“How to succeed in doing a PhD: personal experiences”

A PhD is a journey of discovery & fun

Professor Ghassan Aouad

Pro Vice Chancellor for Research & Innovation

University of Salford

g.aouad@salford.ac.uk

“To be a top performer you have to be passionately committed to what you’re

doing and insanely confident about yourability to pull it off”

(John Eliot)

Your confidence in me!!!

• Completed PhD in 1991

• External Examiner to more than 45 PhDs and 4 Mphils (worldwide)

• Currently supervising 6 PhDs

• Internal Examiner to 9 PhDs

• Successfully supervised 18 Post Docs, 21 PhDs, 2 MPhils & 1 Mres over the last 15 years

06/83BSc

09/87MSc

06/91PhD

02/92RF

02/99ChairRID

05/03HoS

08/06Dean

07/08PVC

Sense ofAchievement

TimeThis is my life (TMP 14)

Innovation in PhD completion: the hardy shall succeed (and be happy!) Authors: Hugh Kearns a; Maria Gardiner a; Kelly Marshall a Affiliation:

a Staff Development and Training Unit, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia

DOI: 10.1080/07294360701658781 Publication Frequency: 6 issues per year Published in: Higher Education Research & Development, Volume 27, Issue 1 March 2008 , pages 77 - 89 Subject: Higher Education; Formats available: HTML (English) : PDF (English) Article Requests: Order Reprints : Request Permissions

Single Article Purchase: £16.00 plus VAT - buy now add to cart [ show other buying options ]

Abstract (snapshot of key messages)

What is it that makes a PhD such a difficult process, and prevents candidates from completing on time? In this paper, we propose that self-sabotaging behaviours, including overcommitting, procrastination and perfectionism, have a role to play. Keywords: cognitive-behavioural coaching; PhD completion; PhD students; self-sabotage; stress

The Key Ingredients of a Ph.D : Passion, Humility and Development

P. W Chang

http://www.tbher.org/index.php/bher/issue/view/2

How to succeed as a PhD student

Prof. Jeff McDonnell, Richardson Chair College of Forestry, OSU (Oregon State

University)

http://www.cof.orst.edu/cof/fe/watershd/mtgpresent/FE%20How%20to%20succeed%20as%20a%20PhD%20student%20(final%20version)_files/frame.htm

Prof. Jeff McDonnell, Richardson Chair

College of Forestry, OSU

Why are you doing a PhD?

• Is it for the title?• Do you like research/

academia?• Better future prospect• To support your

teaching• To get some

promotion• Out of curiosity• Funded project• To please your family• Forced to do it

• What is your strategy?

(Need to have an overall picture)

Reflections• Robust Methodology• Clear aim, objectives, hypothesis,

research Questions • Good data collection and analysis

methods• Comprehensive literature review,

Critical Analysis• Well presented, Interesting findings• Strong Validation, Good reflections• Good use of appendices• Confidence, Other researchers will use

as a reference• Work already published

(Amanda and Ghassan)

Good PhDsGood PhDs

•Original findings

•Appropriate structure of chapters (flow)

•Writing style (exciting)

•Evidence based

•Well scoped (focus)

•Intellectuality and creativity are evident

•Strong theoretical underpinnings

•Researching a phenomena

•Refereed journal papers as references

•Contribution to knowledge clearly described

Good PhDs

• Weak methodology• Ambiguity in defining the aim,

objectives, research questions • Weak data collection and analysis

methods • Superficial literature review• Superficial analysis• Badly presented (spelling)• Findings are not clearly reported• No validation• No reflections• Bad use of appendices• Bad Performance at viva

Weak PhDs

•Arrogance and ignorance

•Other researchers will not use as a reference

•No publications before viva

•Predicted findings

•No structure (flow)

•No excitement in the writing style

•Opinion based (unsupported statements)

•No scope, all over the place

•No intellectuality or creativity

•Weak theoretical underpinnings

•Reporting on a piece of software

•Conference papers and reports

•Contribution to knowledge is not sufficiently addressed

Weak PhDs

Research Process and Milestones

Identification of the PROBLEM

Identification of the PROBLEM

Definition of the AIM

Definition of the AIM

EstablishObjectives

and Hypothesis

EstablishObjectives

and Hypothesis

LITERATURE REVIEW

(Information from Existing knowledge)“THE GAP” and “THE RATIONALE OF RESEARCH”

What is your contribution to knowledge?

LITERATURE REVIEW

(Information from Existing knowledge)“THE GAP” and “THE RATIONALE OF RESEARCH”

What is your contribution to knowledge?

