curriculum is created by the environment in which you are located and instills you with the norms and values of your academic culture. Think about it: admitting incompetence is a loss of face and undermines your academic authority with your peers. Hence the fear of admitting you might not really know how to search the literature thoroughly or efficiently.

Lucky for those of you who are feeling this fear, there's plenty of good, free advice about how to start searching the literature on the internet and many university libraries offer guides and courses. The research training team at ANU curate these resources on social media have compiled a database with literally thousands of useful sites. These resources will get you off to a good start, but you can quickly find yourself stuck in mud. This is because most of this advice is in the form of context free lists of 'dos and don'ts' which are hard to operationalise in practice.

For instance, we all know that the first step in searching the literature is to type keywords into a database and get results, but how do you generate the keywords in the first place? Do you just ... guess? Well - yes. Sort of. As you have probably already found out, guessing will only get you so far. You have to be systemmatic about generating keywords - and creative at the same time. Not an easy ask. In fact, searching the literature involves a surprisingly sophisticated set of thought processes that take a long time to learn.

I'm going to outline one method of being systemmatically creative about how you search the literature. This is the way I do it, but there are probably as many ways as there are academics and I'll be interested in what advice you might have to share in the comments.

If you can, start with your research concerns and questions. The example I'm going to use here is from a recent teaching trip to Indonesia and is documented in this slide deck. My research question is:

To what extent do safety concerns affect women's transportation choices in large cities like Jakata?

Let's use a spider diagram to generate some sub-questions and broaden our search. Sub-questions are questions that would have to be answered as part of answering the larger question:

You might have noticed I work in threes when I use a spider diagram. This is a way of creating hierarchy and limiting the scope, so the task doesn't become unmanageable. I've documented more about how to use this diagramming process in a downloadable cheat sheet here).

Let's tackle one of the sub-questions. In the top right bubble is the question "How do women make choices about commuting in other large cities?". This is where I have to make my first educated guess. If the articles I was looking for were in a library, what would the label on the shelf say? Here's what I came up with:

Now I have three topic areas: 'commuting in large cities', 'women and transportation' and 'commuting in small cities'. Each of these topic descriptions has a different search purpose:

'Commuting in large cities' is what I call a background topic. If I type this in I'm likely to find literature I need to know to appear credible to other academics researching in this area. 'Women and Transportation' is an obvious topic. If I type these keywords in I will find researchers working in my immediate neighbourhood.

The final topic, 'Commuting in small cities', is what I call the going fishing topic. By deliberately inverting my search I might find something interesting - I'm not sure what yet. This is an example of deliberate systemmatic creativity in action.

I'm going to demonstrate using the Google scholar because everyone reading this blog will have access to that. Here's what happens when I type in the obvious topic:

All the hits are relevant, as you might expect, but the last hit on the page looks most interesting "En-gendering effective planning: spatial mismatch, low income women and transportation policy". I've run a highlighter over the information Google gives me - most important is the number of citations. The number is quite high, which tells me people seem to have found the article useful.

Citation searches are one of the best ways of assessing the impact of a piece of literature in your area. Generally the more citations, the bigger the impact - but bear in mind you can be highly cited because everyone hates your work or because of other poor academic practices. But it's a good enough reason as any to have a closer look:

Paydirt! All the articles on the page seem useful to my imaginary project. I could keep looking, using the citations to guide me, but let's go fishing now. Here's what happens when I type in 'commuting in small cities' - the opposite of what I am studying:

Strangely, the first hit looks pretty promising - the idea of 'wasteful commuting' is probably useful for my background reading. But let's bookmark it and have a look further down the list. When you go fishing you have to be patient. On the second page I spot something even more interesting:

'The economics of urban sprawl' looks has a fair number of citations. Let's take a closer look, who has cited this paper?

Third hit down is a literature review. A great find - hopefully this paper will contain a carefully curated list of literature and critical commentary. Why does searching for the opposite sometimes help us find exactly what we need? I'm not sure, but it never fails to turn up something interesting. Give it a try and see.

I could say so much more about searching the literature, but now I'm interested in what you think. Do you use any of the techniques I've described above, or do you have others to share? I'd be interested to hear about them in the comments.
Related posts Taming the literature dragon Wormhole literature

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How to become a literature searching ninja

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We often talk about 'searching the literature' - but how do you actually do it? Literature searches are one of those skills that we assume students already have when they get into a PhD. As a consequence we rarely make time to explicitly teach the skills, so it's probably not surprising that I meet many...

# data[].attributes.body
The Thesis Whisperer

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The literature review is the thesis component which gives you the most scope to demonstrate your mad skills of scholarly warfare. Being able to write a killer literature review is important because it 'sells' your academic competence to examiners and other readers.

The literature review receives a lot of attention in the how-to-do-a-PhD books. The key point they all make is that the lit review must be more than a list of things you read - it has to have an argument and a point of view. There's no shortage of good advice out there, such as this excellent list of 'literature moves' out of my favourite book on PhD writing, 'Helping doctoral students to write':

1) sketch out the nature of the field relevant to the inquiry - including history if relevant and
2) identity major debates and define terms, in order to
3) establish which studies, ideas and/or methods are most pertinent to your study, and
4) locate gaps in the field, in order to
5) create a warrant for the study in question, and
6) identify the contribution the study might make

But there's a gap between this kind of style advice and the actual mechanics of analysing and organising the raw material of your literature review. I'm talking about getting to grips with all those journal articles people. You have rather a lot of them don't you? How are you going to 'identity major debates' and decide which are the 'right' studies to draw on in all that mess?

As I see it, there's two basic techniques for developing a literature review from a given set of references. You must work at forming critical judgment on the literature by reading it, at the same time as you work on finding 'patterns' in the mess of information. It's important to realise that these patterns are not 'real' - you make them by sorting and presenting the information in particular ways. This sorting process makes the raw information legible so that you can start to write an argument from it.

This is more than a filing problem. If you are anything like me you have a massive pile of journal articles on your desk. The neat freaks amongst you will have them all printed out and filed in alphabetized binders. Some of the more technical minded amongst you will probably be using something like Mendeley or even - ahem - Endnote . These tools help you find stuff when you want it, but they don't do the intellectual heavy lifting for you.

There's many different techniques you can use to massage meaning out of your information mess, but there's only room here for one. It comes from the seminal book 'Information Anxiety' by Richard Saul Wurzman. Yes, you heard right - Wurzman is the creator of the TED talks. Good pedigree yes?

Wurzman argues that there only 5 ways to organise information, which he calls LATCH:

These organising principles can be used to perform simple operations on the material you have. Here's some ideas:
1) Location
All scholars are 'located' somehow. Sometimes geography matters - think of the famous 'Chicago school' in social science. But we can think about location in more abstract ways - such as a 'location' of a scholar within a discipline. Some scholars will be 'fringe' and others will be 'main actors'; some people will be 'theoretical' and others will be 'practical'; some people will care about history, others will not - and so on.

Make a table in word and arrange the authors according to different 'locations'. This is a good way of choosing which authors you can use to illustrate the dimensions of each debate. It's easy to compare and contrast their ideas with each other because you have identified oppositions.
2) Alphabet
Of course alphabet is essential to organising your bibliography! I can't think of another good use for alphabetical in a literature review, so I'll pass over this one for my favourite:
3) Time
So simple - yet so genius. Take all the references and lie them on the floor in order of their publishing date from left to right (or whichever way your culture prefers to do it). Skim read them all again in order - what do you notice?

Fashions will have come and gone; ideas will have grown and died. This is a really good way of interrogating underlying assumptions in a body of literature and how they have developed. Indeed you may discover that 'facts' presented by subsequent authors are merely 'ideas' which have grown pretensions by being repeated by subsequent authors, who haven't done due diligence like you have.
4) Category
I call this the 'colour by numbers' technique and use it often as a quick and dirty method of squeezing sense out of the literature. Basically you can develop categories about almost any idea or theme you read about. A good way to come up with themes is to visualise them in a spider diagram. Once you have identified the categories they can act as subheadings in your literature chapter. Simply make a list of which authors fit in which categories; don't worry if some of them occupy multiple categories - they will just need mention them more than once!
5) Hierarchy
I find this organisational principle is really a 'meta' device - a way of criticising information you have already sorted using one of the other methods, particularly the category method. You make a hierarchy by exerting critical judgment on each of your categories: is one school of thought or way of doing things described in the literature superior to the others? Is one idea more practical and useful than another idea - or more theoretically interesting and elegant? Why? If you have organised your information according to location and identified oppositions, you can use hierarchies to identify which side you are on in the various debates. As you write, you weave in the critical stance you have developed - but that's a topic for another time.

So that's a grab bag of techniques to tame your literature dragon - at the very least they give you something to do when you are stuck!
Related posts Turn your notes into writing with the Cornell Method Your thesis is the map, not the journey Love the Thesis whisperer and want it to continue? Consider becoming a $1 a month Patreon and get special, Patreon only, extra Thesiswhisperer content every two weeks!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The literature review is the thesis component which gives you the most scope to demonstrate your mad skills of scholarly warfare. Being able to write a killer literature review is important because it 'sells' your academic competence to examiners and other readers. The literature review receives a lot of attention in the how-to-do-a-PhD books.

# data[].attributes.body
The Thesis Whisperer

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
I have a friend, let's call her Jenny.

Jenny is about six months into her degree and just beginning to discover the true extent of the literature which might be relevant to her topic, by which I mean she's completely freaking out.

Jenny 's had a good start to her literature review. She initially read things her supervisor suggested and then went off exploring, using the references in those papers as a stating point. She met with her subject librarian who taught her about databases and how to use Google Scholar properly (not everything is in there, just so you know). The librarian taught her how keywords work and how to do citation searches. With these new mad skills of library Jenny discovered a vast amount of stuff, which, although it was interesting, seemed only peripherally related to her topic.

She discussed ideas she had read about with her supervisors and some of her peers. She wrote a bit, then read some more. Under the influence of the literature, her ideas about her thesis changed. She started to recognise the same names started appearing in the bibliographies and understand how the scholars were linked together in skeins of thought. Being a social type of person she did a bit of academic networking and started to know, socially, some of the people who wrote those papers. This made her feel more confident. Comfortable even. Part of a community.

