1.1 Completion rates: a cause for concern?
1.2 The purpose of this document
1.3 The status of this document
2.1 Motivation
2.2 The joys of research
3.1 Durations of the periods of study; thesis word-length limits
3.2 The scope of the thesis
3.3 The criteria for the MPhil and PhD degrees
3.4 "Structure is argument and argument is structure"
4.1 The importance of topic choice
4.2 Generating the topic
5.1 The importance of the supervisory relationship
5.2 What your supervisor will and will not do
5.3 Frequency of meetings
5.4 Monitoring of and feedback from meetings
5.5 Contact after the period of full registration
5.6 The role of the Thesis Advisory Panel
5.7 Input from other members of staff
5.8 Resolving problems in the supervisory relationship
5.9 The supervisor and the examination process
6.1 The importance of the first year
6.2 Establishing the initial framework; the literature survey
6.3 Research training
6.4 The dark side of graduate study
6.5 Starting to write a thesis
6.6 Academic and personal problems
6.7 The end of the first year; upgrading procedures
7.1 More on upgrading procedures
7.2 The second and third years: the move from primary research to writing
7.3 Revising the thesis
7.4 The additional year
7.5 Extension of registration
8.1 Using the University's resources fully and systematically
8.2 Research resources
8.2.1 The Library
8.2.2 The Computing Service
8.3 Organisation of research materials
8.4 Quasi-legal issues; restriction of access to thesis
8.5 Plagiarism
8.6 The format and presentation of theses
It has been written in a context of concern on the part of those interested and involved in British higher education over thesis submission rates. For some time now the relevant parliamentary committees, particularly the powerful Public Accounts Committee, have been expressing concern that a high proportion of research degree students do not complete their theses or do not complete them within what is regarded as a reasonable period. These committees see this as public money being wasted - with some justification (although the fact that a student does not complete a thesis does not necessarily mean that the money has been wasted, as the thesis is not the sole product of the research). Parliament's concern obviously needs to be taken seriously, as most of the money for postgraduate work derives ultimately from the public purse.
This concern is transmitted to universities mainly through the Research Councils, which now monitor research degree completion more thoroughly than in the past. The device they use for this purpose is the annual submission rate survey. This shows the proportion of full-time students who complete their theses within four years of the date on which they start their studentship (although, obviously, students whose registration is suspended, for example on medical grounds, are discounted from the statistics). The Economic and Social Research Council now operates a sanctions policy whereby institutions which fail to achieve a specified rate of submissions are barred from receiving new research degree studentships for two years in the first instance.
But above and beyond these political and financial considerations, there are also sound academic reasons for ensuring prompt completion of theses. Some of the following points are findings from research into higher education; all of them are self-evident:
This document has been written to help and guide you in managing your research. We suggest that you should read it before you start and again at intervals during your period of study, particularly if you are encountering difficulties.
Although it is worded for you as students, the document is also designed for supervisors, to remind them of their duties and to help them in their task as well.
Having examined why you want to go to into graduate study, it is worth also finds how others see it. Talk to members of staff in your department, to research students and to your Careers Service about their perceptions and experience of graduate work, and read any materials your Careers Service may have on the subject. In this way you will be able to find out about difficulties of research work - and also about its satisfactions, rewards and excitements.
The normal registration periods for students beginning an MPhil or PhD programme are as follows:
| PhD (full-time) | 3 years |
| PhD (part-time) | 6 years |
| MPhil (full-time) | 2 year |
| MPhil (part-time) | 4 years |
Beyond the normal registration period, students are allowed an additional period of up to one year, if required, in order to complete the writing up of their thesis. You should bear in mind, however, that, if you take employment during this additional year, your scope for completing your thesis will be restricted. The approach you should take to the additional year is discussed at greater length in section 7.4 of this document.
In addition, it is possible for students to apply for extensions of registration beyond the end of the additional year. Such extensions are made on the recommendation of the departmental graduate school board concerned, and require the approval of the University's Board for Graduate Schools. Extensions are not automatic, and are approved only in exceptional circumstances (see section 7.5 of the document). Under the Regulations, the maximum periods of extension that may normally be approved are:
| PhD (full-time) | 2 years |
| PhD (part-time) | 3 years |
| MPhil (full-time) | 1 year |
| MPhil (part-time) | 2 years |
Thesis word length limits are set by the Board of Studies or the graduate school board of your department or centre. Across the Social Sciences guidelines are as follows:
| Department | MPhil (words) | PhD (words) |
|---|---|---|
| Economics | 50,000 | 80,000 |
| Educational Studies | 70,000 | 100,000 |
| Environment | ||
| History | 60,000 | 90,000 |
| Language | 70,000 | 100,000 |
| Politics | 70,000 | 100,000 |
| Psychology | (no specified limit) | 80,000 |
| Social Policy | (no specified limit) | 100,000 |
| Women's Studies | 50,000 | 80,000/100,000 |
These limits are advisory. It is unlikely - but possible - that your thesis would not be accepted for examination simply because you exceeded your department's limits. On the other hand you should not disregard them entirely: they are guides to give you an indication of the scale on which you should be working.