Develop Research Plan

Develop Research Plan

Write up Conclusion

Write up Conclusion

Identification of the research population

Identification of the research population

Identification of data to be collected

Identification of data to be collected

Contribution to existing knowledge

Contribution to existing knowledge

Contribution to existing knowledge

Contribution to existing knowledge

Identification of means of data collection

Identification of means of data collection

Identification of means of data analyses

Identification of means of data analyses

Development of model/

frame work / and Evaluation

Development of model/

frame work / and Evaluation

StartStart

QuantitativeQuantitative

QualitativeQualitative

Questionnaires, interviews, survey

Questionnaires, interviews, survey

Content analysisThematic analysis

NViVo or SPSS

Content analysisThematic analysis

NViVo or SPSS

Useful References

Research Approach• An email with two questions was sent to

around 50 staff (mainly PhD holders)• Response rate of 56%• Content Analysis

– Three things we should do as part of the PhD process

– Three things we shouldn’t do as part of the PhD process

Mentoring

Relationship with

supervisor

Keep Reading

Networking

EncouragementOwnership

Dealing with problems

Think out of the box

Good Methodology

DefendingYour PhD

Directions

Rigour

Get organised

Get published

Never give up

Focus

Key Findings

Passion (Determination, Self disciplineMotivation)

Preparation (problemidentification, develop

a strategy)

Planning (time,process map,research map)

PhilosophicalStance

(Research Methodology)

Published Literature(especially Refereed Journals

theoretical underpinnings)

Plenty ofEvidence and originality

(data collection, analysis and validation)

Productive relationshipwith supervisor

Polish and proofread your thesis

PhD Mock VivaPublications

The 9 (or 12) Ps of PhD Success

My PhD covers an interesting topic, it has a clear rationale for doingthe research and a well defined focus. It is supported by strongtheoretical underpinnings through a critical and comprehensive literature review and a robust research methodology. The research aim, objectives, questions/hypotheses are well articulated and the research sample is representative. The data collection, analysis and validation phases are comprehensive and appropriate. My PhD is original and it makes a serious contribution to knowledge and it has already been published in top rated refereed journals and conferences. It is written in an exciting, flowing and convincing style and the conclusions clearly meet the research objectives. I am proud of my PhD, not just because of the product (thesis and title), but also because of the process (I am now a trained researcher). My PhD opens many doors for me, it gave me confidence and strengthened my analytical skills, it has also helped me to find a good job.

My PhD in a paragraph

Good Methodology: Basic Definitions

• Paradigm: “An integrated cluster of substantive concepts, variables and problems attached with corresponding methodological approaches and tools…”

• Epistemology: one of the major branches of philosophy, most often contrasted with ontology. Epistemology is the study of how we know what we know. The branch of philosophy that deals with the varieties, grounds, and validity of knowledge.

(Thomas Kuhn, Wikipedia, Oxford English Dictionary)

Good Methodology: Basic Definitions

• Ontology: derives from the Greek ‘ontos’ (‘being’ or ‘what exists’) and ‘logos’ (‘rational account’ or ‘knowledge’). From the philosophical perspective, ‘ontology’ is synonymous with ‘metaphysics’ as classically conceived. It is an account of being in the abstract’. The science or study of being; that part of metaphysics which relates to the nature or essence of being or existence

• Methodology: the science of methods. The branch of knowledge that deals with method and its application in a particular field. Also, the study of empirical research or the techniques employed in it. A body of methods used in a particular branch of study or activity

(Thomas Kuhn, Wikipedia, Oxford English Dictionary)

We all bring (often implicit?!) assumptions and path dependencies to our research!

• What knowledge is – ontology• How we know it – epistemology• What values go into it – axiology• How we write about it – rhetoric• The process of studying it – methodology

(Sexton 2002)

Good Methodology

Dimensions of research philosophy: Bringing it all together! (Sexton, 2002)

OntologyE

pis

tem

olo

gy

Axiology(Aesthetics,ethics,justice)

RealismA commonly

experienced externalreality with predetermined

nature and structure

IdealismAn unknowable

reality perceived indifferent ways by

individualsPositivismA search for general

laws and cause-effectrelationships byrational means

InterpretivismA search for explanations

of human action byunderstanding the wayin which the world is

understood by individuals

Value neutralResearch is value freeand objective

Value-biasedResearch is value-laden and subjective

Locating some common methodsRealism

A commonlyexperienced external

reality with predeterminednature and structure

IdealismAn unknowable

reality perceived indifferent ways by

individualsPositivism

A search for generallaws and cause-effect

relationships byrational means

InterpretivismA search for explanations

of human action byunderstanding the wayin which the world is

understood by individuals

OntologyE

pis

tem

olo

gy Objectivist

approaches

Subjectivistapproaches

Action research

Case study

Experiment

Ethnography

Case Study: Knowledge sharing within a Kuwaiti Higher Education Context

Maha Said Ali (Loughborough University)

