18. Coffee and editing: tales from the fourth year

It’s the 20th of January and, after coming back to work after the holidays on the 2nd, I finally feel like I’m back in the swing of things. My name is Matthew, and I’m a PhD student in that progressively dense, foggy space between the third and fourth years of my studies at Newcastle University, trying to finish a PhD on the confluence of transcontinental railways, geopolitics, imperialism, and ‘civilisation’ between c. 1875 and 1930. I’m at the point where I’ve got a good draft of every chapter and I’m trying to knot them all together into one smooth stretch of scholarly rope. It’s proving really difficult, and it would also make my usual ‘week in the life’ excruciatingly dull to read. Monday: drank coffee and did some editing. Tuesday: drank coffee and did some editing…and so on and so forth. This week has however been a little bit more varied, with a trip away from Newcastle and a couple of meetings to break up the monotony. This means that what follows is probably only pretty, as opposed to excruciatingly, dull to read.

Monday begins with, how about that, some coffee and some editing. I’m currently working on editing and slightly reworking my first empirical chapter on the German/Ottoman Baghdad Railway, having spent the last month or so doing the same to my introductory chapter, my theoretical framework, and my methodology. I’m happy with all of those now, so they’ve been ‘banked’ away as finished, only to be looked at again once the complete full draft is together. To be honest it is slow work, going through comments on the chapter from my supervisors, trying to clarify or remove some of the waffle and sharpen the arguments and key points I’m trying to make. The chapter is in a good state, but suffers from unnecessary detail in places. Some of it goes into footnotes and some of it gets removed entirely. Tuesday begins the same way, but at lunchtime I’m on the way back home to get picked up by my partner. She’s spent the last two years doing a part-time MA at Warwick University in Educational Leadership (whatever that means), and Wednesday is her graduation. The thought of one-and-a-half days away from the screen still conjures squirms of anxiety in the pit of my stomach, but it is something that I couldn’t, and didn’t want to, miss. So at around 3pm we start on the four hour journey down to Coventry. I have a book with me – Gitta Sereny’s ‘Into That Darkness’ – which is the second of the twenty-five ‘non-work’ books I resolved to read in 2017 as my New Year’s Resolution. I finish the last 70 pages or so just before it gets too dark to see. We arrive in Coventry at just before 8 and, after a quick bite to eat at a nearby pub, head to bed early.

The graduation takes place at 11am on the next day, but maddeningly I’m up at 7am and at the appropriate university building just after 9am. After a brief stop for coffee, I take my seat at around 10.20am and wait for things to get started. It’s been a while since I sat through a graduation, and this one taught me that graduations need at least three things. Firstly, canned applause (my hands were really sore by the end); secondly, complimentary deodorant (I was drenched); and thirdly, optional wee bags (I was very nearly even more drenched). A reasonably difficult Sudoku or crossword wouldn’t have gone amiss either. Still, before long it’s over, and after taking the necessary photographs it’s time to hit the road again. I start on book number three, a short and simple little rag entitled ‘Beyond Good and Evil’ by some old German nobody called Friedrich Nietzsche. I get 40ish pages in before the light fades. It’s just before 7pm when I get back, and my housemate and I have some food and watch a couple of episodes of Battlestar Galactica before the waves of tiredness lap over me. After a day-and-a-half effectively off work, I need to be up and ready to go again on Thursday morning.

Alas, it’s not to be, as I mess around for a couple of hours before heading off to a meeting at 11am. This meeting is with the Module Leader of the third-year undergraduate module I’m the Teaching Assistant for. I did the module last year, too, and we got the highest teaching feedback scores from across the whole department, so the meeting proceeds from a kind of ‘if it ain’t broke’ style premise. The seminars I’m leading are remaining almost exactly the same, and we talk about the microscopic changes to other parts of the module and to one of the assessments. The afternoon sees all of the geography postgrads congregate in the coffee room for one of our newest PhD students’ birthday. We have an ingenious system among the postgrads at Newcastle where the person whose birthday it has most recently been sorts a cake and card for the next person. We have chocolate cake, sing happy birthday, and although an incessant segment of my brain continually edges my eyesight towards the clock and the amount of editing I still have left to do, we stay in the coffee room for a good while, talking and laughing. We also decide where to go for a drink that evening to celebrate the aforementioned birthday. Drinks on a Thursday night are usually a huge no-no – ‘it’s a schoolnight, you slacker’ whispers the incessant segment of my brain with scarcely concealed venom – but what the hell. So, at 4.30pm, we head off to a fine local drinking establishment called Dat Bar, and stay there until 10pm. Slightly tipsy we disperse, and my housemate and I stop for a nightcap at another fine establishment called Bar Loco before completing the 15minute walk back to our house.

And then it’s Friday, and here I am, with that very same incessant segment of my brain jumping up and down in fury at the fact I’m writing this blog post instead of editing my chapter. A few months ago I would have let this incessant segment dominate my time, shouting its orders through a megaphone and throwing books and lightbulbs at me every time I seem like I’m going to get another coffee or have a 5minute break. Now though, it shouts at me as if through a window: I can still hear it and make out the words it is saying, but I can tune them out and choose not to obey them. It’s already sent me a strongly worded letter decrying my plans for the weekend: a meal out with my partner on Friday evening, then a trip to Newcastle vs. Rotherham at St. James Park on Saturday before a few drinks on Saturday evening for a friends’ birthday. It got particularly livid about my plans to have a lazy Sunday with a mild hangover doing washing and some meal prep for the following week, alerting me to its wrath by sending both a carrier pigeon and a thinly veiled threat via the Beacons of Gondor. ‘You have marking to finish!’ it shrieks when learning of my plans to possibly even have a nap on Sunday afternoon. ‘And what about your chapter?! You’re spending a day doing basically nothing when you could be finishing your PhD!’

Ignoring the fact that there are voices inside my head, there’s a genuinely important message in all this, something I remind myself of frequently and something that is worth thinking about. When you come towards the end of your PhD, you can place yourself, consciously or not, under overwhelming pressure. Your 6pm finishes can creep slowly later, your working week can increasingly bleed into Saturdays and Sundays, and you can often feel like your entire life is placed under a suffocating blanket of stress as the clock ticks down and your supervisors still insist on you tweaking this section or that argument. On top of this, you will often be juggling this pressure with a number of other tasks. You might take on (more) teaching to keep your finances ticking over, you might be frenziedly filling out postdoc or teaching fellowship applications, and – if you’re serious about staying in academia – you’ll quite often be spending all of the spare time you have trying to draft papers and manoeuvre them through the labyrinthine peer review process. Not only this, you’ll be trying to understand (let alone demonstrate) the dreaded word ‘impact’, you’ll be attempting to maintain and extend your networking reach, and you’ll be doing all of this alongside your other, non-academic responsibilities, whatever they may be.