Until she downloaded THAT paper.

She didn't realise how important the paper was at first. She merely downloaded it as part of a conference proceeding, read it and then tucked it away in her database under the mental tag: 'interesting, but not relevant'. There it might have stayed, unloved, if she had not had her paper proposal accepted at the next iteration of that conference. Being the diligent type of student, Jenny dug out the proceedings again to get a feel for the length and tone of the papers.

So it wasn't until the second read through that she realised that it was THAT paper.

You see - suddenly that paper spoke to her. That paper, on the second read, seemed to touch on every idea that she had thought about so far, but - you know - in a better way. It took her half formed ideas and wrapped beautiful words around them. Although it didn't precisely scoop her thesis topic, that paper showed her that she had only been reading in the shallow end of the pool.

The paper had a bibliography; full of papers that she had not read. This surprised Jenny. She had thought she was on top of the main players in her field. So she read some of the referenced papers and, as it turns out, all of them were interesting, relevant - even important. She started to see THAT paper as a godsend. It was, if you like, a set of goggles she could use to swim in the deep end of the pool.

Then an uncomfortable thought intruded.

What might have happened if she had not bothered to read that paper twice?

What if she had carried on, without knowing that all this other literature existed? What might her examiners - who surely would have read all those papers - have thought of her? They would think she was a bad scholar! They would have failed her!

Hence the phonecall to me (I'm a useful friend to have when you are doing a PhD as you can imagine). I tried to tell Jenny that she was borrowing trouble. She had now read the paper. All those terrible things wouldn't happen. But she was far from reassured. Why did she not see the importance the first time she read it? How had she missed all this literature it pointed to? It was clear to me that her faith in her new mad skills of library was deeply shaken.

So I promised this post.

You see, the feelings Jenny was experiencing are completely normal. In fact, realising you have just missed a piece of important literature is number four in the Thesis Whisperer's top five #phdemotions. In case you were wondering, here is the list:

1. Elation when you realise you know more than your supervisor about your topic and you feel brave enough to argue about it.

2. Fear of being 'found out' as fraud, not really knowing enough/being smart enough to be Phd student.

3. Unexpected admiration of your own writing.

4. The "I'm a genius! Why hasn't anybody thought to do that before?" moment before people point out the obscure paper you've not read.

5. Misplaced smugness after photocopying/downloading loads of stuff but not actually reading it.

So why didn't Jenny see how important this paper was the first time she read it? Answer: sometimes you can't see the gorillas.
There's a difference, some artists contend, between looking and seeing. Looking involves taking in a scene with your eyes, seeing involves making meaning from it with your brain. The key to making meaning is relevance. It's surprisingly easy to miss the relevance of other people's work, partly, perhaps, because of how we are wired to look at stuff in the first place.

There's a famous experiment with a Gorilla and basketball players which is a good demonstration of how our processes of looking. When participants were asked to watch a video and count the number of passes basketball players were making, most failed to notice a guy wearing a gorilla suit wandering through the scene, even when he stopped to beat his chest. When you watch the video knowing the gorilla is there it is almost impossible to believe that people could miss him. But those people were looking at the ball being passed between players and paying attention to the number of times this happened, they were not looking for gorillas. They were not primed to look for a gorilla, so they literally did not see it.

I suspect this is what happened to Jenny on the first reading. She hadn't yet read enough to know what she should be looking for. She wasn't yet primed and so couldn't see what she needed to see. Just as you can't understand a whole conversation from two lines of dialogue, academic papers rarely make sense in isolation. Re-reading is an important part of the process. If you don't see the point the first, second or even third read, you have not made a mistake - you just haven't seen gorillas yet. Or there may be no gorillas to be seen. Getting to know literature is like watching a picture come into focus. Be patient, just keep reading.
What would have happened if Jenny had not re-found this paper 'by accident' Answer: there are no accidents.
The first thing to realise is that she didn't re-discover this paper by 'accident' at all. I contend that if Jenny hadn't gone looking for that conference proceedings for another reason, she still would have re-discovered the paper anyway, probably via a citation. I routinely download articles without realising I already have them until my database tells me. I'm experienced enough to realise this is not because I have made an error; this is just what happens sometimes. I can't keep everything I have ever read in my head. I may not have recognised the importance the first time around and therefore forgotten about it. Procedures are important for this reason. So long as Jenny kept on doing exactly what she was doing - reading, writing, thinking, talking - she would eventually have found, if not everything, enough of it to convince the examiners that she is a competent scholar.
How had Jenny 'missed' all that other literature? Answer: that paper was a piece of wormhole literature.
One of my favourite TV shows is Stargate SG1, mostly because of the way Col Samantha Carter kicks ass the wormhole itself. It's a fantastic magic device that catapults our heroes to another world, in seconds. THAT paper was a research wormhole; it catapulted Jenny into a whole new area of potentially relevant literature. Again I say, if she kept doing what she was doing, she would have found all those papers - eventually. But sometimes, even travelling at light speed, it can take a long time to get somewhere. That paper helped Jenny, briefly, bend the laws of research physics for a moment - and that's got to be a good thing.

Have you had an experience similar to Jenny's? Do you have any suggestions for making sure that you are getting everything you need out of the literature?
Relevant Posts 5 ways to tame the literature dragon The Top five #phdemotions

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
I have a friend, let's call her Jenny. Jenny is about six months into her degree and just beginning to discover the true extent of the literature which might be relevant to her topic. By which I mean - she's completely and utterly freaking out. At the start of her journey Jenny read a few...

# data[].attributes.body
https://openknowledgemaps.org/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Custom integrations

Would you like to complement your services with our AI-based discovery tools? Using our Custom Services, organisations are able to embed Open Knowledge Maps components in their own discovery systems.

Explore live case studies

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Open Knowledge Maps - Your guide to scientific knowledge

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Start your literature search here: get a visual overview of a research topic, find relevant papers, and identify important concepts.

# data[].attributes.body
http://www.raulpacheco.org/resources/literature-reviews/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
While literature reviews are part of just about every single scholarly manuscript, I thought I'd put together a collection of blog posts that I have been writing to teach my students how to undertake a literature review. This page links all the posts associated with how to write a solid literature review, from searching for information, to assembling a mind map.

How to map a new body of literature or a new field of scholarship.

My students and research assistants often come to me and ask me " how do I systematically delve into a field that is not even mine" or " how do I go about learning about an entire new body of works that I have not looked at before?" This blog post attempts to answer these questions by offering a systematic process of mapping (based on a combo of AIC Content Extraction + Conceptual Synthesis Excel Dump and mind-mapping techniques).
6 questions and answers on depth and breadth of literature reviews
This post compiles six questions I often get asked (such as "how many sources should my literature review have?" and "when should I start writing?") when undertaking a literature review.
How to write an annotated bibliography
As I have written before, there are differences between literature reviews, banks of rhetorical precis, conceptual synthesis matrices and annotated bibliographies. Of these, the annotated bibliography is one of the most underrated scholarly outputs. It helps the reader get a lay of the land of which scholarly works are available out there, and it also enables a researcher to veer into specific pathways of research. This post describes how I write my annotated bibliographies, as well as a few examples.
Writing a literature review assignment (for students, RA) and providing guidance on how to conduct a LR (for instructors)
In this blog post, I explain the importance that supervisors' guidance on how to write a literature review has, and I showcase a few ways in which a LR can be conducted, with an example of my interactions with one of my doctoral students.

Moving from Having Read All The Things to Writing Paragraphs of Your Literature Review

In this blog post, I walk through the reading, scribbling, highlighting, note-taking, systematizing, mind-mapping of the literature and then, through the process of writing paragraphs that can be used in a literature review.
What are the differences between banks of rhetorical precis, conceptual synthesis matrices, annotated bibliographies and literature reviews?
When doing research, we read a lot of material. I use a systematic approach to constructing banks of rhetorical precis, to building worksheets with a conceptual synthesis, to creating an annotated bibliography, and all these are intermediate steps to constructing a literature review. This post of mine offers a few suggestions on how to go about creating an annotated bibliography, writing a literature review, and using project products such as banks of rhetorical precis and databases of citations to improve your research pipeline production.
Making your research "dialogue" with other scholars' in your literature review
This blog post shows how we can situate our work within the broader landscape of scholarly literatures.
Writing a literature review based on the Cross-Reference column of the Conceptual Synthesis Excel Dump (CSED)
This post explains how we can use one of the key columns in my Conceptual Synthesis Excel Dump (CSED) spreadsheet method, the Cross-Reference one, to write the literature review section of a paper.

From review of the literature to mind map of the field
In this blog post, I show how one can, from a published literature review, create a mind-map of a field of study. This is the reverse process of the one I outline on this blog post ( going from readings to mind map to full paragraphs of the literature review).

How to write synthetic notes of readings (books, journal articles, reports, book chapters)

This post explains how I write my own synthetic notes. These notes are more detailed than a rhetorical precis, but less extensive than a memorandum. One can generate an annotated bibliography by collecting and systematizing these synthetic notes into a single document.
How to undertake a literature review
Once you know how to write an annotated bibliography, how to summarize journal articles, books and book chapters, you can now easily turn to creating full-fledged literature reviews. Since the literature review is a critical document that not only lists scholarly works but also makes judgments about their relevance, it's an important scholarly product, and one that students and faculty need to know how to do. In this post, I share my own process for doing a literature review.
Mind-mapping as a strategic research and teaching tool
I use mind maps as tools to create a broad overview of a field of research, or to map ways in which my thinking should be going, or to create new research projects, or also to describe the different ways in which themes and topics are interconnected. This post describes how I use mind-mapping with a detailed description of MindJet's MindManager 2017 (which is a paid, proprietary mind-mapping tool).