For many years the PhD degree was seen as a culmination - the topmost rung of the academic ladder (other than the rarely-seen higher doctorate, which is awarded on the basis of a lifetime of published work). This meant that students were encouraged to take a rather exalted view of the level of achievement entailed. The expectation was that the finished thesis would be capable of being published, with little or no alteration, as the definitive word on the subject.
In recent years, in part because of the context described in section 1.1 above, the emphasis has changed: the PhD thesis is seen less as a masterwork and more as an apprentice piece. Although it is still expected that parts or all of the work will be worthy of publication, present thinking is that a thesis should contribute to, rather than encapsulate and dominate, a particular field of studies. The scope is less ambitious - and more realistic.
In recognition of this the University has endorsed the following formulation, which was drawn up by Oxford University and promulgated by the British Academy (now the AHRB - the equivalent body to the ESRC for subjects in the Humanities):
"A doctoral thesis is a piece of work which a capable, well-qualified and diligent student, who is properly supported and supervised, can complete within three years."
In 2003, the University introduced fuller criteria for the award of the degree of PhD.
At the MPhil level, the University has introduced a description of the level of attainment it expects for the MPhil degree which reads as follows:
"The MPhil is a degree of considerable distinction in its own right. It is obtained by research, and a MPhil thesis is expected to display:
This is not a formal University regulation, but it is intended as broad guidance to students and examiners, and it supplements, rather than supersedes, any local guidelines your department may already have in place.
In 2003, the University introduced fuller criteria for the award of the degree of MPhil.
Thus, before you write a chapter, be clear about its structure and argument, about what precisely you want to argue and how you will lay it out to best effect. It is no good slapping it down in a first draft in some more or less unordered way, hoping to attend to 'structure' later. Editing and alteration will of course happen later on, but you will save yourself a very considerable amount of time if you plan each chapter - and the whole thesis - as carefully as possible, point by point, trying to map out the way in which the structure will best carry forward the argument you will be developing.
Obviously it should be a topic in which you are interested. Thus if a member of staff takes the initiative and suggests to you a topic which is only at the fringes of your interests, you should not be awed into undertaking something you do not want to do.
If you are interested in graduate study and have the germ of an idea, the first stage is to discuss it with your supervisor or an appropriate member of staff who will be able to advise you as to whether it is worth your while to pursue your ambitions further. If it is, you should then apply on the University's graduate application form.
For research degree candidates in the Arts and Social Sciences, there is a supplement to the application form in which the applicant is asked to write a preliminary outline, about 200-350 words in length, about their proposed research topic; to list any relevant literature they have read; and to state the academic factors which have caused them to apply to York. The purpose of this exercise is to achieve a match between student and supervisor by ensuring that the department is able to offer supervision (and, where relevant, appropriate support facilities) and also that the member of staff intended as supervisor is interested in the topic in which you are interested. The department can only do this if it is clear what topic you wish to pursue.
In particular the short essay in the supplement to the application form is intended as a basis for further discussion and refinement of your thesis topic before you start your course. The interview will be part of this process: the interviewers will be seeking to establish that you have the motivation for graduate study and that your topic has the depth to sustain three years of intensive study. The process may also continue after the interview with further correspondence between you and your supervisor.
The aim of this preliminary activity is to ensure that you enter your first year as a research student with a clear sense of topic area and purpose.
In the context, it is worth mentioning that it is normal practice in all Social Science departments for candidates who do not already have a MPhil degree to be offered research degree registration at MPhil level in the first instance. (For a description of the upgrading procedures, see the third paragraph of section 6.7).
Your supervisor will be a member of the staff of the Department concerned who is involved and knowledgeable in the area of your research interest. That is not say, however, that supervisors already know all there is to know about the subjects they supervise. The most successful supervisor-student relationships are those in which the interaction of research and learning is two-way, in which the student discovers and explores material and insights which are stimulating to the supervisor as well. Probably, also, you will find that the nature of the relationship will change over the study period, as you become less directly dependent upon your supervisor.