The point is that we have a tendency, often because we think we’re getting paid to ‘do what we love’, to allow work to colonise our lives; to allow it to stretch its tentacles into all aspects of our existence, constricting anything and everything even slightly detrimental to our levels of productivity and efficiency. And we have a tendency to think that it’s both normal and necessary to our future careers. It isn’t. I’m increasingly convinced it’s vital that PhD students of all stages draw themselves firm boundaries, work bloody hard within those boundaries, but then switch off as much as possible outside of them. So I guess what I’m saying is that when you get an invitation to go out for drinks on a Thursday evening but want to finish this or that section, or are contemplating spending that spare Sunday doing another full day on your methodology, ask yourself: is it really necessary to do so? Will you fail your PhD if you don’t spend that one day or that one evening doing a few more hours work? If the answer is no, then go out for those drinks or spend that Sunday doing something you will really enjoy. Go to the cinema or to the coast. And don’t regret it or allow any incessant segments of your brain to make you feel guilty. You’ll still get your doctorate, the paper will still be written, and the right job will still come along. Most important of all, you’ll have a much less of a stressful time about it along the way.

Questions for PhD students from Master’s students (or is a PhD like a tortoise wading through gloop?)

Our Master’s rep Beth has driven this fascinating conversation, with contributions from the PGF committee and Twitterworld. It’s turned about to be a pretty major piece, and while it probably won’t answer all of your questions, hopefully it will give you a good flavour of what’s it like to be a PhD student.

 