How to write a systematic review, a scoping review, a meta-analysis

While I write about the mechanics of writing a literature review, I don't really write about systematic, scoping or narrative reviews, or meta-analyses. BUT in this blog post I link to resources I found and articles that explain how to write those types of reviews.
Writing effective memorandums

One of the biggest challenges I have found in my career is teaching my students how to assemble information and preserve it in a way that makes sense for their own purposes. One of the most powerful tools to synthesize data and information is the memorandum. In this post I explain how I write my own memorandums, linking to a chapter on memos and diagrams from a well-known qualitative research methods textbook.
Using the rhetorical precis for literature reviews and conceptual syntheses
I am more of a fan of long-form, detailed, extensive memoranda when doing research or conducting a literature review. Nevertheless, I wanted to find out how do other professors teach the rhetorical precis (a much shorter version of a memo). The rhetorical precis allows me to do precisely this.

How to do a literature review: Citation tracing, concept saturation and results' mind-mapping

One of the first questions my students ask me is "Professor, how do I go about finding scholarly articles that might be useful for my literature review?" This blog post intends to answer this question. In the blog post, I focus on the technique of finding relevant citations (citation tracing), making sure your literature review search is extensive enough (concept saturation) and mapping the results to make sense of how they relate to each other (results mind-mapping).

Forward citation tracing and backward citation tracing: Searching through the literature.

I wrote this blog post to complement the one on citation tracing, concept saturation and mind-mapping of results, and here I explain how to do forward and backward citation tracing.
My #AcWri Strategies: Write reflective memos
Touted by some scholars as a "game changer", this method allows you to synthesize ideas from a journal article, a book, a book chapter, by summarizing and including specific quotes that you can cite. Creating memorandums and storing them in your computer's hard drive or on the cloud (e.g. on Evernote) allows you to have text ready that you can swiftly insert into your papers' literature review (or in the Excel synthetic dump described below).
Synthesizing different bodies of work in your literature review: The conceptual synthesis Excel dump technique
This is a method I've been using for many years to assemble my literature review. What I do in this technique is write a memorandum for each book, article, book chapter I read, and then dump the contents into an Excel worksheet. This method allows me to have specific quotes handy and at the ready, and to see when I haven't reached sufficient concept saturation.
My own workflow: Strategically reading and summarizing the literature
One of the first questions I get when my students need to write a literature review is - how do I make the time to Read All The Things? They need to balance coursework, labwork, research, fieldwork, etc. While I loved doing my comprehensive exams when I was doing my PhD because I had the time to read everything, as a professor on the tenure-track, it's hard for me to block enough time to read. So what I do now is I read more strategically. Depending on the work I am doing, I choose what to read and to which depth. I don't attempt to read everything, but I triage what I read and assess what needs much more time to process and comprehend and what can be quickly skimmed. In this post I explain my process.
Highlighting and note-taking on journal articles, book chapters and books as a mode of engagement
When doing a literature review, or writing a paper, you'll probably need to summarize articles, books, and book chapters. I usually engage with content by highlightingn and scribbling on the margins. This post explains my rationale.
Color-coding your highlighting when reading articles and book chapters

Related to the previous post, I use different colors of highlighters to mean different ideas and degrees of relevancy. This post explains my color coding.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
Writing a literature review assignment (and for instructors: providing guidance) - Raul Pacheco-Vega, PhD

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
The rhetorical precis, with an example - colourless green ideas

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
A eading techniques for undergraduate students' primer: Learn how to write arguments first, then how to read in depth, then how to skim - Raul Pacheco-Vega, PhD

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
While literature reviews are part of just about every single scholarly manuscript, I thought I'd

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
One of the first questions I get asked on Twitter (I'm at @raulpacheco) is: " how do I get started on X? " It's always hard because to be perfectly honest, a lot of things I don't even realize how I got started, I just know that I now know how to do them. And because I actually do know how to do them, I share openly with the world. Mapping new fields of scholarship is something nobody taught me how to do, but I've developed a strategy throughout the years that works for me, and it may work for you too.

The process I use to map a new field of scholarship looks something like this:

1. Decide on the topic of interest.

2. Ask trusted advisors for suggestions of key citations and/or authors.

3. Run a citation tracing process on the above-mentioned cites and authors.

4. Run a Google Search for top-cited papers in the field.

5. From Steps 3 and 4, create a mind map of key authors and topics.

6. Choose 3-7 articles for the topic, and 3-5 for each sub-topic.

7. Read (or if under extreme time pressure, apply AIC Content Extraction and Conceptual Synthesis Excel Dump method) to create a visual and analytical map of the field.

8. Expand the mind-map as necessary and continue searching and reading/annotating/highlighting/scribbling until I reach conceptual saturation.

Now, let's go through step by step:

1. Decide on the topic of interest.

Here, I knew I wanted to do a paper on informal water vending.
2. Ask trusted advisors for suggestions of key citations and/or authors.

Try Debbie cheng, katherine furlong, Michelle kooy, Katie Meehan 🙂

- Nikhil Anand (@liquidperson) January 18, 2018

@raulpacheco I am sure you have seen the special issue of Water Alternatives on the theme of informality in the water sector?! https://t.co/AWnbhGfBsS

- Margreet Zwarteveen (@mzwarteveen) January 24, 2018

3. Run a citation tracing process on the above-mentioned cites and authors.

I already knew that Quentin Grafton had done work on the Murray-Darling basin and on formalized water markets, so I searched for him and did a citation tracing process.
4. Run a Google Search for top-cited papers in the field.

For example, on the topic of informality in water provision, if we use a simplistic divide (formal and informal, which @maliniranga 2018 demonstrates is not as simple, and it's actually a continuum, but let's assume binary divide) then I need key citations on formal water markets pic.twitter.com/ak38JFoDOo

- Dr Raul Pacheco-Vega (@raulpacheco) January 27, 2018

I would also add that you can run a Google Scholar Search on the authors you KNOW work in the field too.

One reason why I really try to read broadly is that even if I have never worked in a field, I know a few key authors from previous readings. I had already read @dustingarrick 's book on water markets in the Murray-Darling basin, so I Google Searched for his works on formal ones. pic.twitter.com/t82pPx5fLM

- Dr Raul Pacheco-Vega (@raulpacheco) January 27, 2018

I never worked on formal tradable water rights, but @dustingarrick has, so his papers will be of help for me as I map out the formal and informal water markets field. Now, on to informal markets. GS search yields @Michelle_Kooy and @maliniranga @Farhana_H2O pic.twitter.com/JCHeneTsfO

- Dr Raul Pacheco-Vega (@raulpacheco) January 27, 2018

5. From Steps 3 and 4, create a mind map of key authors and topics.

This is where asking authors, or meeting them at conferences helps. I know several of the authors I have mentioned very well, including Michelle Kooy (who like me did her PhD at UBC), Malini Ranganathan, etc.

So now I have @paulahanasz @micheleleemoore @GraftonQuentin @dustingarrick 's contributions all mapped in a mind map of water markets pic.twitter.com/aIxrHyXj3F

- Dr Raul Pacheco-Vega (@raulpacheco) January 27, 2018

6. Choose 3-7 articles for the topic, and 3-5 for each sub-topic

Here, I knew I needed to read Michelle Kooy, Amber Wutich, Andrea Marston (I've already read them, but again, let's assume I haven't - my mind-map and Conceptual Synthesis Excel Dump both show I would need to read them in order to get a grasp on the field of water and informality)

Then I would use @geographiti (Andrea Marston) and @AWutich on Bolivia (Cochabamba). That's 3 rows in the Excel dump. Then @maliniranga

- Dr Raul Pacheco-Vega (@raulpacheco) January 25, 2018

7. Read (or if under extreme time pressure, apply AIC Content Extraction and Conceptual Synthesis Excel Dump method) to create a visual and analytical map of the field.

This is a snapshot of my Conceptual Synthesis Excel Dump for water informality - as you can see, I have mapped out case studies, theoretical overviews, etc. This exercise allows me to gain insight into who has written about the topic, covering which cases, what lessons learned. pic.twitter.com/uRM14AZOVi

- Dr Raul Pacheco-Vega (@raulpacheco) January 26, 2018

So, let's imagine I haven't read these works... if I only have time for ONE paper, I can read one a day, and within two weeks, I can more or less get a broad overview of who has studied water informality, and which cases they have examined, roughly. There will still be gaps.

- Dr Raul Pacheco-Vega (@raulpacheco) January 26, 2018

8. Expand the mind-map as necessary and continue searching and reading/annotating/highlighting/scribbling until reaching conceptual saturation.
While I have a good mind-map of what the field of water informality and the continuum/spectrum/divide of formal and informal water markets looks like, I still need to read more to reach conceptual saturation. So, I go back to Step 1 in this process until I've found the right number of citations ( I've written on this topic before, i.e. when to stop reading and how to decide when you have got enough sources and you've read enough).

My entire set of posts on Literature Reviews can be found here if you need to search for a specific technique I've mentioned in this blog post.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
One of the first questions I get asked on Twitter (I'm at @raulpacheco) is: " how do I get started on X? " It's always hard because to be perfectly honest, a lot of things I don't even realize how I got started, I just know that I now know how to do them.

# data[].attributes.body
Whats a PHD Contribution

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
You hear the term contribution almost as soon as you enrol in the PhD. It's something you wrestle with as you write your research proposal - you need to convince your chosen institution that your research will make a contribution. Funders are particularly keen to hear about contribution too, is their scholarship money going to produce one, they wonder. And of course, you continue to worry about contribution. For instance, during your field work. Contribution - do I have one here? What if I don't? And then when you finally get to thesis writing, your supervisor tells you have to know your contribution, anticipate it in the introduction and make the big claim for it in the conclusion.

But what is 'a contribution'?

Expressed in plain language, examiners see a contribution as something interesting, something that brings a new perspective, something that teaches them and offers them something they haven't considered before.