Generalisation of approach and not results

Outcome: Award PhD subject to minor corrections

Reliability & Validity

The postpositivism approach can be positioned in the middle of the two extremes '' positivism and interpretivism'' as that reflects the use of mixed methods approach or triangulation which is referred to as the pragmatic approach.

The criticism to the two main extremes in the epistemology of knowledge and mainly to positivism had led to the development of the postpositivism/pragmatic approach

Postpositivism

ReliabilityReliability is the extent to which an experiment, test, or any measuring procedure yields the same result on repeated trials. Without the agreement of independent observers able to replicate research procedures, or the ability to use research tools and procedures that yield consistent measurements, researchers would be unable to satisfactorily draw conclusions, formulate theories, or make claims about the generazibility of their research

http://writing.colostate.edu/guides/research/relval/pop2a.cfm

Validity

Validity refers to the degree to which a study accurately reflects or assesses the specific concept that the researcher is attempting to measure. While reliability is concerned with the accuracy of the actual measuring instrument or procedure, validity is concerned with the study's success at measuring what the researchers set out to measure.

Researchers should be concerned with both external and internal validity. External validity refers to the extent to which the results of a study are generalizable or transferable. (Most discussions of external validity focus solely on generalizability). Many qualitative research studies are not designed to be generalized.

Validity

Internal validity refers to (1) the rigor with which the study was conducted (e.g., the study's design, the care taken to conduct measurements, and decisions concerning what was and wasn't measured) and (2) the extent to which the designers of a study have taken into account alternative explanations for any causal relationships they explore (Huitt, 1998). In studies that do not explore causal relationships, only the first of these definitions should be considered when assessing internal validity.

Validity

http://www.documentingexcellence.com/stat_tool/reliabilityvalidity.htm

The baby and the bathwater: research methods in construction management Authors: Wing C.K.; Raftery J.; Walker A.Source: Construction Management and Economics, Volume 16, Number 1, 1 January 1998, pp. 99-104(6)Abstract:This note is written in response to Seymour, D., Crook, D. and Rooke, J. (1997) Construction Management and Economics, 15 (1), 117-19. We argue against their narrow focus on the interpretative approach. Also, Seymour et al. are incorrect in implying that the 'rationalist approach' is necessarily quantitative. Our contention is that the choice of research approach in construction management depends on the nature of the problem. However, whatever choice of approach is adopted, it is important that the problem and associated key concepts are defined clearly and that the methods used, underlying assumptions and limitations are transparent and defensible. It is difficult to argue in favour of any single approach based purely on epistemological grounds as what constitutes knowledge is still an unsolved philosophical issue. Since construction management is a practical subject, we suggest that the choice of approach should be a pragmatic one: the approach that is likely to generate practical solutions should be adopted. Seymour et al.'s suggestion serves only to limit our choice of research tools. Furthermore, a lot of the research issues in construction management are practical problems which involve generalization of experience and formulation of hypothesis that can generate empirically testable implications. For problems of this nature, testability of hypothesis and reproducibility of results are important, and the naturalist approach (which is labelled 'rationalist paradigm' in Seymour et al.) of discovering causal relationship is more likely to produce general practical solutions. However, this does not deny the value of the interpretative approach, as it may be more suitable for certain types of problem. Moreover, in practice, an understanding of human behaviour 'from within' often provides useful insights for formulation of empirically testable hypotheses, despite the philosophical incompatibility of the interpretative and naturalist approaches. Keywords: EPISTEMOLOGY; INTERPRETATIVE; APPROACH; RESEARCH; METHODS

Be Critical

A successful PhD - some hints• Never submit a PhD without the approval of your supervisor• Never exceed the number of words specified by the University (Ideal PhD:

200 pages). Read the University regulations.• The introductory and conclusions chapters are the most important- take

great care to manage expectations and understand the limitations• The Research Methodology chapter should be clearly written and justified:

– Qualitative or quantitative

– Single case study or multiple case studies

– Data collection

– Statistical analysis

– Research Process Map

• Research findings should be rigorous and statistically proven if possible

• The literature review should be comprehensive (Critique and not reporting)

• Proof reading is important:

– Minor typographical errors - Acknowledgements

– Clear abstract - Referencing

– Numbering

More hints –the Viva• Remember that the PhD viva is a formal examination, but in most cases it

is operated like a discussion• Make sure that you arrange a mock viva before the real thing• Read about your examiners’ work• Be confident, not arrogant and show passion towards your research• Listen to the question you have been asked• Agree with the examiners if you can’t support your argument -don’t waffle• Bring a list of corrections to the viva• Mark up your copy of the thesis in order to find your way easily during the

viva• Don’t read the PhD the night before the viva, try to relax• Typical questions:

– Tell me about the story of your PhD, what is your main contribution?– Why did you choose the topic or this research method?– Give me the names of two experts in this area (well known

researchers)– How did you validate your work?– Would you do this research the same way again?– Do you have any questions which you would have expected me to

ask?

Getting publishedWhy refereed Journals?

• Not commercial: no fees• Status• More weight• More rigour• Researchers refer to• RAE

• Academic Career• Establish a name• Reputation• Support your PhD viva• Knowledge

dissemination• Lead to collaboration

How to choose a Journal?• Start with a conference paper• Study carefully a sample of journal papers, this will give you some

insights into the expectations and standards for a paper• Decide on a journal

– Quality: Journal ranking– Speed of publication– Relevance of subject– Ask staff colleagues for help– Visit the web and library, plenty of information– Join mailing lists– Ask the editor of the journal

• Draft an outline of your paper and discuss with supervisor• Produce the first draft• Pass paper to your supervisor for comments• Improve paper• Submit paper

Drafting your paper• Abstract: Concise, to the point, research methodology, main

contribution• Introduction: subject matter, introducing the paper• Literature review: comprehensive & critical, refereed papers• Research methodology: very clear, rigorous• Main findings: statistics, etc• Testing and validation: • Conclusions and further work• References: Harvard, etc• Follow guidelines strictly• Respond to corrections (include a covering letter that identify the

corrections)• Never give up• If rejected, improve and send it somewhere else• Good Luck

Some key questions• Readability - Does it communicate the right message? Is it

clear? Is there a logical progression without unnecessary duplication?

• Originality - Why was it written? What’s new?• Credibility - Are the conclusions valid? Is the methodology

robust? Can it be replicated? Is it honest – don’t hide any limitations of the research? You’ll be found out.

• Applicability - How do findings apply to the world of practice? Does it pinpoint the way forward for future research?

• Internationality - Does it take an international, global perspective?

(D Amaratunga)

Research Ethics• Your PhD is publicly available

• The sensitivity of the research topic

• You must consult with the research ethics panel

Personal Experiences from some PhD holders

The first 6months

The first 6months

The 2nd 6monthsThe 2nd 6months

The 2nd yearThe 2nd year

The final year+ few extra

months

The final year+ few extra

months

A lot of confusion

Some Stability

Good Productivity

ImpatienceAnxiety

Confidence

Looking Back

My Own ExperienceMy Own Experience

“DO”• Define a POA (plan of action) from day one!• Find a topic that you are really interested in • Work with your fellow PhD students • Work closely with your supervisor  to get full support• Undertake a thorough and critical review of the literature • Present papers at conferences and publish in high quality

refereed journals so as to improve your writing skills and obtain early critical comments from external reviewers and peers

• Take over – PhD ownership is important • Write and keep on writing, it cements your thoughts • Reward yourself when significant milestones are achieved• Be confident (not arrogant)

• Prolong your PhD  • Take long breaks ( it is difficult to start again)• Depend 100% on your supervisor• Be forced down a specific theme / methodology route just

to fit in with the supervisor's interests• Think the supervisor knows everything• Have poor time management• Lose focus or direction • Let any third party or your supervisor control your PhD• Plagiarise• Underestimate the writing up period• Ignore the importance of meeting your supervisor on a

regular basis• Take criticism negatively, but as a challenge!

“DO NOT”

Dr Bingunath Ingirige’s PhD Experience

“A PhD is 80% thinking and 20% doing” (May 2000)

YOU ARE SHOWING AN IMPROVEMENT FROM LAST TIME. BUT THERE IS A LOT

MORE TO DO!!!!

What challenges?• being self motivated, positive attitude• setting your own deadlines• being ruthless with yourself• continuous discussions with peers and

maintain their interest in your work • get the supervisor interested in your work• access to companies

Sometimes I felt ….

and my level of interest, enthusiasm, and motivation

Doing really well

I am going nowhere

PhD requires a significant shift in your thinking!!!