  1. How do you manage to sustain motivation in your research area?
  • Phil Emmerson: This is hard to answer. The short answer is I just do. I love what I do, it simply interests me – the more I work within the area, the more questions and answers start to emerge which keeps you going. The best way to sustain motivation is probably as simple as picking a topic that you find truly interesting and intriguing, then follow it and see where it goes?
  • Maddy Thompson: Yeah, very hard to answer at the moment as I’m month 4 into at least 15 months of writing… It can become hard to keep motivated. I tend to get around this (although I probably wouldn’t suggest this to everyone!) by trying to take on smaller activities. So I’m part of the PGF, and the SCGRG, I took a small teaching qualification last year, and I do around 5 hours of teaching a week. This means I’m always busy, and I can often get stressed about the lack of time I spend on the PhD BUT, I am the type of person who thrives on having several things to do. Plus, when I really can’t find any motivation, doing another task for an afternoon gets my mind off things, and makes it much easier to come back to.
  • Jen Owen: I’m definitely the same as Maddy and can stay more motivated when I have multiple things on the go at once. Obviously this can carry more stress because you are juggling commitments but it works for me! Saying that, I think it comes down to loving my research topic and wanting to do it justice.
  • Lucy Baker: I like to keep speaking to the people involved in my research; key stakeholders and my supervisors who are really interested in my topic. I have a motivational picture board by my desk too. One image is of possibly the best pancake I’ve ever eaten and one is of the Alps, but the rest are all the fun times I had on fieldwork and most importantly the people I met during interviews whom I can’t let down by not completing!
  • Tim Fewtrell: My research looks at young British Muslims, so I am very lucky in the fact that my research area is constantly within the public eye, particularly within politics and media. These constant reminders of the relevance of my research is a motivation for me.
  • Chris Martin: I’m kinda with Phil on this. My research is based on an adventure playground and I’ve been involved in playgrounds for a few decades and I’m passionate about the subject area. I am a mature student and am studying half time while working, and while this is sometimes a tricky balance it means I don’t get bored. I also have multiple things on the go which usually helps but sometimes does make life confusing and complicated. What also drives me on is coming across new ideas and ways of looking at things.
  1. Do you enjoy doing your PHD? What part of it do you enjoy most?
  • Kieran Phelan: Of course! It is having the freedom to spend time doing what you love that is the best bit- even if writing and getting your ideas down on paper is sometimes frustrating!
  • Phil: Big picture: LOVE IT!; Small scale: sometimes hate it (never lasts long). The most enjoyable aspect for me is getting the smallest spark of an idea and then kicking it around with colleagues, through literature, on paper, in my head until it works and makes a real contribution to my work.
  • Dan Casey: I especially like the opportunity to teach undergraduates and masters students and organise my own events. The ability to travel to new and exciting conferences is also great. Writing up, like Kieran, can be really frustrating – particularly as I try to be a perfectionist. However, I’m hoping at the end it will have been really worth it!
  • Lucy: Be realistic. Don’t expect to enjoy the whole thing and don’t worry if you’re going through a rough patch, we almost all do. But choose something you really want to find out more about.
  • Tim: I love the flexibility you get and the autonomy you have with your own work. I like talking to people and broadening my understanding of complex issues within my own research, and also learning from my peers.
  • Chris: I absolutely love it even though at times I feel like I’m really thick and I don’t understand some of the shiny new concepts everybody else seems to be spouting about. At the end of the day my passion for learning and my subject area wins through and eventually by asking what I consider to be dumb questions and persevering I usually end up getting the gist of most concepts. I enjoy the thinking and writing most.
  1. What reasons did you have to undertake a PhD in Geography?
  • Phil: I enjoyed my undergraduate dissertation, I enjoyed my masters one even more, I was quite good at geography, I didn’t want to stop doing it, I still had stuff to learn…
  • Maddy: Same… plus I just love Geography!
  • Wilbert den Hoed: I really started to enjoy getting out there to do research during my masters (in Geography and Planning) so I decided a PhD would help me get more experience in that direction. Besides, Geography always has new research frontiers and is very relevant societally.
  • Dan: I love Geography – the diversity of topics and the way the subject looks at societies and the environment together and the links between both really enticed me to continue studying in a Geography Department. Someone’s always researching something you’ve never heard of before or thought about! Makes it interesting.
  • Lucy: Avoiding a 9-5 and I love to travel.
  • Tim: I am similar to Phil in that, for me, the best part of undergrad was the dissertation. Working on a single project  with a larger scope and the time and resources to actually produce something that I can be proud of (hopefully) is appealing. There also aren’t that many opportunities in life where you can get paid to get a qualification.
  • Chris: I wasn’t going to do one as I couldn’t afford it! When I finished my Masters, which I was only able to do as I got made redundant and got a redundancy payment and other support, the idea was to get a ‘proper job’. My supervisor was an external verifier for my MA and over a number of months talked me into doing one and found some funding to pay fees (but no living expenses 🙁 ). Hence I have to work but my research is exactly what I want to do and builds on my MA. In terms of Geography,  in all honesty that was just where my supervisor was coming from, but I am now a convert!
  1. How do you manage the deluge of emails?
    1. Maddy I don’t…
    2. Phil me neither…
    3. Jen: You could spend whole days dealing with emails particularly if you are arranging fieldwork or teaching! Therefore I try to set aside email-free hours where I turn off the notifications and concentrate on other things, and then blitz the backlog in one go.
    4. Dan: Usually try to look at the subject line or who the email’s from to see how important it might be first. However, I’m always usually on email trying not to miss anything – my friends sometimes get a laugh out of it as they always see me on my emails!
    5. Tim: I am really bad with my emails, but I do try to make sure that I have nothing outstanding at the end of each day (even though I usually fail at this).
    6. Chris: I try to set aside email free chunks of time but not very successfully. I tend to ignore ones that aren’t from people I know or seem relevant by the subject header.
  1. Do you get any holiday as a PHD student?
    • Maddy: Yes! This is probably one of my favourite parts of the PhD. With my funding body (ESRC) I get up to 6 weeks of holiday a year, which I only have to organise with my supervisors (funding continues as normal). Opportunities for conferences and fieldwork also means I can often get the unviersity to pay for flights, attend a conference, then hang around and explore the place myself afterwards. Through this, I’ve been to the Philippines, Australia, San Francisco, Poland, and now Canada!
    • Wilbert: Equally to Maddy, my funding body (social science faculty) states 6 weeks, as long as you notify your School and supervisors. Also the conference opportunities got me to travel to the US and much of the UK (may not be special to most, but 2.5 years ago I had never been on this island).
    • Lucy: Yes and make sure you take them!
    • Tim: I’m sure it is different for everyone doing a PhD, but for me it has been really easy to take holiday when I want. It is a pretty flexible lifestyle really. I think it is a much easier transition from undergraduate/masters than for people who have gone straight into a full time job.
    • Chris: Holidays, yes I get them, but I tend to not take them as it’s not always convenient to fit them in with my work. I also like going to conferences and using that as an opportunity to look around. I’m off to California in the middle of February and Calgary in September, and I travel around the UK quite a bit too.
  1. To those that study part-time, do you find it manageable?
    • Anja McCarthy: You do what you can! I’ve been part time (2.5 days/week) then full time, then back to part time (1 day/week) while writing up. It was definitely more challenging at the beginning doing my literature review on a part-time basis when I had to remember where I left off each week. It’s relatively easier to write up my analysis in small chunks, though there never is enough time! Less time for procrastination, in theory anyway!
    • Chris: Manageable is a bit like the length of  a piece of string. I find that I absolutely have to put in the hours and have to be pretty strict with myself. I do often feel like I’m running to catch up as work sometimes needs to be a priority. At the end of the day I always meet deadlines and get really good feedback for what I do so it is do-able. I’m not actually the most disciplined person either so I do find it hard. The other thing is that I live in Devon and go to Leicester Uni, so often feel isolated as well. Not sure that it’s actually much different for full time students actually, at least if you’re part-time you do have longer to complete things, which can be a blessing as well as a curse.
  1. How did you decide where to study? What is most important to look out for?
    • Wilbert: Newcastle is where my funding and wider research project were. The city itself is very important, you have to ask yourself ‘Can I live here for 3+ years?’, also if it’s lively enough and well connected to home or other places you frequently visit.
    • Kieran: For me, the most important thing was the expertise and my supervisors. If you have poor supervisors, then your project won’t be as successful as you’d like it to be. Secondly, I would say look out for the general feel of the place. Is it sociable? Does it provide opportunities to do the things that are important to you (academic and non-academic)? Ultimately, can you see yourself calling the place home for the next four (ish) years?
    • Lucy: I stayed close to home and where I did my Masters. It’s less exciting, but I have a good support network around me of family and friends.
    • Tim: Staying at the same place as I did my undergraduate has positives and negatives. I am very comfortable, I have many friends and I am involved a lot in the sport here. However I will have been here for almost 7 years before I leave, so I think I will definitely be ready to move on!
    • Chris: As I mentioned previously, I was persuaded by my supervisor to do a PhD so didn’t really even think about locations. If I had to choose I would have chosen Exeter, as the geography department is good and it’s close to home!
  1. How much support do supervisors offer within your PHD and how often are you able to meet with them?
    • Maddy: Most institutions will advise 1 hour a month with supervisors for at least 10 months a year. On top of this, they also read and provide feedback on your work. Depending who your supervisors are, you may see them a lot more than this. I for example bump into mine in the coffee room and occasionally have mini-informal progress meetings with just one of them. My supervisors are of the opinion that they will help me as much as I ask. They don’t give me deadlines (but I can request them if I wish), and generally just let me get on with it.
    • Kieran: Whilst most institutions suggest 12 over the course of the academic year, in practice it is often much more regular. At the University of Nottingham, we have an open door policy. If my supervisors are in and have the time, they will sit down with me to talk through ideas that I’ve had or offer their opinion on my work. I have a really good working relationship with my supervisors, who are regularly in contact with me to see how I am getting on. They often email things of interest to me throughout the week and we meet informally at the various research seminars the school. Being in the department helps a lot, as you find informal corridor conversations fuel great ideas. The Geography Department at the University of Nottingham has a great social feel, and good supervisor-student relationships seem to be the norm.  Supervisors are there to help you get as much out of the PhD process as you can, and are there to bounce ideas off of.
    • Phil: I am required to meet with my supervisors ‘officially’ once a month but in reality I see them a lot more often (pretty much whenever I need or want as long as they are in the building). It seems to be customary these days to ‘invade’ one of my supervisor’s offices every friday afternoon along with all of his other PhD students which means we can also discuss things as a group too. While my supervisors have always been supportive, the kind of support has changed over the last 2 and a half years. At first it was very hands on, reading lots of my work and setting me tasks every month to be completed. These days my task for the month is generally “carry on doing stuff! ” and they trust me to send them stuff when I want it to be read but don’t worry if I don’t send them anything. They have also been hugely helpful in mentoring me and pushing me to do things outside of the PhD thesis itself.