Examiners usually expect the contribution to be spelled out for them. They want to see, written explicitly in the thesis text, that the research...

uses a conventional research design and/or method to produce results which add to, challenge or modify the extant literatures - so the writer says my research adds to what is known about x, specifically... it raises questions about the previously held view that... it suggests that the usual formulation of y is problematic because...

uses a conventional research method and/or design to arrive at a new research agenda, so the writer says - this study reveals x for the first time, suggests that research into x is urgently needed because ...

replicates a previous study, testing out its hypothesis or method - so the writer says this study sought to test whether... and ...

takes an existing research approach into a new field - for example an ethnography somewhere new, or about something different. The writer's claim is then this the first ethnographic study of... it shows...

combines conceptual or theoretical resources in a new or novel way. This is often the claim of interdisciplinary research - the writer says the study brings together (discipline) concepts of x, (discipline) concepts of y and (discipline) concepts of z in order to shed new light on... the approach shows....

develops a new research tool - perhaps the researcher has modified an existing instrument, or developed a new approach altogether. So the writer claims - this study uses .... which allows... to... . This demonstrates...

applies an existing social theory in a new or novel way - the writer says this study brings x's theory of y to a new area, namely ..... in order to....

Once you're able to state your particular variation of the above clearly - and it takes quite a bit of practice and chutzpah to do so - you can confidently approach your written conclusion. You can show how your research design and results have led to you making your claim. (Taking part in events like Petcha Kucha and the Three Minute Thesis are great ways to help you to get your claim sorted, turned into to a clear and succinct statement.)

If you have a sorted-out claim-to-contribution you will be able to answer what is often the first question in a viva... the-tell-us-in-a-few-minutes-about-your-research. Stating your contribution at the beginning of the viva is a great start because those first few minutes often set the tone for the rest of the viva. If you can confidently state what you contribute, how and why it's important, then the examiners will know that you know what you are talking about.

About pat thomson

Pat Thomson is Professor of Education in the School of Education, The University of Nottingham, UK

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged contribution, Pat Thomson, research, thesis. Bookmark the permalink.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
You hear the term contribution almost as soon as you enrol in the PhD. It's something you wrestle with as you write your research proposal - you need to convince your chosen institution that your research will make a contribution. Funders are particularly keen to hear about contribution too, is their scholarship money going to...

# data[].attributes.headline
Beall's List Potential Predatory Journals 

# data[].attributes.subject
Beall's List Potential Predatory Journals 

# data[].attributes.body
https://beallslist.net/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Beall’s List – of Potential Predatory Journals and Publishers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Instructions: first, find the journal’s publisher – it is usually written at the bottom of the journal’s webpage or in the “About” section. Then simply enter the publisher’s name or its URL in the search box above. If the journal does not have a publisher use the Standalone Journals list.All journals published by a predatory publisher are potentially predatory unless stated otherwise.

# data[].attributes.body
Another one from the brilliant Patter blog - this time from Dr Justin Field

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This is a guest post from Dr Justin Field. Well nearly Dr – just graduation to go and it’ll all be finalised. Justin shares his experience of doing a part-time and distance PhD. Earlie…

# data[].attributes.headline
The Part Time Doctorate - no glory in the ph without the d

# data[].attributes.subject
The Part Time Doctorate - no glory in the ph without the d

# data[].attributes.body
This is a guest post by Karen McAulay on the the amazing patter blog

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This is a guest post from Karen McAulay, Music and Academic Services Librarian and concurrently Postdoctoral Researcher at the Royal Conservatoire of Scotland. Karen has worked in the Whittaker Library at RCS since 1988. She is a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals. In October 2012, she embarked upon a 3-year AHRC-funded project at Glasgow University, seconded as part-time postdoctoral researcher to the Bass Culture project looking at accompaniments in Scottish fiddle music. Between October 2015- April 2016, Karen was awarded an Athenaeum Award by the Royal Conservatoire of Scotland, enabling her to commence part-time research on her new project into the Stationers' Hall music collection at the University of St Andrews, and her research role has since been extended until August 2018. Karen graduated with a PhD in Music from the University of Glasgow in 2009. Her book, Our Ancient National Airs: Scottish Song Collecting from the Enlightenment to the Romantic Era, was published by Ashgate in March 2013.
At 21, I went to Exeter as a postgrad. I did a research Masters there, changed topic for my PhD, and ran out of time because I started a postgraduate librarianship diploma instead of trying to complete my thesis first. In fairness to myself, I did get the job and the pension-plan that I had decided were a priority. At the time, I couldn't imagine myself as a lecturer, so putting my research to one side felt sad, but not a tragedy.

If you had told my 24-year old self that I'd start another doctorate part-time alongside a full-time job, with three sons and a husband traipsing through my "study" (an alcove in the dining-room) at regular intervals, I don't think I'd have believed you. Adjusting to the realisation that I was no longer a PhD student had been at times uncomfortable, but I now had other priorities. Indeed, I was a church organist as well as a librarian, and I even took up writing light fiction as a remunerative side-line, until the boys came along - life wasn't dull.

However, finding three old flute manuscripts in an old cupboard at work revived my interest in research, and one thing led to another PhD. By now aged 46, I chose a completely different topic that I considered relevant to one of the courses offered at my workplace, and using resources that would be geographically easy for me to visit as a part-time student. I was also incredibly lucky to find a great supervisor at the university on my doorstep. Fitting in supervisions was something that had to be carefully planned around my work, but I regarded my trips across the city as a distinct advantage. Studying at a different institution to my own workplace meant I was able to separate my dual identity as full-time librarian and part-time postgrad, and I found that very helpful.

There are many different routes to getting a PhD these days. Whether you're studying full or part-time, you may well seek paid employment of some kind. If you choose the work to fit in round your research, then obviously it's nice to find something that will benefit your CV, whether it's teaching, admin, lab-work or some other relevant activity. Some people will be fortunate enough to find creative work, or work that's a complete contrast to the research. However, when you're fitting in research around an existing career, then the work choice has already been made, and the big decision is in committing your "spare time" to research.

Working full-time, you're always conscious that your PhD is what you do in the time that's left over. It is as important to you as it would be to any full-time researcher, but you can't allow it to impinge upon the day-job.

In my case, with a family as well, shopping and domesticity were also something of a priority at weekends. You can't concentrate on doctoral thoughts when new school shirts, swimming lessons or piano practice are clamouring for attention! And I was still a church organist. That paid my uni fees.

I had five years in which to complete my thesis. This time, personal pride meant that non-completion wasn't an option. In my last year, I signed up to Academic Ladder just to get myself a support group, and logging my progress forced me to be accountable. I had progress charts and deadlines pinned up beside my computer; online shopping became the new normal; and because my husband had two knee replacements that summer (one before thesis submission and one before the viva), I paid a gardener to tidy the garden. Neither of us was in a position to do it!

Do I make it sound like a hard slog? Let's be honest, any PhD is hard work. It's hard work if you devote three full years to it, and it's hard work if you spread it over five years and fit it in around the day-job. I think I've always been fairly organised, but multi-tasking my work, a family and a PhD certainly helped my time-management skills. It also demonstrated that I have quite singular determination when I really want to do something!

It has also been good for my self-esteem. After I'd abandoned the first PhD, the most painful thing was the gradual realisation that I had been considered capable of doing it, but hadn't lived up to my potential. It's disappointing to realise that you've sold yourself short - there's no glory in being a Ph without the D. Successfully finishing the second PhD meant that I could finally put to rest the ghost of the first.

And the truth of the matter is that I loved every minute. I loved, and still love immersing myself in research. I never doubted that I would finish it, and it has genuinely been life-changing. It hasn't made me richer, but it has certainly opened up many interesting opportunities, and offered me the chance to get involved in further research projects. Once, I couldn't see myself lecturing, but now my CV is full of conference papers, and I'm in the middle of studying for a PG Cert in teaching and learning. And once, I took pride in having published 30-odd magazine stories and a serial. Now they take their place after a book and a quantity of scholarly articles. I'm very good at narrative!

If I do have a regret, it's that I didn't do my PhD sooner, but common-sense reminds me that I did establish a career, have three children and get them all started in primary school before the time was right for research again.

Part-time doctoral research? It may not suit everyone, but it certainly suited me!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
the part time doctorate- no glory in the ph without the d

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This is a guest post from Karen McAulay, Music and Academic Services Librarian and concurrently Postdoctoral Researcher at the Royal Conservatoire of Scotland. Karen has worked in the Whittaker Library at RCS since 1988. She is a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals.

# data[].attributes.body
From University of Warwick Blog

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Film & TV Studies Department. I'm a part-time PhD Researcher as I'm a Co-Director of a marketing consultancy, Palmer Squared, with my twin brother Andrew. We specialise in the arts, heritage and cultural tourism sectors and most of my spare time (!) is spent going to the theatre, cinema, art galleries, museums, festivals and heritage attractions - a complete busman's holiday! Working thesis title: Sexual Repression and the Romantic Ideal in the Dream Ballets of Hollywood Film Musicals 1938 - 1957
There are a number of questions that I'm regularly asked about doing a PhD part-time whilst working full-time - how is your PhD going and how do you manage to balance work and study (never mind a social life!)? Well the answer to those questions is always the same - to the first question - slowly, and to the second - if I ever find the balance I'll let you know!
Clocking the hours
A colleague of mine who had completed a PhD whilst working full-time advised me to allocate a minimum of 15 hours per week to dedicated study, recognising that this will build over time, particularly in the last year. In my first term I took advantage of some of the free training sessions available to post grads to help with developing my approach to study and picked up a lot of useful tips, particularly with reference to note-taking, setting out the parameters of my research and planning my approach to study. I had a four year gap between completing my MA and starting my PhD so felt a little rusty to say the least. Of course what I discovered was that I needed to allocate dedicated time in the week to study, so at Christmas I took the decision to ringfence a day in my working week to focus exclusively on my PhD. My business partner (also my brother!) has been great in respecting that day and all was going well until a couple of months ago.
Impacts of success in work
As a marketing consultant working in the arts, no two days are ever the same and work naturally ebbs and flows with no recognisable pattern. Just to get political for a moment, the arts sector has suffered greatly due to national and local government funding cuts and my business has felt the impact of such measures with a difficult start to the year. But it's like buses, you wait for one to come along and then three turn up! My brother and I are actually directors of two consultancy businesses plus Joint Head of Marketing for a biennial festival taking place this autumn, and in the last couple of months we've been successful in winning new clients too - great for our businesses and our bottom line but not so great for my PhD studies. My precious one day a week has all but disappeared in the last two weeks due to the pressure of work and having to travel around the country to work with clients.
Getting back on track with time management
I always thought that I'd have much more flexibility as a consultant, hence fitting in a PhD in the way that I'd managed to complete a Masters whilst working full-time. But a PhD is a different beast and requires a different approach and particularly a different writing style. So to claw back some time I took a week off work at Easter to dedicate to research and writing as well as recharging my batteries. I anticipate that most bank holidays, like today, will be spent as PhD days, so no enjoying the glorious sunshine for me...