There are things your supervisor will not do, such as writing your thesis for you or acting as your copy-editor in the sense of correcting every error of spelling or punctuation, every idiosyncrasy of vocabulary or grammar. The things supervisors will do come in two main areas:
It is a good idea for you and your supervisor to agree a calendar of meetings at the start of each term, or better still, at the start of each year. You will also need to keep track of one another's movements: it may be that the supervisor will be out of York for a period and thus will not be available for drop-in consultation.
If your supervisor is going to be away from the University, whether for a research term or a more extended period, your Department will make every effort to find a replacement.
If you feel that you have not grasped fully the comments your supervisor makes at a supervisory meeting, it is open to you to ask for a written account of them. Similarly, if your supervisor feels that you are not grasping oral comments, or that your progress is not satisfactory, he or she will reinforce the oral comments by sending them to you in written form. However, this goes back to the point we made earlier about your supervisor not writing the thesis for you. If you get written comments or criticisms from your supervisor, you must not make it the limit of your ambition simply to meet the points your supervisor makes to you in the letter; instead, you should think of those points as a basis upon which to build your own original work.
Once your supervisor has seen your work in its full and final form you will be given the word as to whether it is fit to be submitted for examination - although, obviously, if there is likely to be doubt on this score any reservations and criticisms will have been made known to you much earlier. However, there is a cautionary point to be made here: if your supervisor tells you that in his or her view your thesis can be submitted for examination, that is not a guarantee that it will pass (this is an area to which we shall return in 5.9 below).
The thesis advisory panel exists to offer a second opinion in that, like your supervisor, it will monitor your progress in terms of both quality and timing of your work, largely on the basis of the reports it receives from your supervisor and the drafts it sees from you. It is also the body which will interview you formally to decide whether you should be upgraded from MPhil to PhD status. The panel will normally comprise your supervisor and one or two other members of staff; these other members, who are chosen for their interest in your subject area, are available to you to consult more informally if you so wish.
The University has stipulated that meetings between research degree students and their thesis advisory panel should take place at least once in each year of the student's main registration period, but in some departments the meetings may be more frequent. It also expects that the meetings will be followed by feedback should be particularly detailed in an unlikely event that your progress is other than satisfactory.
Also in this connection, the University has recommended to all departments the practice used in several departments whereby as part of the upgrading interview the members of the advisory panel who are not the student's supervisor interview the student in private without the supervisor being present. The point of this practice is to find out whether there are any problems with the amount and level of the supervision the student is receiving. Not all departments have adopted this practice. Some have chosen other means to the same end, for example a confidential questionnaire administered by the Chair of the departmental graduate school board. But for the purposes of this section of the document the key point is that you should know that there is going to be a channel of this kind open to you.
The first person to talk to in these circumstances is, surprising as it may seem, your supervisor. Presented with the possibility that your work is being affected adversely by differences between the pair of you, he or she should be prepared to examine the situation fair-mindedly.
If talking to your supervisor proves to be impossible or unprofitable, the next person to talk to is your departmental graduate chair or your head of department. It doesn't much matter which: such cases are serious, and the two departmental officers would be likely to consult one another about them. Should you wish to press your case to the point of requesting a change in supervisor, the matter would be considered formally by the departmental graduate school board. Your case would need to be properly documented; you would be allowed to appear before the board in person to present it, accompanied by another member of the University for moral support if you so wish.
In terms of the University's formal academic procedures, the supervisory relationship is a matter which is internal to the department, and any problems arising from it should be resolved at that level. If you feel that your grievance is not being handled satisfactorily within the department, it is open to you to discuss it in confidence with the administrative officer in charge of the Graduate Schools Office; while obviously not competent to advise on specific academic issues relating to the subject matter of your thesis, this officer should be able to provide guidance on general matters covered in the University Regulations and in this booklet, such as frequency of meetings. The Graduate Students' Association, the Overseas Students' Association and the Students' Union might also be able to provide you with advice and support.
There are three wider points to bear in mind in this connection.
Firstly, you do not have to like your supervisor personally in order to get good supervision - although it helps! A supervisor who is detached (but not remote) can sometimes help you towards completion more effectively than a supervisor who is matey (and not detached).
Secondly, if you find yourself wanting to change supervisor remember that your original supervisor was appointed because of his or her expertise in your subject area; a new supervisor may be more agreeable in personal terms but less adequate in academic terms. Remember, too, that changing your supervisor could be costly to your chances of prompt completion as momentum and continuity might be lost in the transition period.