    • Lucy: It depends what’s going on in the PhD, but I expect at least 1-2 hours per month as well as comments on drafts. I advise against having a professor as a supervisor because they are too busy (although well connected). Make sure you have at least one supervisor who is always there for you at least by email and responding in a couple of days (unless on leave).
    • Chris: Same as everyone else above, and my supervisors are really supportive and generally happy to provide what support I need.
  1. How did you approach prospective supervisors?
    • Wilbert: They approached me.. Well, basically there was a vacancy coming out from the School and I applied. Generally I think most universities have a small number of funded PhD spots where the topic is more or less defined. Keep an eye out on those!
    • Kieran: I read widely and engaged with the work of potential supervisors. I then looked at where they were based, and which research groups they were in. I was really lucky that my supervisors were based in my original undergraduate institution so I just asked them whether they would consider supervising me. But my peers who were not, often emailed speculatively to departments and to individual academics with project ideas and arranged to meet them/skype them to talk further. One American colleague arranged a trip to visit the campus and meet with potential supervisors staff over coffee- they said it was invaluable to get a feel for the place and the team.
    • Maddy: I didn’t really do much approaching… One was my undergrad and Masters supervisor. And he suggested the other one as they have worked together well before and the research interests fit my own.
    • Jen: I approached potential supervisors when applying for the PhD place and funding, and identified them by looking up their research interests and publication histories to see if they aligned with my research idea. The responses I had were varied, some did not respond and with others I had long phone calls and received advice on my proposal.
    • Lucy: I applied for an open PhD topic and then sent an email asking a suitable lecturer in the University, it wasn’t planned very well and I got lucky.
  1. What other things have you participated in and opportunities have you had from completing your PhD  other than completing your own research?
    • Maddy Being involved with the PGF has been a great opportunity as I’ve organised a conference, led the committee, and get lots of chances to meet the wider geography network. I’ve also had a 6 month fieldwork visit in the Philippines, as well as a 3 month overseas institutional visit in Canada. Both of these trips were fully paid for by my funding body, and are not things I would have been able to do in most other jobs.
    • Phil: Many things. I have been involved in both the Postgraduate Forum and the Social and Cultural Geographies Research Group, been to conferences, organised a workshop, written blogs, written academic papers, reviewed academic papers, presented my research as stand-up comedy, talked to prospective students, done teaching for undergraduates both in the UK and on field trips to Berlin… (probably more than that too).
    • Jen Loads! In our School PhD students have many opportunities to get involved with teaching, so over the last couple of years I have run seminars for a range of modules, taken a lecture and assisted on three UG field study visits (Hong Kong twice and Amsterdam). During my second year I was one of our School’s PGR representatives which gave me chance to bring issues and recommendations to the Heads of School. Also being part of the Mid-Term Conference Team is definitely also proving to be a great experience.
    • Tim: For me, the most important thing I have been involved in, outside of the research project itself, is teaching. At the University I am at there are many opportunities for PhD students to assist in practicals, seminars and field trips. These are always good fun and very rewarding.
  1. When writing, what is the level of feedback you receive before the finalised piece?
    • Maddy First of all, finalised piece is probably not something you’ll have until the last couple of months! I tend to submit drafts to my supervisors which they read and provide annotated comments throughout. We then meet together and discuss the comments. Unless there are HUGE changes to be made, I then move on to the next written piece. My plan is to go through all comments at the end when I know the overall thesis structure. However, they are willing to read several drafts of any chapters, and give very detailed feedback.
    • Kieran: I try to think of writing as an ongoing process until submission. You are not done until you are done. My approach to writing tends to be broken down into bite-sized chunks. Every couple of weeks I work on a theme, which often feeds into broader discussion points. I then aim to collate them all. Each of the themes act as little pieces that I can then re-jig and re-shuffle into a coherent order. When at a workshop, one person described the writing process as having a jig-saw puzzle without the picture on the box. You work at piecing them all together, talking with your supervisors and getting their feedback, until it actually looks like something recognisable. I took comfort from that- especially at times when you feel you aren’t really getting anywhere.
    • Lucy Same as Maddy, but realistically you may not be able to change everything they comment on and I don’t think they expect you to. The feedback is often what comes off the top of their heads and you can always challenge it in a follow up meeting if you don’t agree.
  1. What is the biggest difference of studying your Masters to your Phd? How do they compare?
    • Maddy No classes for the PhD, so all of your time (is/can be) dedicated to the thesis. At the same time, there is much less structure than with the Masters so it can be easy to fall off track.
    • Wilbert The freedom of defining your own project. This is both good and challenging. You stop ‘studying’ and start becoming responsible for an own contribution to knowledge.
    • Kieran: I have recently just finished my Masters. I have found the transition quite difficult. There is no one telling you what to do. It makes ‘work’ very difficult to detach from. As, in theory, all of your time is ‘work’ time, I have found myself feeling a little guilty when I have time off. And when I am not productive, I feel guilty that I am not utilising ‘work time’ to the best of my abilities. I have also found that previously, when I completed master’s modules, I knew where I was, and I could see what it contributed to. I knew that if I did an essay, it would be X percentage of the module grade, which fed into an overall accreditation. With a PhD I have found I can spend a week or so on an idea that actually just doesn’t work. Whilst that isn’t a bad thing, you can sometimes feel frustrated when you are used to the formulaic module routine.
    • Phil: I think the biggest change for me has been the timescale of the project and the lack of obvious “wins” whilst doing it. Seeing my project come together is hugely satisfying but it is an incredibly slow process. I have been doing the project for 27 months and am only just starting to see it hold together as a single thing (and even this feels like mere glimpses). When doing my MRes there were essays and assignments that you had to do in relatively short timescales. They would then be marked and generally I would get a good mark which lifts and motivates you. I really lacked this in my first year of PhD but have found new ways to get those “wins” – being accepted to a conference, good feedback on a presentation, getting a paper reviewed by a journal etc. These help you to see your project and academic abilities progress even if your thesis still feels far away.
    • Dan: I found the first year pretty difficult – especially as I was still exhausted after my masters and I was trying to read and learn loads of new stuff. However, the lack of timetable and having to be self-disciplined I struggle with the most. It’s really easy not to do much haha! And there’s a need to balance the thesis with other stuff you might want to do.
    • Chris: I think there’s a big difference. It seems like there’s a lot more expected from you at a much higher academic level, and you are expected to drill down deeper and provide a much more robust theoretical basis for your thoughts. There’s also lots more freedom and need to drive yourself forwards.
  1. Would you recommend doing a PhD at your institution in Geography?
    • Kieran: Absolutely! I have stayed in Nottingham since my undergraduate studies. Whilst I think moving away would have been a good opportunity to build a larger network, I think that I wouldn’t really want to be anywhere else. The department is great, sociable and supportive. Plus, in terms of supervision, my supervisors are second to none!
    • Phil: Yes, the PhD environment here is superb with many opportunities and a great set of PhD offices full of interesting and lovely people. If there is a supervisor at Birmingham who you want to work with in particular, I don’t think you would regret it.
    • Maddy: 100%! Newcastle has a great postgraduate geography community (we’re the envy of the politics and sociology departments), amazing friendly staff, and it’s in a great location being a city centre campus in the UK’s friendliest city! We’re quite a critical department, mainly focused on human geography, although the physical side has grown a lot in the last few years. We also have BIG undergrad cohorts, which means lots of opportunities for teaching (and lots of opportunities to make extra money as we get paid £25/hr for teaching!)
    • Jen: Definitely! Our School at Cardiff University has vibrant research group series’ which provide a chance to mingle and share ideas with other PhDs and staff, and there are lots of opportunities to get involved with teaching. Also as those attending the Mid-Term will find out for themselves, we are very lucky to be situated in such a beautiful green and walkable capital city. Also who doesn’t want to work in the building used for filming Doctor Who and Sherlock Holmes!
    • Dan: Sheffield is a great place – particularly, for me, when it comes to developing your teaching portfolio (I get paid a significant amount of money less than Maddy for my teaching per hour haha :() but I’ve been given the awesome opportunity to teach in Tanzania on a masters fieldcourse, mark first year exams, lead seminars and I’ve been able to reach Associate Fellowship of the Higher Education Academy (AFHEA) with the help of development schemes at Sheffield. Also, we try to bring PhD students together through socials and monthly training activities, promoting a friendly and sociable atmosphere.
    • Tim: Completely! The postgraduate community at Loughborough is very sociable and very supportive. It’s a great environment to work in with many opportunities beyond the thesis itself.
    • Chris: Even though I don’t get up to Leicester very often, it’s a great place and I totally recommend it.
  1. If you could describe your PhD in one word what would it be?
    • Tortoise – It takes long but gets you there (Wilbert)
    • Jelly – Constant state of gloopy-ness and feeling that things are not coming together but wait long enough and it finally sets into something that’s ‘whole’!
    • More results from the Twittersphere:
      1. Adventure. A bold, usually risky undertaking, with an uncertain outcome (Stefan Rzedzian, probably with help of a dictionary)
      2. Bothersome (Matthew Scott)
      3. Rollercoaster (Melissa Dickinson)
      4. Long (Alexander Macleod)
      5. Mammoth (Wilbert den Hoed)
      6. Ceaseless (Greg Thomas)
      7. Frustrating; banter (Fraser Bell)
    • Evolutionary – the variety of things you can do during your PhD studies are always changing and you’re constantly developing and learning about new ideas (Dan Casey)
  1. What use does your PhD have in your future career goals?
    • Maddy I want to work in academia, so a PhD is basically an essential qualification.
    • Wilbert I’m intending to work outside of academia, in that sense it adds to my knowledge and working experience in my field – working experience in the sense you’ve set up an own project around it and got to engage with several other projects (especially in an interdisciplinary PhD)
    • Kieran: I must admit I don’t like thinking of its ‘use’. At least not yet as I’ve only started. I am doing a research project on Harris Tweed; it’s kind of niche. I find it interesting and that is all I feel I need to justify it.  I think that if you view what you value of your PhD as the ‘end goal’, you miss out on valuing it for what it is; a process. Naturally, if you want to go in academia, it is a staple, but I think it is better to view it licence to enjoy studying what you want. Having the time to fully immerse yourself in what interests you most. Once you have finished, you will find you have accrued transferable skills and ‘employability’.
    • Dan: Like Maddy, I’m looking to stay in academia. I really love teaching, but want to do this at University level, so the PhD is a must. Equally, the opportunity to balance teaching whilst still doing some research and advancing subject matter is a real draw for me.
    • Tim: I am thinking of going into teaching so the many experiences I have gained throughout my PhD will hopefully put me in a good place for that.
    • Chris: I’m also hoping to stay in academia. I started my PhD as it was too good an opportunity to pass up, but as a mature student I don’t fit the usual mold so think I will have to combine academia with other related interests when I finish. One of the advantages of being part time is the ability to develop that in a complementary fashion.