I'd like to think that I could spend one or two evenings a week working on my PhD but I'm either out a work related event, travelling home late or frankly just too tired. So I try to allocate one day at the weekend for PhD study, as well as the day in the week, as there are no work phone calls and I can ignore work emails too.

I'm the only part-time PhD researcher in my department (film and tv) so I've learned not to compare my progress with anyone else. I'm glad that I chose an area of study that I already know well as it's related to my Masters dissertation, that certainly makes a difference. I fear that if I'd chosen a completely new topic I'd have had thoughts of throwing in the towel by now!
It's good to talk
I've had to make a difficult decision in the last two weeks and that is to defer my planned summer archive visits to Los Angeles and New York to January 2014. I'm thankful to my tutor, department and the Graduate School for being so understanding and supportive. My professional workload is such that I simply can't fit in the trip and the pre-trip required research. I'm lined up for a busy summer and autumn so I'm aiming to keep plugging away at the PhD in the snatched time slots I've allocated so as to not slip too far behind.

I've found that it's helpful to flag up concerns early to my tutor so that we can discuss my priorities and arrange appropriate deadlines to fit around my busy work life. So today I'm finishing rewriting my first chapter and my aim for this academic year is to complete that first chapter to a standard that my tutor and I are happy with, and to have agreed the thesis chapter structure. The literature review will probably have to wait until autumn when I'll be in my second year but technically I'll still be a first year!
Top tips for time management
I wish I had a great list but my main advice is to not sweat the little stuff! Every PhD is different and everyone has to deal with unexpected turns in their lives. Whilst we all may have an ideal way that we'd like to complete our PhD, the reality is very different and that's all part of the experience. I'm a completer finisher by nature so I'm determined that I will go the distance and submit a thesis even if it takes me the full 5 years - I completed my Masters over 5 years due to work interruptions. Having to earn a living, run my own home, deal with family commitments and maintain some sort of social life helps me to put things in perspective when I'm feeling stressed about my lack of available time for my PhD.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Helen Palmer Film & TV Studies Department. I'm a part-time PhD Researcher as I'm a Co-Director of a marketing consultancy, Palmer Squared, with my twin brother Andrew. We specialise in the arts, heritage and cultural tourism sectors and most of my spare time (!) is spent going to the theatre, cinema, art galleries, museums, festivals...

# data[].attributes.body
Refining Your Research Topic

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Where do research topics come from?

The research topic you have at the start of your PhD may come from work you did in your Masters. It may come from a professional or policy context, perhaps your own professional work situation, or something you've read about in the media. Or it might come from the scholarly reading that you've done.

People generally start their PhD with an idea of what they want to research. They've had to put in a proposal as part of the entry process.

But this initial idea is not fixed. It might change. Yes really. Your first idea may not be what you end up researching. Your primary task in the first few months of PhD candidacy is to revisit and refine your initial topic so that it becomes a research-able project. A researchable project that is focused on the potential contribution you will make by doing it.

Your task, in the first few months of the PhD, is to refine your topic - through reading. You read to find:

(1) what other people already have said about your topic

Many PhDs, not all, but most, find themselves researching a topic where a corpus of research and literature already exists. This research might be exactly on the topic that you are interested in, or it might be in a related, overlapping area. As you read, you can begin to see how your proposed topic sits in relation to what already exists

(2) what material you need in order to make sense of your topic

You'll usually find and read bodies of literature that establish the wider context within which your research sits. These literatures provide you with important contextual information. They offer you examples of the differing research traditions that you might work within. They show different conceptual and theoretical possibilities that you might take up in your study.

(3) 'less likely' material that also might have something interesting to offer to your topic

Sometimes, reading outside of your discipline, reading something tangential, provides you with an angle on your topic that is new and interesting. Many PhDs neglect this wider reading in favour of the first two, more focused, literatures work. This is not a mistake, but an omission that might mean your work is not as "original" as it could perhaps be.

At the end of this beginning reading, you should be much clearer about what research is and isn't done about your topic. You can therefore think about what possibilities there are for you - what you might do and accomplish in your PhD. Perhaps you will look at a different group of people, or work in a different place, or work in a different tradition. Perhaps you'll bring a different theoretical tradition to bear on the topic or combine perspectives across disciplines - maybe one/some that are not usually brought to the topic. The process of bringing your topic into conversation with the literatures is often called finding the gap - although most often we are not talking about a gap, but rather a niche. A niche that you can occupy.

Once you've completed this early reading, you can then reconsider your initial topic - and modify it if you need/want to.

In addition, you will also need to read at the start:

(4) how your topic can be researched.

This methodological reading is often the crunch point. This reading helps you to decide whether there is a defensible way to find an answer to the question or problem you have tentatively formulated. You look at various methodological and methods possibilities to see which of them are most likely to yield interesting data. You think about how these might be analysed.

You can also check how much time different approaches will take, and -scarily- whether it is even possible to do what you want, given questions of access, distance, cost and so on. You can see whether yours is a topic for one person for a year or so full time equivalent field work or whether it needs a team of people for several years! These practical issues are vital for you to consider... many a PhD topic has to be modified simply because the research isn't actually do-able.

At the end of this early period of reading you will be in a position to come back to your initial research idea.

Read your proposal again. Is it still OK? Then consider:

How might you express your proposed project - In a question? Aims and Objectives? As an hypothesis to be tested?

What is the contribution it will make?

What is the research design?

If you have read thoroughly enough, then you will be able to answer all of these questions -convincingly and concisely - after just a few months.

Image credit: J D Noske

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
refining your research topic - starting the phd

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Where do research topics come from? The research topic you have at the start of your PhD may come from work you did in your Masters. It may come from a professional or policy context, perhaps your own professional work situation, or something you've read about in the media.

# data[].attributes.body
This one is from James Hayton

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Do you have any tips for part-time PhD students?

If you're doing a PhD part-time, the tips I'd give depend very much on what you're doing with the other part of your time.

If you have a part-time job with predictable hours, it's easier to manage the two demands than if you're running your own business, which is easier than if you're doing a PhD and have a full-time job and you're raising kids all at the same time.

But I'll try to give a general answer anyway.

First, treat the PhD with a level of priority that can compete with the other demands on your time. This means that sometimes you have to say no (or not now) to important things so you can work on your PhD.

Set aside time for your PhD and protect that time. If you can't or won't do this, it will always be pushed aside by other demands.

Second, make sure you don't get isolated. Connections with other students and academics can make a huge difference and you might have to make extra effort to make these happen.

See also:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Tips for part-time PhD students | James Hayton's PhD advice website

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Do you have any tips for part-time PhD students? If you're doing a PhD part-time, the tips I'd give depend very much on what you're doing with the other part of your time.

# data[].attributes.headline
5 Time management ideas from part time PhD Students

# data[].attributes.subject
5 Time management ideas from part time PhD Students

# data[].attributes.body
https://thesiswhisperer.com/2013/03/13/5-time-management-ideas-from-part-time-phd-students/

So this one is from the amazing Thesis Whisper blog

# data[].attributes.headline
The highs and lows of a part time student

# data[].attributes.subject
The highs and lows of a part time student

# data[].attributes.body
Another post from Edinburgh University by Alastair Duthie

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
by Alastair Duthie |

Completing a doctoral research project in three years is a challenging endeavor. Today, PhD students are expected to do far more than submit their thesis; organizing conferences or seminars, teaching, and writing book reviews are just some of the ways we can improve our chances of employment in a competitive job market. While this is now an accepted feature of PhD study, as a part-time student it is almost impossible to juggle it all in tandem with a part-time (or in some cases full-time) job. In this blog post. I will discuss some of the positive as well as the negative aspects of part-time study as I come to the end of my first academic year.

Personally, the decision to undertake my part-time study was purely a financial one. It has allowed me to pursue my interest in history and career goals without bankrupting myself in the process. Working in bars, cafes, and offices has allowed me to do this, but is has had it practical advantages and disadvantages. Flexibility is key and half the battle in finding the right employer. Working in a cafe near the department allowed me to maximize my time at both, however the proximity of the job sometimes resulted in unexpected exchanges with students and faculty. Of course, this was countered by the additional perks of free or discounted coffee, bread, and other baked goods (specifically the buns from Peters Yard!). Although I may be unable to eat another Peters Yard sandwich again, it helped to cut costs and fueled through work on my thesis during the evening and on the days that I could dedicate to study.

The decision to move into a new flat halfway through my first year brought new challenges. I soon discovered that letting agents hate part-time students even more than students! Once you find a sympathetic letting agent, the council becomes your greatest adversary. For anyone considering part-time study , it is important to know they charge full council tax rates to part-time students-going by the philosophy that if you are working and studying part-time it means that one drives around in a Ferrari! Income tax also becomes a nightmare when you work two or three jobs and it was an uphill struggle to convince the bank to grant me a student account.

That being said, I either anticipated most of these problems or the issues ironed themselves out over time. Although I researched part-time I studied extensively before I was accepted into the programme, nothing could have prepared me for the number of times I have questioned my own status and legitimacy. After reading Tristan's excellent blog post on liminality, I found myself thinking about this question from the perspective of a part-time student. Dividing my time between the PhD and working has impacted my visibility and momentum, making 'imposter syndrome' - a common affliction among graduate researchers - all the more pronounced.I do believe that this has improved steadily over time. However, it can feel overwhelming during the early stages of doctoral study, when you are first finding your feet.