Thirdly, if you feel you have a grievance any case you may want to make arising from it will be stronger for being documented; anecdote may not be enough. Grievance cases are rare; but if you feel that you are not getting proper attention from your supervisor in that the supervisory meetings are infrequent or perfunctory, it may be helpful to you to keep notes of the dates and lengths of the meetings you do have.
Your supervisor is very unlikely to be one of your examiners. The University has a policy that a student's supervisor can be appointed as internal examiner only in exceptional circumstances. The University has to conduct its examinations in a manner which is consistent with the concepts of integrity and impartiality, and also has to be seen by its students and by the outside world to do so: and this makes it improper for the supervisor, who will have been intimately associated with the production of the thesis, to be associated with the examination of the thesis as well
It is University policy that it is open to the examiners to consult your supervisor and, if they so wish, to ask that he or she should be present at the viva voce examination: and this is the normal practice for most departments. If your supervisor is present, it is also open to the external examiner to exclude him or her from parts of the proceedings as appropriate.
In the very few cases where the supervisor is appointed as internal examiner, two external examiners will be appointed (the normal number is one).
The point of explaining these matters of administrative procedure is to show that, procedurally at least, it is possible that your supervisor and the examiners might disagree about the quality of your thesis. If they do, the examiners' verdict is overriding and final. You will be happy to hear, however, that such cases are very rare indeed.
If you submit your thesis for the PhD degree and the examiners recommend that the MPhil should be awarded without the possibility of revision and resubmission it is possible for you to make an appeal, under Regulation 2.9, to the University's Board for Graduate Schools for the opportunity to resubmit the thesis. The permissible grounds of an appeal are procedural only: but they can include seriously inadequate supervision. Again your case will need to be based in substance, rather than anecdotes, and to be supported by documentation (or by the lack of it: if you have been struggling and your supervisor has not given you comments in a written form, this might possibly be a point in your favour). Simply to say "My supervisor told me it was going to be OK" is not going to cut much ice with an appeal committee.
Establishing the initial framework for approaching the theme of your research is one of the most crucial stages in graduate work. It is important that you should begin to grapple with this problem at the earliest stage of your period of study as a research student. In section 4 we described the preparations prior to your arrival at York: the application, further correspondence where appropriate, the interview, subsequent discussion to refine your topic. Nevertheless, this preliminary dialogue with your department and supervisor is neither limiting nor binding. The first few months of your research will be spent in defining and sharpening up your ideas. Do not be surprised if this occasionally involves different approaches, materials and perspectives form those you sketched at the interview stage. Many students start with an over-ambitious framework, which needs to be refined and redefined in ways that meet the criteria for the relevant degree - in the case of the PhD thesis, that it contains "a substantial original contribution to knowledge or understanding" - and that ensures that it can be completed within the prescribed period of study.
There are no hard and fast rules as to the point at which you should start your thesis. Some argue that a draft introduction is the equivalent of a "flight plan": it is important to have it down on paper before proceeding further, even though there may be mid-course corrections en route, for example in the face of high winds or other contingencies. Others argue that you should begin by writing up the material which looks as if it is going to be the simplest or most readily acceptable, leaving the introduction to the end to pull the threads together (the danger with this approach is that it implies that the idea of structure and argument will somehow emerge of its own accord). Yet another approach is to start by writing material which is concrete rather than abstract: as you try to discuss and formulate ideas on concrete material as text on the page, the abstract generalisations are likely to arise from them.
What you write in your first year will not be your final word on the subject. You will find that as you continue into the later stages of your thesis some of your earlier text will need to be clarified or tied into the arguments you develop subsequently. In the early stages, therefore, it is not necessary to labour over every word and sentence in search of perfection which later developments will render relatively less perfect.
On a practical note in this connection, training to use a word processor will save you a great deal of time later.
In addition, material contained in two chapters of this kind will often constitute what is required from you when the upgrading of your registration status from MPhil to PhD is considered, commonly at the end of the first year or very early in the second year. Upgrading procedures differ somewhat from department to department. But what is common to them all is that you will need to convince both your supervisor and your department not only that you have made good progress in your first year but also that you know where you are going. You will also have to persuade them that your thesis, when it is completed, will have the element of originality needed to meet the criteria for the PhD degree. The material you will be required to present for upgrading - for example, the two chapters mentioned above (or other comparable written work) - will also generally have to be accompanied by a reasonably detailed and realistic account of your proposed timetable for the remaining research and writing, up to the point of completion, stage by stage and chapter by chapter, giving dates for each.