Academic jobs post-PhD (re-post)

On 5th December Dr Charlotte Mathieson spoke to PGRs in Surrey’s School of English and Languages about getting the first job post-PhD. She talked through her career path, from the messy immediacy of the post-PhD stage through to the permanent job started 4 months ago, and drew out some (potentially) useful things she learned along the way. Charlotte published her notes and slides from the talk on her website, and kindly agreed to share her blog with the RGS-IBG Postgraduate Forum as her experience will be very valuable to geographers nearing the end of their PhD.

What jobs are available post-PhD?

I focused on the academic route post-PhD, while my colleague Joanna Gough gave further insights into industry in her half of the talk. Going the academic route, I assumed that the end goal is a permanent lectureship combining teaching, research, and admin.

To get there, though, may take several years via the following:

What jobs.png

My experience has covered most of these at some point – a brief summary of my career path is as follows:

  • PhD, University of Warwick 2007-2010 (viva 2011)
  • 1.5 years of hourly-paid teaching, marking, invigilation, academic writing and 1-1 tuition, A-level tuition, short term research fellowship, research assistant on project bid, work on University projects supporting ECRs, freelance proofreading, etc… (Jan 2011 – Oct 2012)
  • 1 year as 0.6 FTE research project fellow at the Institute of Advanced Study, University of Warwick; plus hourly-paid teaching (Oct 2012 – Sept 2013)
  • 2 years further in this position FT with research time (Sept 2013 – Sept 2015)
  • 10-month teaching fellowship at Newcastle University (Sept 2015 – July 2016)
  • University of Surrey lectureship (August 2016 – )

In what followed I talked through this in more detail, drawing out a few things I learned along the way about how to make the most of what has been a highly unpredictable, precarious, and varied career path.

The first 1-2 years

This, for me, was the hardest in terms of managing multiple jobs. Like many others I found myself in the double bind of the post-PhD landscape: teaching is what pays, but research publications are (typically) the key experience needed for permanent job. Unless you are very lucky to secure a research post straight away – and some are, of course – you will likely find yourself with a heavy and unpredictable teaching load while trying to write publications. At this point my key aim was finding a way to stay in the game by any means possible. The key things I learned in this period were:

Be flexible: take any job that builds up experience; look for the benefits of these positions e.g. skills development, building networks and connections

Stay affiliated: a library card and institutional affiliation are key, and various University positions should keep you in with these. At Warwick an Associate Fellow status was created which granted 3 years affiliation post-PhD.

Support is everything: work with, not against, your peers for advice, moral support, and help each other with applications and interviews – talk to people who have been to interviews, ask what questions they had and what their experiences were like, build up knowledge of the sector. Your supervisor(s) will hopefully remain a valuable source of support at this point, but you may also seek out others who can mentor you – advice from a range of people across career stages is especially valuable, from early career colleagues who are a few years down the line to more senior  professors who have been on interview panels. (Not sure how to find a mentor? This ECRchat has some good advice).

Plan: have a 1, 2, and 5-year plan. This is far from easy when you are living month to month, but keeping in mind long-term goals and objectives is crucial to making the most of the time you do have and, importantly, keeping your morale and long-term focus going in difficult times. Be strategic and prioritise publications, as well as identifying CV gaps to fill; and be realistic, recognize that plans will change and you need to review, revise, readjust periodically.

3-5 years: finding (some) stability

After 2 years of precarity I took up a 0.6 position at Warwick’s Institute of Advanced Study. I was nominally a Research Fellow but employed to work on public engagement strategy, launching Warwick’s first Book Festival. There were some less than ideal features about the post, not least that I had to make up the remaining time from hourly-paid teaching, and while in theory I had 1 day a week (unpaid) for research, in practice I was working every spare hour on teaching, marking, and applying for jobs.

I also wasn’t in a strictly academic post as my remit was public engagement. However, there are strong advantages in alternative paths such as this: I gained valuable skills and experience in public engagement which became a unique selling-point on my CV. I learned a lot about the higher education landscape and relationships between universities and the public sector, and was able to build up networks of contacts around the University and beyond which became useful in my academic work. It was also immensely enjoyable and refreshing, if challenging at times, to work on something completely different but related to my academic work.

I also tried to be as proactive as possible in making the most of the project I’d been given, and following the success of the pilot Festival in 2013, funding was secured for my job for a further two years. At this point I was extremely lucky: my post was extended to full-time and this included some research time, which was exactly what I needed to write my monograph which in turn, I hoped, would help me get an academic post. Although the job didn’t started as the ideal position, a combination of luck, hard work, and being proactive meant that it came to work to my advantage in the long-term.