For example, it is a condition of many funding opportunities - particularly large grants - that the applicant holds a first class honours degree at undergraduate level or a distinction in a higher degree. Many funding opportunities are not open to part-time students for the reason that they have an income. This is understandable, but a one-size fits all approach unfairly targets students who have improved their academic performance across their time in education or who work to support themselves if funding is closed to them. Largely due to timing, I began PhD study part-time to ensure that I could start in September 2013, after missing the deadline for AHRC funding when I returned from travelling in March of that year. After seeking advice, my plan was to apply to the AHRC for my second year and to go full-time if I was successful in gaining funding at a later date. While this proved to be a practical possibility it was impossible in reality and in the current climate, this type of funding is just not being granted.

As Roseanna mentioned in a previous post, self-funding your research raises questions about the validity of your project. Even if this is isolated as self-doubt, every funding application becomes a judgement of your project's worthiness. As a part-time student, it is challenging enough to find momentum as the project evolves slowly over two years. Making coffees while you could be harnessing a burst of creativity on your thesis is frustrating, but you ultimately learn how to make coffees and write little notes in the back of a waiters pad! I also found that the first grant of money you receive completely changes your mind-set. That first award is the most powerful and can act as an important catalyst for the entire project.

A piece of advice I would offer to anyone considering applying for part-time (or full-time) PhD study: work hard to ensure you pick a topic that you are passionate about. Picking a topic that interests you, that you genuinely want to learn more about, and that drives the research process, will ultimately see you through the darkest days of your project. Although you will be working on your thesis for the same length of time as a full-time student, your research project has the potential to be in your life for twice as long. It can be challenging to maintain motivation for it while working to earn money in support of your studies. There is a running joke at the café I currently work at, that my colleagues can tell when I have my academic brain or my coffee brain in gear each day. I think suspicions were first raised when I started making flat whites with latte art of President Hoover's face drawn in the milk!

On a more serious note, I have been fortunate to meet kind, understanding, and supportive friends and employers during the last two years. My managers allowed me work my hours around their rotas, which made my time working at two of Edinburgh's busiest cafes easier. While this usually resulted in many 14 hour + days, for the most part it worked. My PhD supervisors have also been incredibly supportive and understanding of my other commitments. Those commitments have sometimes resulted in missed deadlines and opportunities - particularly the inability to make it to many conferences and seminars. My intention to move to full-time study for my second year has largely been in response to this last point. Not only is it important in terms of visibility, but I have found that fully immersing yourself in academic circles is the crux of turning your work into an original contribution to knowledge.

Since I made the decision to apply to Edinburgh, there have been many highs and lows. It has been difficult at times, but I recommend part-time study to those who are willing to make sacrifices of time and money, and who have a supportive network around them. As my friends outside university advance in careers with healthy salaries, put deposits down on property, and settle into post-university life, I have questioned the sustainability of balancing work and study. At the same time, I feel privileged to be pursuing a career that is tied closely to my interests, even if it is sometimes hard to explain to those outside academic circles. In the end, whether you are studying full-time, part-time, or all the time, it is those around you who ultimately help you through the trials and tribulations of PhD study. It is something that we all have in common, no matter what subject or time period you are working on.
Alastair Duthie is a first year PhD at the University of Edinburgh. He studies changes in American political journalism and President Herbert Hoover's press relations during the early years of the Great Depression, with an emphasis on the emergence of the political columnist.
(Image 1: commons.wikimedia.org, Image 2: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:SecHooverMicrophones1929.jpg, Image 3: http://otakumode.com/tokyootakumode/post/230368799113609216)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Highs and Lows of a Part-time PhD | Pubs and Publications

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
by Alastair Duthie | Completing a doctoral research project in three years is a challenging endeavor. Today, PhD students are expected to do far more than submit their thesis; organizing conferences or seminars, teaching, and writing book reviews are just some... Continue Reading →

# data[].attributes.body
Starting Your PHD

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
At the start of the PhD, your supervisor will almost undoubtedly ask you to critically evaluate some literatures. This reading is so that you can prepare a more detailed proposal than you initially submitted. And it you are doing courses at the start of your PhD, you will probably be asked to critically evaluate a paper, or two.

So, what does being critical actually mean?Is there a specific academic meaning of critical?

In short, yes.

Being academically critical doesn't mean tearing strips off something. That's the way that critical is usually understood. If I say Fred is a critical person, then you will understand that Fred almost always has something negative to say. Fred is tiresome. Fred is a pain in the proverbial. Fred is probably to be avoided.

The dictionary defines critical in two ways -

to express disapproving comments or judgments

and

2. to analyse the merits or faults of a work of literature, music, or art. Or in our case - scholarship.

Synonyms for the second version of critical include - evaluate, analyse, interpret, comment, explain, elucidate. And these are exactly the words that help us to understand what it means to be critical in the academy.

Let's take an example. Critically reading an academic paper means that we (that's we the generic scholarly we) don't just repeat and summarise what is written. We don't take the words at face value. No, we evaluate, analyse, interpret, comment, explain, elucidate.

When we start looking at a paper, we first of all make sure that we know what the writer is trying to say. Then we examine more closely - we look at what they have written about what they did. And then we explain our view.

So, what does that mean that you do? Well, when reading a paper, you might begin by thinking about the big overarching point the writer has presented to us. What's the argument that they are making?

Then you might begin to critically analyse how this argument has been produced.

First of all, consider your immediate response. Did you learn anything from the paper? Channelling Jon Wagner, you might ask, did the paper reduce your ignorance? If so, that's great and you mustn't forget that as you begin your more fine grained analysis. it's easy to lose sight of the bigger picture when you get into the detail.

You might now ask:

What is the reason the writer offers for the importance of their topic? Is this convincing? How important is this topic relative to others? Are you persuaded? How does this project sit alongside other work in the field?

What's the basis for the argument? What kind of research? What kind of research tradition? What methods are used? What do these methods allow the writer to do, see and say - and what don't they? How well are the methods used?

What literatures and theories are used and what does this mean the writer understands and says? What alternative literatures and theories might productively be brought to this topic?

And So What - what might happen as a result of the paper?

Once you've been through this kind of analytic reading process, you are in a position to say something about what the paper contributes, and what someone interested in the same topic might do next to extend the work. You are also ready to think about who else might benefit from reading the paper, why, and what might happen as a result.

So that's it really. You have now been critical.

You might have nothing but good things to say about the paper. But let's say you do have something negative in mind. You may think that there is an issue with the methods chosen. You may wish that the writer had read in a different discipline. You found some statistical errors. So you could now go back to definition (1) - you could be censorious, disapproving, scathing, fault finding, judgmental, unsympathetic. But you don't need to be. The old adage of do unto others is very true in the academy. Critical, definition 2 is great. Critical definition 1 is ungenerous and often uncollegial.

If the work is actually sloppy, plagiarised, or wrong, you do have to say so. But if it's not, then think of these issues as further possibilities. The writer might now go on to... another researcher might now build on the study by...

In sum, critical doesn't have to mean tearing strips off things - by which we actually mean tearing strips off other scholars. Our colleagues. Our peers. Being critical means finding the contribution, and assessing how the writer/writers have achieved it.

Image credit: Dylan Snow

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
At the start of the PhD, your supervisor will almost undoubtedly ask you to critically evaluate some literatures. This reading is so that you can prepare a more detailed proposal than you initially submitted. And it you are doing courses at the start of your PhD, you will probably be asked to critically evaluate a...

# data[].attributes.headline
Part Time Research - Full Time Challenge

# data[].attributes.subject
Part Time Research - Full Time Challenge

# data[].attributes.body
This is from Shinton Consulting

# data[].attributes.body
This is an article in the Chronicle of Higher Education - you need to sign up to read it but it's free to do so

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
My department recently graduated two Ph.D.'s of rather, ahem, mature vintage. Kristina Harvey entered our Ph.D. program with an M.A. in hand 10 years ago. Jacqueline Grindrod spent four years as a master's student and 12 more in the Ph.D. program before her successful defense.

Two more disgraceful examples of grotesquely elongated time to degree?

Not exactly. Both students went to graduate school part time.

Part-time graduate students in the humanities and related fields used to be a common sight on the U.S. educational landscape. Not so much anymore. As Ph.D. programs increasingly move to small models enrolling full-time students with full financial support, part-time students are gradually being squeezed out.

That is a historic change. I was surprised to learn that part-time students made up the majority of American graduate students from 1967 until 2000. According to statistics collected by the Department of Education, part-timers represented about 55 percent of the total graduate-student population through the 1960s and 1970s. But there's been a marked shift since the millennium. Full-time students now make up significantly more than half of all graduate students. In 2010, part-time students amounted to only 44 percent of the total, a swing that essentially reverses the ratio of the previous generations. And that movement shows no sign of abating.

My department's graduate program followed the national trend in its shift to an exclusively full-time model. We admitted our last part-time student about five years ago. The two part-timers who just graduated are among the last on our rolls.

The national shift away from part-time graduate-school options has some eminently reasonable motives. Most prominent programs are shrinking because they want to pay tuition and stipends for more of the students they admit. They also don't want to overproduce Ph.D.'s for employment markets that can't accommodate them. The movement away from part-timers results from a general downsizing that reflects a responsible approach to economic realities.

But when we eliminate part-timers, we may be throwing the baby out with the bathwater. After all, most part-time students already have jobs, so they don't necessarily need protection from a bad market. Harvey and Grindrod, my department's recent graduates, worked all through graduate school at the jobs they still have.

Harvey is a high-school teacher. She says she's better at her job for having gotten a Ph.D. That makes sense for her, and also for everyone else: The nation's secondary-school teaching improves when teachers get more training, so it follows that we should support the efforts of schoolteachers to earn doctorates. Both elementary and secondary schools suffer when Ph.D. programs restrict their enrollments to a small number of full-time students and thus exclude working teachers.

But Harvey didn't go to graduate school for vocational enhancement-at least that wasn't her main reason. "I come from a family of scholars," she wrote in an e-mail. "I have always loved critical analysis and literary interpretation, so it was a natural step to enroll in a Ph.D. program," even though she was working and raising a family during her doctoral-student years. Despite the extra work, she said, "I never tired of reading and refining my own argument in conversation with other critics."

In other words, Harvey went to graduate school because she enjoyed it. So did Grindrod, her fellow part-time student.