•Get the PhD thinking going!!!Linking and Narrowing Down – The funnel

• Why ?

• Why not ?

• How ?

• What ?

• So What ?

focus

Research Problem & researchquestions

Level of resolution

Research hypothesis / hypotheses

Overall Methodology

Individual / company access

to collect data

Substantial completion of field research

Analysis

Substantial Write up

Contribution to knowledge

Achievement of major milestones / major areas

Can’t do it any more. Please give me the doctorate!!!

Overheard…….

“Sometimes I feel, why I started it in the first place”

But, look at the bright side….Generally speaking success rate is very high

Concluding remarks• A good problem identification underpinned by

a sound methodology will take you through• Read books such as “how to get a PhD”, quite

earlier on in your process – gain insights • No ‘silver bullet’ – but commitment and

endurance• Several alternative paths available

Snow White and the Seven Ph.D. Students

Two years later you’re sick (Sneezy), tired (Sleepy), and irritable (Grumpy).

At first you’re Bashful and Dopey.

Finally, everyone calls you Doc, and then you’re Happy.

Dr Richard Haigh’ s PhD experience

Moti

vati

on

Time

“I’m going to make a real contribution to science”

“Why did I ever start this?”

“Just give me the Doctorate”

Your supervisor

• Your supervisor may be your “best” friend - your success is their success !

• Unlike marriage, they expect (and want) you to leave, to see you stand on your own feet - more like children?

• The dream supervisor…– A good knowledge of the topic in year one– Interested in your subject– Excellent knowledge of research methodology – Provides feedback timely, fast and consistently– Promotes their academic and publishing contacts– Agrees to meet frequently– Second supervisor offers an alternative perspective but is not

fundamentally opposed to the first

Reading

Curiosity

Application

Sharing

Reflection

Knowledge

Enlightenment

Confidence

Trust

Vision

Publish

NetworkFriends

Recognition

Steps

to s

ucce

ss

(Dr Vian Ahmed’sPhD Experience)

Be part of a community if you can

Underpinning Theory

Methodology

Outcomes

PhDPhD

“Research with Passion is the True Ingredient to Success”

•Passion for reading around the subject•Passion for learning•Passion for applying concepts•Passion for analysing•Passion for publishing•Passion for writing•Passion for being critical

Heart

Mind

“To be a top performer you have to be passionately committed to what you’re doing and insanely confident about your ability to pull it off”

!!!!!Enjoy it!!!!!

Spot the PhD

Pity the nation that is full of beliefs and empty of religion.Pity the nation that wears a cloth it does not weave,

eats a bread it does not harvest,and drinks a wine that flows not from its own wine-press.

Pity the nation that acclaims the bully as hero, and that deems the glittering conqueror bountiful.

Pity the nation that despises a passion in its dream,yet submits in its awakening.

Pity the nation that rises not its voice save when it walks in a funeralboasts not except among its ruins,

and will rebel not save when its neck is laid between the sword and the block.Pity the nation whose statesman is a fox,

whose philosopher is a juggler, and whose art is the art of patching and mimicking.

Pity the nation that welcomes its new ruler with trumpeting,and farewells him with hooting,

only to welcome another with trumpeting again.Pity the nation whose sages are dumb with years

and whose strong men are yet in the cradle.Pity the nation divided into fragments, each fragment deeming itself a nation.

Pity the Nation, Kahlil Gibran - The Garden of the Prophet (1934)

Believing in ourselves

And what is it to work with love? It is to weave the cloth with threads drawn from your heart, even as if your beloved were to wear that cloth. It is to build a house with affection, even as if your beloved were to dwell in that house. It is to sow seeds with tenderness and reap the harvest with joy, even as if your beloved were to eat the fruit. It is to charge all things you fashion with a breath of your own spirit. And to know that all the blessed dead are standing about you and watching.

And if you cannot work with love but only with distaste, it is better that you should leave your work and sit at the gate of the temple and take alms of those who work with joy. For if you bake bread with indifference, you bake a bitter bread that feeds but half man's hunger. And if you grudge the crushing of the grapes, your grudge distils a poison in the wine. And if you sing though as angels, and love not the singing, you muffle man's ears to the voices of the day and the voices of the night.

Kahlil Gibran - The Prophet

Working with Joy

Thank you for listening• Q/A• Presentation will be made available if needed• Good luck with your PhDs• Always remember that a PhD is an opportunity for

you to be trained as a researcher• Always remember, that you are not alone, hundreds

of thousands of PhDs are in the same position

g.aouad@salford.ac.uk