4 years post-viva

By March 2015 it was 4 years since my viva and my monograph had been contracted, but getting long- and short-listed for jobs was still tough. At this point, I referred to the statistics published by Professor Andrew McRae, Head of the English Department at the University of Exeter, on the recruitment of a typical permanent lectureship and the number of applicants that had monographs at various stages of publication:Picture11.png

See: Professor Andrew McRae, “That tricky first book: trends from the job market”, July 2015 )

While these figures are a stark reminder of the realities of competition on the job market, I raised these not to prompt worry but rather as a reminder of the importance of both being realistic, and staying on top of this kind of information. Reading about the job market and the state of HE in general may not be the most cheering topic, but it’s much better to know what you, and universities, are up against. Going to professionalisation talks, reading HE news, and talking to others about this, is as important to your career development as what goes on your CV and will not only help you focus your goals but also speak to these better in interviews.

  • One particular challenge for ECRs has, and will continue to be, the Research Excellence Framework. My work on the REF 2014 is fast becoming outdated as the landscape changes ahead of the next REF, but this post on my talk at the Westminster HE forum in 2015 and my detailed post on the REF for the New Academic will give an idea of what last time involved, some of which will likely remain relevant.
  • Other places you might look to read up about the current state of HE and its impact on ECRs include the THEGuardian HE NetworkTaylor & Francis blog. If you’re on twitter then check out the #ecrchat and #phdchat threads and consider joining the fortnightly chats for more on particular topics.

Year 5-6

The final stage of my career journey was relatively straightforward – not withstanding the small issue of moving 300 miles across the country at 2 weeks’ notice for a 10-month job. This position was one that I very (very!) nearly didn’t apply for: the logistics seemed entirely unfeasible for a short-term post, and the quick lead-in time from application close to job start date was such that I assumed there were ideal candidates already in mind. Many of us have been to an interview where another candidate looks sure to get the job – and yet for every experience like this, I have heard another story that ended in success, if not with that job then with future applications to the same department. Although it may not seem like it when you’re faced with a folder full of rejection letters, going for the job you don’t expect to get is always worthwhile: if nothing else, interview experience (and the opportunity to get feedback – something you should always ask for) is always valuable. The experience of going to an interview with a feeling of “nothing to lose” can also be highly liberating – gone is the stifling anxiety of expectation.

And so it was that a couple of weeks later I found myself commuting across the country, and balancing the trials of a new teaching load, panicked flat-hunting in a city I barely knew, and living out of a suitcase in budget hotels for a month (not only soul-destroyingly dull, but 3 fire alarms the night before your first seminars is not the most ideal start).

Even though this was a fixed-term position for 10 months, I had a feeling that this job would be the stepping-stone I needed to get to a permanent position and my instinct was right: I gained useful teaching experience in a new department, built up new networks of contacts, and had incredibly valuable research and career mentorship from senior colleagues, as well as support from fantastic peers. It was the final push I needed to be ready to apply for permanent positions in the spring, securing my current job in late May.

This weekend, I finally faced the horror that is my applications folder and did some sums. Over the course of 5 years, I had applied for a total of 35 jobs, plus 4 attempts at early career fellowship schemes.

job stat.png

I know people who have done many less, and people who have done many more, applications. It varies. There is no golden number, because just like the infuriating advice that something you’ve lost will be in the last place you look, you just never know until the final phone call which application will be the last.

In retrospect it is easy to make some observations about this pattern: I wish I had been more strategic early on and focused on getting published rather than the huge amount of time spent on those unsuccessful applications; I am also aware that I was extremely lucky that the one application I focused my time and energy on this year was successful (there were others advertised at the same time that I decided against going for, for reasons including the vague and not-entirely-advisable “gut instinct”). It is tricky to advise when to start going for jobs as everyone’s preparedness is different at every stage, but hopefully this post has given a few pointers to consider and I am always willing to answer questions in the comments or via email.

PGF-ACTS 2016 – Reflections…

Also at the 2016 RGS-IBG Annual International Conference in London, PGF-ACTS or the Postgraduate Forum Annual Training Symposium provided training to postgraduate delegates. The pre-conference event gathered delegates based all over the UK and from a variety of backgrounds, all to receive relevant training and engage in networking in a supportive environment. The event featured three distinct training sessions with experienced academics explaining how to deal with a conference, getting the most out of the PhD experience, and discussing the post-PhD stage. Keep reading for a summary of the sessions, as reported by our delegates.

1. Getting the most out of the conference – Dr. Nicola Thomas 

By Greg Thomas – Aberystwyth University 

The first session entitled getting the most out of the conference was given by Dr Nicola Thomas (University of Exeter) and did not disappoint! The session, primarily aimed at those who had not been to a conference before, gave a fun, and highly interactive guide to what to expect at a conference and how to make the most of the experience.

Using the analogy of a carousel, Nicola discussed the highs and lows that everyone experiences throughout the conference journey. Personally I found it very reassuring to know that these perfectly natural, and are to be expected, and that even the most experienced of academics go through the same as those of us who are experiencing our first conferences. After this short introductory discussion came the return of arguably one of the biggest talking points of the 2015 Annual Conference, Top Trumps. The packs designed by delegates at the 2015 event were handed out and we split into groups and began to play. Using the 2015 Top Trumps facilitated further discussions around the good and the not so good aspects of our own conference journeys, as well as possible ways to overcome these.

This year’s activity was then revealed. We were tasked with designing our own nexus thinking board games, based around the highs and lows of the conference experience. When a high was hit you got to collect a piece of gold from the middle of the game; if a low was experienced you had to go back on the board. The person to get fifteen pieces of gold first won. Once the game was designed, we swapped boards, and we gave them a go!
pgfacts

The session was a fantastic icebreaker for the conference and got the whole room talking and interacting, and showed to delegates that we were all in the same boat sharing the same hopes and fears of the conference.

2. Making the most of the PhD experience – Prof. Klaus Dodds, Dr. Sarah Mills and Dr. Tara Woodyer 

By Amber Wilson – University of Sheffield 

The second workshop of PGF-ACTS was based around the theme of “making the most out of the PhD experience”. In advance of the workshop attendees were asked to book onto one out of three breakout sessions, in anticipation of stimulating a more detailed conversation on how to navigate potential opportunities which may arise whilst undertaking a PhD. These three breakout sessions consisted of: “engaging with the public and disseminating research to a wider audience”, led by Dr. Tara Woodyer (University of Portsmouth); “publications”, led by Prof. Klaus Dodds (Royal Holloway, University of London); and “developing your personal profile” led by Dr. Sarah Mills (Loughborough University).

On the day, the workshop began with all attendees of PGF-ACTS listening to a short overview of each of the three breakout sessions, giving the option to swap sessions if necessary. The overriding message from all of the session leaders was the importance of choosing opportunities which would add value to your own, individual PhD experience but not at the detriment of writing the actual PhD thesis. It was also highlighted, that in order to make the most out of each experience it was necessary to evaluate what impact each activity may have on future career development; be it academic or non-academic. After the brief introduction, the attendees split off (almost evenly) into the “three breakout sessions” making way for a more relaxed and appropriate environment to proper discuss the each topic.