"I love to read," wrote Grindrod in an e-mail. A lawyer by training who has long worked in politics, she began her M.A. in 1996. "I always had a suspicion that I had taken a wrong turn after college by not pursuing the dream job of being an English professor," she said. "I decided I wanted to have a piece of that dream come true in some form or another." So she went to school after work, taking one course each term for many years before advancing to her dissertation, which took years more.

Of her time in graduate school, Grindrod said, "All my intellectual pistons were firing. I was surrounded by people who thought differently than the people in my workaday world. These new people and these instructors enlarged my view of humanity." Because of her studies, she said, "I became a better person."

What better testimony to the value of the humanities than that?

Both Grindrod and Harvey talk of love when they describe their time in graduate school. They speak the language of vocation-literally, calling-rather than of job. Shouldn't there be a place in graduate school for those who love it?

Dave Colander thinks so. Colander, a professor of economics at Middlebury College, argues in a forthcoming article in Pedagogy that graduate school ought to be presented not only as job training but also as a "luxury consumption good." Departments, he says, ought to distinguish between students who enroll in search of a job afterward and those who attend for the sheer love of the subject, a category that includes many part-time students.

Colander focuses his analysis on English departments, but it's easy to generalize from his conclusions. Part-timers, he suggests, "might be organized into an 'Executive English Ph.D.' program" with "a more convenient schedule for working students, just as Executive M.B.A. programs have."

Some graduate students, Colander points out, already treat graduate school as a consumption good. "Studying English can be highly intellectually fulfilling," he notes, adding: "It is amazing how the current structure of the programs suppresses this intellectually enjoyable aspect of the study in the attempt to prepare students for an academic research job."

Colander's point-and also mine-is that one blueprint should not be used to design all graduate programs. Too much of the training that graduate students receive fits the template of the research-university career that we all know is available to only a comparative few.

The same goes for admissions. Why should we admit only full-time students seeking a faculty career when graduate study also fits the lives-and desires-of other groups of people who would benefit from going part time? Making a place for those students looks like a win-win, for them and the institutions. That isn't a disguised desire to pad enrollments and generate tuition dollars to stuff the university's pockets. Instead, it's a matter of reaching out to a neglected constituency that the university once served well, and that now needs attention.

Doctoral programs in education already provide an example of what productive part-time study looks like. Education schools have the highest doctoral time to degree of any field, but the numbers inspire less alarm than elsewhere because so many education students work full time as teachers and administrators while they pursue Ph.D.'s. Part-time graduate students in education are not being impoverished by the graduate-industrial complex. They have professional lives, and they're living them.

Some might contend that the cost of graduate school is an unfair burden to part-timers, who often pay their own way. Would-be graduate students don't always know what's good for them, this argument goes, and universities should not become complicit in soaking them for heavy tuition costs over many years.

That argument applies most readily to private universities. Public institutions not only cost less but also have a broader mission: to serve the public. Shouldn't that service include part-time doctoral study?

The problem is that many public universities think less about the public and more about the private universities that they're trying to emulate. For example, the Graduate Center of the City University of New York recently announced a plan to reduce graduate admissions and raise fellowships across the board for those admitted-a move to a leaner, full-time model offering students full financial support. The idea, said William P. Kelly, who was president of the Graduate Center when the plan was unveiled (he's now interim chancellor at CUNY), is for doctoral students to graduate in five years. Certainly that is a laudable goal.

But Kelly added an unpleasant subtext when he described this policy as a move away from graduate school as a "roach motel," where "you check in and don't check out." Kelly caught a lot of flak for describing his own graduate students as vermin, and justly so. But more to the point, Kelly said that if anyone doesn't finish in five years, "that will be principally a function of life decisions and life choices."

That whole thought process renders the part-time student invisible. Kelly's pejorative tone suggests that any "life choices" that lead to part-time study must be bad ones.

But CUNY should be just the kind of place that encourages part-time Ph.D. students. Chase Robinson, a former provost and now interim president of the Graduate Center, linked the new fellowships to the recruitment of star faculty members, who will, in turn, attract better and better students-and on whirls the familiar prestige-driven carousel. Many students protested, saying that that aim was inconsistent with CUNY's historic mission to serve the less privileged.

The question of the larger mission of institutions like CUNY invokes a wider debate, of course, about the diverse purposes of different graduate programs. It's a debate I've already joined. But let's look at it from the perspective of part-time students. If we are to make it possible for part-time students to pursue graduate degrees, then public institutions should lead the way.

Jim Grossman, executive director of the American Historical Association, says that public universities have public obligations, including to part-timers. "If you're a teacher," says Grossman, "you ought to be able to get a Ph.D. at a public university at an affordable price."

If teachers can do it, the door should be open for professionals from other sectors as well. With part-time offerings, universities can serve the public, the professions, and society at the same time. True, part-time doctoral options may not qualify as "elite" or help move a program up the national rankings. But isn't it time that we were motivated by something other than such invidious comparisons?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
My department recently graduated two Ph.D.'s of rather, ahem, mature vintage. Kristina Harvey entered our Ph.D. program with an M.A. in hand 10 years ago. Jacqueline Grindrod spent four years as a master's student and 12 more in the Ph.D. program before her successful defense. Two more disgraceful examples of grotesquely elongated time to degree?

# data[].attributes.body
This one is from Sue Watling's blog
https://digitalacademicblog.wordpress.com/2018/11/30/tips-for-part-time-phd-research/

# data[].attributes.body
This is from the PhD Talk blog and although it seems to be from a full time perspective I still found it useful

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
PhD studies are the highest level of education, and the road can be frustrating and exhausting at times, but the final result (your dissertation) is at the same time a major achievement in life, and a very rewarding event.

Whenever you feel like you keep on working on the same problem, with no way out, remember that blocks and friction are simply part of the creative process that is research.

When you feel like your world is limited to your lab, your bed and the library - know that there is no shame in taking a break and refueling yourself.

In the 3,5 years of my PhD research (no coursework), I've spent about 40 to 80 hours a week on my research. Sometimes, I was in the lab from 8am to 4pm, and then making calculations for the funding organization from 4pm to 10pm. Major deadlines always tend to fall around the same time. Other times, I left the office at 5pm and spent the entire evening relaxing.

Some people say a PhD costs you a kidney and a lung, other people say it's just like a 9-to-5 job. I say, the truth is somewhere in the middle, and you have the freedom to determine how much time you really want to pour into your work. It's not a linear process, at all - and it's different for every student.

With these precautions in mind, I'd like to share with you my 20 best tips for making it through the PhD, in a time-efficient way:

1. Don't work too hard

It's a PhD, not a Nobel prize - and in this context I'd like to remind you of your sole purpose of your PhD: finding a way to answer your research question, in a novel way, showing that you are an independent researcher.
Everybody has loose ends, but if they are only remotely related to your research question, cut them out and leave them for later (or put them up as an idea for a MSc thesis student).
2. Know when you need to do some extra effort
When major deadlines collide, go into bunker-mode. Don't stay in that mode for too long, but know when you need to put in that extra effort to push things through. It's just a temporary thing, never stay bunkered or hermiting for too long.
3. Take enough breaks during the days
Don't skip your lunch break, for the love of the Flying Spaghettimonster. Browsing the internet does not count as a break. You know what I mean - get some fresh air, talk to a colleague or go and grab a coffee with a friend.
4. Make friends in your department
If you're a foreigner, befriend a local to whom you can turn for advice on the non-written rules in the society you landed in. Make friends with your fellow PhD students, and have fun together. I contribute the "success" of my PhD by and large to being in a great research group, and working closely together with the bestest lab tech and awesomest daily supervisor in history.
5. Go to conferences
If you can find funding, get out of your institution and learn from the rest of the world. Conferences have been my eye-openers, my trial-stages and the place where I made friends within the research community on my topic.

6. Reach out to the industry

Especially true for a PhD in Engineering, which will always keep at least one finger at the pulse of the problems of the World Outside. Try to go to conferences that are attended by industry players, or attend workshops/meetings/... where practitioners of your field come together.
7. Don't forget the bigger scope
When you get frustrated with a detail, remember the bigger scope, and if you're a little on the idealistic side, remember what the Greater Good of your work is: are you making sure the roads/bridges are safe (my case), or protecting baby hearts, or improving water purification? Connect to that feeling of pride and importance on being able to contribute to the greater problems of society for a meager salary.
8. Work up a sweat
After sitting all day behind my computer screen, you need to get your body tired too to be able to get a good rest at night. Try to move your body for at least 15 - 20 minutes a day; and try to find time for 3 to 4 longer workouts per week.

9. Pick up a hobby

Get a hobby that absorbs your mind fully, so that you can concentrated on something completely different than your research. The options are plenty: musical instruments are a great way to clean your mind, but gardening, handiwork, cooking,... all work equally well. Just find something that touches a *dzing* within you.
10. Get your finances sorted out
Avoid financial stress during your studies. Get a good overview of your finances, know in how much debt you will be getting over your studies (if any), and always always have an emergency fund ready in case shit hits the fan. Don't overspend. If need be, roam around in clothes from thrift stores and eat from a discount supermarket. Been there, done that, stayed out of debt.

11. Make time for your friends and family

There will be times when you bunker down and don't call anybody. But make sure you find the time to catch up with your friends and family every now and then. They are what truly matters in the end.

12. Find a routine that works for you

Nobody ever told me to come to campus early, but I've always started some time between 8am and 8:20am at the latest. Having a routine of certain evening/social activities throughout the week, designated cleaning/laundry days and batch-cooking evenings, can greatly help you at getting into a routine that makes sure you get fulfilled in all your needs.
13. Lead your own research
Become the CEO of your own research-enterprise. Take leadership of your project, and come up with ideas. Don't depend too much on your supervisors, make sure you know what to do when they are unavailable for a month or longer.

14. Present wherever you can

Practice presenting your work as often as you can, and for as many audiences as possible. Try giving a TEDx Talk, talk at an industry event and present at as many conferences as possible. Get your face out there, and practice practice practice.