After a good thirty minutes of discussion (although this could have easily been extended to an hour’s worth), everyone returned back to the Ondaatje Theatre for the final part of the session. A volunteer from each of the breakout sessions was given five minutes to summarise the key findings, with prompting from each of the session’s leaders. This then led to a more general discussion from the panel leading the workshop including their own “top-tips” and PhD experiences as well as some of the pitfalls of engaging with activities that are beyond the basic requirements of the PhD. All three of the session leaders gave a balanced and honest account of a whole host of “PhD related activities”, which included: teaching experiences; journal reviewer comments; unpaid “jobs”; volunteering in the community; conference presentations; organising workshops and other un-related events that enhanced their overall PhD experience and their on-going careers today. In particular, it was quite refreshing to hear that, it was acceptable to be selfish in some instances (e.g. saying “yes” to a ten minute slot in your PhD supervisor’s 2nd year methods module, but also saying “no” to ten hours of unpaid seminar facilitation).

Overall, this particular workshop seemed to be well received by all attendees and was deemed particularly useful for new PhD students. Furthermore, it was clearly stated that each PhD experience is unique and that there is no “right or wrong way” of undertaking extra-curricular activities of a PhD (as the main take away point of the overall workshop). Subsequently, this workshop seemed to drive the greatest amount of discussion at PGF-ACTS from the general audience, as they required very little prompting when volunteers were sought for and when questions were asked.

3. Post-PhD: What next? – Dr. Ellie Miles, Dr. Virginia Panizzo and Dr. Matthew Rech 

By Maddy Thompson – Newcastle University 

The final session of the day brought three early-career geographers – Dr. Ellie Miles, Dr. Ginnie Panizzo, and Dr. Matthew Rech – into PGF-ACTS, to share their experiences and advice for the dreaded post-PhD stage in a panel setting. Ellie began by recounting her ‘lucky’ experiences of finding work at various prestigious museums and galleries. Despite her claims of luck Ellie’s unwavering perseverance was clear as she adhered to her father’s advice: ‘if you hang around long enough, they’ll eventually have to pay you’. For those looking to work beyond (yet not fully apart from) the academy, Ellie’s story, advice, and resulting success should serve as a motivator. Her interesting take on short term contracts was also a breath of fresh air – while they can be stressful, it also guarantees variety in your working life.

Ginnie followed, offering a perspective of a physical geographer. Similarly to Ellie, she claimed luck had contributed to her gaining her current position, yet again, it was clear that in fact hard work and flexibility were also at play. Ginnie stressed the importance in searching in less obvious places for jobs, the importance of creating and maintaining (international) networks, and the benefits that can emerge when willing to be geographically mobile and flexible.

Finally, Matthew recounted his numerous short-term contracts. While Ginnie and Ellie may be able to claim luck had helped them, Matthew’s story seemed instead to be plagued by a distinct lack of luck. Despite an impressive CV filled with post-docs and teaching fellowships, Matthew struggled to find the elusive lectureship for several years. Finally, an opening on the other side of the country gave him the chance to gain permanent employment, and a place to put his teaching and research skills to use. The resulting discussion gave our postgraduates the opportunity to question the three presenters on their regrets, challenges, and opportunities. A lively discussion was had, but perhaps the most important conclusion was that the post-PhD stage is stressful, uncertain, and precarious. It is not the light at the end of the PhD-tunnel that we may imagine. Yet with hard work and perseverance, combined with a clear idea of what your non-negotiables are, it was shown that success is possible, in a variety of post-PhD avenues.

Postgraduate Forum Logo Competition

The Postgraduate Forum of the Royal Geographical Society (with IBG) is pleased to announce a postgraduate open competition to design a new logo. The logo will appear on our website (pgf.rgs.org), social media and publicity materials. The winner of the competition will receive a years RGS-IBG Postgraduate Fellowship.

We are asking for entries to provide both a colour and black & white electronic version for reproduction. The following restrictions apply to its design:

  • It should not infringe on any copyright;
  • It should be square (ideally for use on Twitter);
  • It should be designed for reproduction against a white background;
  • It should be designed for reproduction at 150 × 150 pixels and 300 × 300 pixels, but be reasonably legible at 48 × 48 pixels; 77 × 77 pixels; and 88 × 88 pixels.

Entries should be submitted to Greg Thomas by email (ggt9@aber.ac.uk) by 15th August 2016.

Committee Positions 2016/2017

The RGS-IBG Postgraduate Forum (PGF) is currently seeking committee members to complete its committee from September 2016 – September 2017. We will be holding a short business meeting and postgraduate tea party during the lunchtime session on Friday 2nd September 2016 at the RGS-IBG Annual International Conference.

During this meeting we hold elections for the PGF Committee roles from which current members are stepping down. We are currently seeking: Social Media/Website Officer and Annual Conference Sessions Co-Ordinator.

Social Media/Website Officer

This role involves jointly working with a second social media/website officer to ensure that the website of the PGF (pgf.rgs.org) is kept up to date, and that our social media channels (Facebook and Twitter) are kept updated with content relevant to the postgraduate community.

Annual Conference Session Co-Ordinator

The annual conference session co-ordinator works closely with out members of the committee, research groups, and postgraduates in order to convene the PGF sessions at the RGS-IBG Annual International Conference. This role involves arranging the call for sessions, calls for papers, and the selection of presenters/chairs for each session. This role can be done by individuals or as a group.

If you are interested in either role, please get in touch to find out more.

Forthcoming RGS-IBG Events…

21st Century Challenges Public Event – Panel Discussion: Life off the ladder

Wednesday 15 June 2016, 7pm, Royal Geographical Society (with IBG)

There are 11 million people in the UK off the housing ladder and in private renting, up dramatically from previous generations. Over half of Londoners rent. Whether through choice or necessity, more people are renting and for longer. Should we accept that Britain’s home-owning dream has ended? Can we improve rights for renters so life off the ladder in the 21st Century can be something to celebrate not commiserate? Join us and our inspirational speakers to discuss the rise of the long-term renter.

Tickets: £10 | £7 RGS-IBG members | Students £5

Tel: 0207 591 3100 or book online: http://www.rgs.org/WhatsOn/21st+Century+Challenges/Life+off+the+ladder.htm

****

21st Century Challenges Policy Forum: Affordable, timely and sustainable housing for London’s workforce: Seeking common ground? (professional interest required)

Monday 20th June 2016

The evening begins with an expert panel discussion and audience Q & A from 5.30pm until 7.15pm, followed by networking drinks.

 The Housing and Planning Bill/Act and current Greater London Authority initiatives will, at best, only partially address the substantial need for genuinely affordable, timely and sustainable housing – for rent and for purchase – for London’s workforce now, and in the future. The new Mayor, Local Authorities and the government will continue to face significant challenges for many years.

The Policy Forum will hear from a panel of leading experts in the housing sector: Nick Raynsford, former MP and Minister with responsibilities including housing, planning, construction and London; Barney Stringer, Director at Quod; architect Lynne Sullivan OBE, Chair of the RIBA Sustainable Futures Group and of the Good Homes Alliance, and Professor Paul Cheshire, London School of Economics.

The panel will consider the realistic potential to meet London’s housing demand, in terms of:

  • How – the capacity to build at the required volume;
  • Where – the locational opportunities, constraints and possible priorities;
  • With due environmental care – can affordable growth be accommodated sustainably and with good quality design?
  • Can we identify common ground and what are the implications?

Please visit our website for more information about the panel, and how to book a place. There is a small charge to attend the Forum to help us cover administrative costs, as a charity.

The Forum is an integral part of the Society’s activities as the UK’s learned society and professional body for geography. Its purposes are to convene and stimulate thoughtful and evidence-led discussion, from different perspectives, on matters that have strong geographical dimensions; to brief policy makers where appropriate; and to promote networking. The Policy Forum is part of the 21st Century Challenges programme of policy and public events.

****

People, Politics and the Planet: Any Questions?

Britain in a Changing Europe

21 July 2016, Royal Geographical Society (with IBG), London

We would like to invite you to join the Sibthorp Trust, the British Ecological Society and the Royal Geographical Society (with IBG) for the first opportunity to debate the future of UK environmental policy in the aftermath of the EU referendum. This event is organised with support from the Society for the Environment and the Wellcome Trust.

The EU referendum presents a crossroads in the course of environmental policy in the UK. Vote leave, and we enter a period of profound uncertainty outside the reach of well-established European policies. Vote remain, and the challenges of climate change and biodiversity loss lose none of their urgency.

Chaired by Jonathan Dimbleby, People, Politics and the Planet: Any Questions? will bring together a panel of leading politicians including Kerry McCarthy MP (Labour, Shadow Environment Secretary), Baroness Parminter (Liberal Democrats, Environment Spokesperson) and Natalie Bennett (Green Party, Leader), to answer your questions.

Tickets are available at £10 for BES/RGS-IBG members and concessions, or £20 full price. Book your ticket now

Postgraduate Forum Logo Competition

The Postgraduate Forum of the Royal Geographical Society (with IBG) is pleased to announce a postgraduate open competition to design a new logo. The logo will appear on our website (pgf.rgs.org), social media and publicity materials. The winner of the competition will receive a years RGS-IBG Postgraduate Fellowship.

We are asking for entries to provide both a colour and black & white electronic version for reproduction. The following restrictions apply to its design:

  • It should not infringe on any copyright;
  • It should be square (ideally for use on Twitter);
  • It should be designed for reproduction against a white background;
  • It should be designed for reproduction at 150 × 150 pixels and 300 × 300 pixels, but be reasonably legible at 48 × 48 pixels; 77 × 77 pixels; and 88 × 88 pixels.

Entries should be submitted to Greg Thomas by email (ggt9@aber.ac.uk) by 15th August 2016.

Interdisciplinary Methodologies: Across Scales and Cultures

Interdisciplinary Methodologies: Across Scales and Cultures

University of Birmingham

7th June 2016

Deadline for Registration: 20th May 2016

This one day workshop will focus on methodological tools and approaches for interdisciplinary research in the fields of energy, water and food. The workshop is hosted by the Adapting to Energy and Environmental Uncertainties research group in the School of Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences and part funded by the ESRC Sharing Futures research project.

Drawing on current research speakers will address the opportunities and challenges of interdisciplinary research and think methodologically about how researchers can understand complex societal problems experienced by individuals and communities, across scales (from the body to the national) and cultures.

Delegates will be invited to submit their ‘Methodological problems and questions’ in advance of the workshop, to be discussed on the day.

The day is aimed at researchers at any stage of their career and throughout there will be opportunities for networking, discussion and reflection.

9:30

Arrival, registration, and coffee

10:00

Keynote: Dr. Julian Clark (title tbc)

11:00

Dr. Steve Emery
Interdisciplinary approaches to flood resilience and preparedness: experiences from the floods in England 2013/14’

11:30

Dr. Mel Rohse and Dr. Rosie Day
‘Energy and everyday life: using story-based methods to explore society-energy relations’

12:00

Lunch Break

13:00

Dr. Surindar Dhesi, Dr. Arshad Isakjee and Dr. Thom Davies
 Food in the Calais Refugee Camp: an interdisciplinary investigation’

13:30

Professor Peter Kraftl and Dr. Sophie Hadfield-Hill
‘Using mobile technologies to explore the food-water-energy nexus’

14:00

Workshop on ‘Methodological problems and questions’

15:30

Workshop ends

Workshop organisers:
Dr. Sophie Hadfield-Hill (University of Birmingham)
Professor Peter Kraftl (University of Birmingham)
Katie Oliver (University of Birmingham)

To register for this event please email Katie Oliver (CCO113@bham.ac.uk) by 20th May, 2016

DARG Postgraduate Workshop – 25th May 2016 (Speakers Confirmed)

The Developing Areas Research Group of the RGS-IBG are holding a one day event to explore the application of academic research and research skills to different sectors beyond academia. The event will be held at Senate House, London on 25th May 2016 and will include speakers from public, private and non-profit sectors.

The day will include panel discussions on the relevance of research for impact, policy and programming with a focus on how the skills you have learned during your PhD can be adapted to these areas.

Additionally, there will be expert speakers presenting on how to effectively communicate your PhD research outside of academia.

Confirmed speakers are:

Stacey Davies │ Managing Director at Practical Action Publishing

Jenny Cann │Head of Research, Migration & Borders Analysis at the Home Office

Natalie Neil │ Senior Research & Impact Manager at the Fairtrade Foundation

Tim Unwin │UNESCO Chair in ICT4D, and Emeritus Professor of Geography at Royal Holloway, University of London.  He is also an Honorary Professor at Lanzhou Univeristy in China.

Jay Mistry │ Professor of Geography at Royal Holloway University  │ Jay was the Coordinator of Project COBRA – Future Challenges, Local Solutions, an EU-funded project working with Indigenous groups in the Guiana Shield of South America.

Lydia Tanner │Consultant at Jigsaw Consult │Lydia specialises in leading complex, innovative research studies and conducts research and evaluation work relating to primary healthcare, education, community resilience and local responses to emergencies and conflict.

John King │Post Graduate Student at Royal Holloway │His research explores the relationships between social science and public policy making.

Nelly Ali  │Post Graduate Student at Birkberk │ Nelly Ali has conducted a two year ethnography with street girls and young street mothers in Cairo, Egypt and has been an extensive blogger throughout her PhD.

Katie Turner | Research Officer | Institute for Voluntary Action Research (IVAR)

To book and to see updates on the confirmed speakers, please see the Eventbrite page here.