15. Write, write and write some more

Write as often as you can, as much as you can, so that by the time you write your dissertation, you will have become a fluent academic writer. Writing is your single most important task, so make time for it. Practice makes perfect (or at least - experienced), so ask for ample feedback.
16. Get the right fuel
Say goodbye to grilled cheese sandwiches and instant tomato soup, and get yourself some decent food. I'm talking veggies here, as well as quality protein, some good grains and healthy fats (avocados ftw).
17. Read outside of the borders of your research topic
Read as widely around your topic as possible. Having broad peripheral knowledge has helped me in two ways: 1) by teaching me how to think out-of-the-box, and 2) by having a basic understanding of a broader field so that I can more easily follow conference presentations and have chitchat with other researchers.
18. Make time for deep work
Get a good slot of time to do your deep work, as this is the time when you get to push your project forwards. Dedicate an entire morning or afternoon to unraveling one tiny subquestion of your research question.
19. Teach and supervise students
Teaching is incredibly rewarding, and so is supervising thesis students. If you're in a program that does not comprise coursework, it's easy to get fully bunkered down into your small topic. Teaching helps you to regain a broader perspective of your field.
20. Remember why you started this PhD journey in the first place
I have my own reasons why I decided to pursue a PhD, and yours my be very different - but remind yourself from time to time why you started this in the first place. Remember the greater goals you have in mind, and know that it was your personal choice to start.
What is your best advice for surviving the PhD? What keeps you going when the going gets though?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
PhD studies are the highest level of education, and the road can be frustrating and exhausting at times, but the final result (your dissertation) is at the same time a major achievement in life, and a very rewarding event.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Five tips for starting (and continuing) a PhD

# data[].attributes.headline
Five Tips for Starting and Continuing a PhD

# data[].attributes.subject
Five Tips for Starting and Continuing a PhD

# data[].attributes.body
This is a blog post from Edinburgh Uni

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Lots of the specific stuff you learn as a PhD student, as well as general approaches to your work, begins with informal advice rather than formal training. I've received lots of advice from others during my PhD, since the very early stages of my project. This has helped me both build a PhD project that I'm happy with, and actually enjoy my life while I do my PhD (the two, of course, being closely but not entirely linked!). As it's the start of the academic year I want to share a few of my own tips along those lines, to help get your PhD off to a good start, and keep it on a trajectory you're happy with:

1. Keep notes on everything you read

My PhD, like many, kicked off with lots of reading of textbooks and academic papers. My reading has ebbed and flowed, but not really stopped, since then. Reading is a big thing during your PhD. It's useful to keep track of what you've been reading because you won't remember all of it, but you will want to come back to a lot of it.

My system for keeping notes on my reading is highly unsophisticated, but it works: I have (currently) three Word Documents, called Reading_[insert year here] stored on Dropbox so I can access them anywhere. I've got a separate one for each year of my PhD because 1) each document is a bit more manageable than one scary enormous one, and 2) I find it surprisingly easy to remember when-ish I was reading different stuff because my reading has gone through some quite distinct phases (e.g. more stuff relevant to study design early on, more stuff about analysis later) so it seemed like a reasonable and simple way to organise my notes.

The notes I make on what I read vary a lot: at my laziest, I just copy and paste the paper title, first author and abstract into the doc, and I'm done. If I'm feeling enthusiastic, I make more extensive notes on the paper and my thoughts on it, or copy specific sections that are especially interesting or relevant to my work. I make sure that each paper title or reference is formatted as a heading so that I can scan through the document easily, and create a contents page for each document. Now, if I want to find a specific paper or read publications on a particular theme, I can Ctrl+F to find key words in my Reading documents.

2. Read a couple of theses

I'm going to disagree with tip #2 in Five Tips for Starting Your PhD Out Right and say you don't need to read them cover to cover - I don't think this is necessary in the early stages in your project, unless you really want to do so, or if you feel that every chapter is highly relevant to your own PhD. But I do think it's helpful to flick through and see different thesis structures (trends in how to structure a thesis evolve over time, and also vary by subject area, so look at recent graduates in your field for ideas of what's likely to be appropriate for you).

Theses might also contain some specific content that you didn't realise you'll need to add to your own thesis (such as more detailed methodology than you usually see in a published paper) or useful references if the PhD is closely related to your own work. I think it works well to look through the theses of recent graduates in your research group, your supervisor, or others working on similar stuff to you. But you can also search for theses online, for example by using EThOS.

3. Start a Word document called "Thesis"

You can use other people's theses (see previous tip) as a guide to add appropriate headings and subheadings to this document which will act as your own thesis structure / outline. Okay, I did this in third year, not first year, but I reckon it would have been helpful to start this earlier. Since I started this document, I've made good progress on actually organising my thoughts and even writing a few things down. And if you've got this document ready from early on in your project, you can populate it with notes and ideas whenever they occur to you at any point during your PhD.

Recently, I've been going through my Reading documents (remember tip #1) page by page and copying across notes from papers that I have read (and often forgotten about) into the appropriate sections of my Thesis document. It's surprising how quickly my rough structure has been populated with ideas and material for literature review and synthesis, and how this has helped me link different ideas together i.e. stuff I read in first year and forgot about, with stuff I've been reading recently, with stuff that's coming out of my own analysis. Actually, now that it's getting quite full, I've split my Thesis doc up so that I'm just working with one document per empirical chapter. In first year, a simple thesis structure in a single document is a good place to start.

4. Think about how to make the flexibility of your PhD (and your control over it) work best for you

This one's quite big-picture, and I'm kind of cheating the list-of-five by squeezing several tips into one. But I think that the general principle of this tip is important, and can be interpreted in different ways to suit different people: PhDs are often inherently flexible, in how you set your daily, weekly and monthly schedule, and I think that you should make the most of that.

The nature of your PhD flexibility and your control over it depend on the details of your project, how you're going to be working with your supervisors and institution. But there are usually opportunities for flexibility, even if you have to be in the lab most days. PhD-life-flexibility can be exploited for your professional or personal development, to maximise your productivity, to create opportunities that are fun or useful now, or allow you to flex creative muscles you haven't had the opportunity to flex before.

Below I list the kinds of things you can think about to best use the flexibility of your PhD. These are all things that can work alongside the core research / write / defend thesis requirements of your PhD, and while you definitely don't have to make any firm plans on day one, I think that it's really valuable to think about ideas like this (and any more you have) early in your project. It's all about what you want to get out of your time whilst doing your PhD, including but not limited to the PhD itself, and how you want to structure that time:

How do you want to set your daily schedule, where do you want to work? What's going to be most pleasant and productive for you, and fit in with your home life?

What things do you want to do outside of your PhD (sports, reading non-PhD-related books, joining local clubs and groups, always protecting weekends off) to actively maintain a healthy work-life balance (which is better for both your wellbeing, and the state of your thesis)?

Are there times when you're going to be working extra hard (like fieldwork)? How do you want to balance that with rest and recuperation afterwards (an extended post-fieldwork holiday...?)?

Do you want to take an interruption from your PhD for an internship or job?

Do you want to practise writing by starting a blog or try a bit of science journalism?

Do you want to get involved with science outreach?

Do you want to build a professional profile and network by making a website or getting on social media?

Do you want to teach undergraduates or Masters students?

What training courses would you like to do (and where do you find out about them)?

Do you want to try turning one or more of your chapters into academic papers?

5. Talk to people, lots, in both general and specific ways

Starting a PhD can be overwhelming, and knowing where to start, or where to go next, can be really tough. Having conversations with other PhD students about what they are working on, how they are finding their PhD, what kind of training they have received, might point you to interesting new research topics, training opportunities, or just give you a bit of a general feel for what it's going to be like doing a PhD in your new department. These general conversations are important because they can provide you with nuggets of wisdom you didn't know you needed and, crucially, help you feel connected to and supported by your colleagues and peers.

Asking your supervisor or others specific questions like are there any academics whose work you recommend I look into? / do you recommend any textbooks on [planning a research project], [planning fieldwork], [fundamentals of landscape ecology], [fundamentals of development research] [insert another topic you're not sure about yet but want to learn about]? / are there any conferences I should look out for? can give you some useful starting points for directing your own learning in the early stages of your project. So, think specifically about what you need at the start of your PhD, and ask for help with it.

...And one bonus tip: read advice from other (ex-) PhD students

There are similar posts to this one with advice on starting your PhD here, and I particularly like the twenty top tips from Lucy Taylor here. There are actual full guides to PhD life like The A-Z of the PhD Trajectory and The Unwritten Rules of Ph.D. Research which can be very helpful to read through at any stage of your PhD (though I guess you maximise your use of them if you read them early!) and to use as reference books as and when you need them. There are lots of people blogging about their past and present PhD experiences, which can offer great advice and comfort at every stage in your PhD. Personally, I love the Thesis Whisperer and like to check in with it semi-regularly. Reading TW feels a bit like my tip #5: it's about seeking out help and advice, sometimes when you didn't even know you needed it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Five tips for starting (and continuing) a PhD

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Lots of the specific stuff you learn as a PhD student, as well as general approaches to your work, begins with informal advice rather than formal training. I've received lots of advice from others during my PhD, since the very early stages of my project.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Top 38 Possible PhD Viva Questions | iLovePhD | Humix Video

# data[].attributes.body
A video by iLovePhD
There are some quite useful suggestions on here

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Top 38 Possible PhD Viva Questions | iLovePhD | Humix Video

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Humix video of: In this video, ilovephd provides 38 possible PhD viva questions frequently asked during the thesis viva. #VivaQuestions #PhD #Thesis #iLovePhD Top 38 Po

# data[].attributes.body
This is an excellent free course on using Scrivener by Catherine pope

Welcome to the CHASE Virtual Learning Environment. On this site you will find learning resources for doctoral researchers. These have been developed by staff in the CHASE Doctoral Training Partnership, and supported by the DTP’s Cohort Development Fund. The Training Hub will develop over time, with more resources being added.

The resources are open to all, so please feel free to look around and share with anyone who may be interested. New users will need to register a WordPress account to access the modules.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Consortium for the Humanities and the Arts South-East England

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How to Use Zotero and Scrivener for Research-Driven Writing - JSTOR Daily

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This month, I’m doing something a little different with my column: I’m sharing the system I use to write it, so that you can use or adapt my system.