So a successful first year as a research student will normally be one in which you have clarified focus, direction and method; in which you have developed any necessary technical skills for your research; and in which you have submitted two foundation chapters (or comparable written material). This will form the bulk of the material you present in support of your request for upgrading from MPhil to PhD.
The difficulties we spoke of in section 6.4 arising from the solitary nature of graduate study may become more pronounced in the second and third years. Be prepared for periods of depression, and be prepared to talk them through with your supervisor, other members of staff and your fellow students.
If you have not completed your thesis by the time the three-year registration is up, you should at least have a full and substantially complete draft if at all possible. You should not still be conducting primary research or collecting and analysing material at this late stage of the registration period.
You will need to set aside at least four months towards the end of the three-year period for revising the thesis. During this period you should go through the thesis carefully to tighten up your arguments; to ensure that your prose expresses those arguments clearly; to eliminate unnecessary repetition; and, at the most basic level, to check references, spelling and punctuation. Your aim should be a thesis which is free from elementary error and a text which can be understood and appreciated by new readers (including the examiners). After the excitements of primary research and secondary analysis, the work you undertake in this final stage may seem like anticlimactic drudgery. But it is also very important; you do not want your thesis to be referred for resubmission because of faults and errors you could easily have avoided earlier.
Be warned: checking and proof-reading always take longer than you think they will. An approach which should reduce errors to a minimum is to read your text at least twice; once for sense, without worrying about typographical errors; and once for typographical errors, without worrying about sense. You should check numbers and statistical tables particularly carefully.
If (in spite of our earlier advice about training yourself to use a word processor for typing your thesis) you write your thesis by hand, you will need to allow time for checking the thesis before it goes to the typist, having it typed, checking the typescript and then checking any amendments - all this before it can finally be presented. These processes are very time-consuming, and will normally take at least six months. They can also be very expensive at the time and even more so should any typographical errors come to light in examination; the University insists that all such errors must be corrected before the thesis can be deposited in the University Library.
As a measure of the seriousness and care with which the Committee considers the applications it receives for extensions of registration, it requires that the applications should be submitted on a standard proforma which requests, firstly, a statement from the student, who is asked to give a detailed account of the present state of the work, the reasons for the delay in completion, an estimate of the extra time required and a note of the timetable for completion agreed with the supervisor; secondly, a statement from the supervisor, who is asked to comment on each element of the candidates' statement; and, thirdly, confirmation that the request has been considered and approved by the departmental graduate committee. The Committee has stated that it will not accept employment in the additional year as sufficient cause in itself for granting an extension; it is looking for additional personal or medical circumstances as mitigation of a delay in completion of the thesis within the prescribed period.
If for personal or medical reasons you are unable to make any progress on your thesis whatsoever, suspension of registration may be a more appropriate option.
The use of printed bibliographies, abstracting and indexing services, and of computerised databases will bring to your notice work already written in books, articles and reports, and relevant research in progress in other institutions both in this country and elsewhere. Material not already available here may be obtained through the Library.
A librarian with responsibility for your subject area will be available to assist you with all stages of your research. Make contact early on so that with his or her help you may quickly become conversant with the techniques necessary for literature searching. If you learn to be systematic and thorough from the start, you will save yourself much time and trouble later.
The central computing system is characterised by communications networks, large scale data storage and archiving, multi-user capability, a high peak processing power and concentration of scarce or expensive resources. These features are important if your work involves collaboration and sharing of data and software within your department and the University or with other institutions both national and international.
Assistance is available on all aspects of computing, not just the centrally-provided facilities, and it is very important to consult the Computing Service right at the start of your project. This can often save weeks of frustration at a later stage.
The two computing techniques most often used by Social Science students are data description and analysis, and the creation and production of theses and dissertations. If anything the latter is even more likely to cause problems than the former, so ask for advice early.
Computers can be of great assistance in your research, but getting the best out of them involves spending time learning and practising, and a certain amount of self-discipline. Start as early as possible, and if all else fails, read the manual!
Make sure that your materials are filed and stored systematically, securely, and in sturdy containers. A pile of articles and drafts in random disorder on your desk or carpet may correspond to some romantic notion of academic behaviour, but it is hardly functional and is vulnerable to loss or other accidents.
If you are using material on a computer, make sure that you have a back up copy in paper form, as a guard against a mechanical breakdown.
If your work is not progressing or is progressing slowly, this may be the result of elementary problems concerned with the organisation of your research materials; and in such circumstances, you should not be hesitant about consulting your supervisor who should be able to give you the advice and guidance you need.
In connection with the issue of libel and the protection of confidential sources, the University's Regulations state: "All theses shall normally be available for consultation. In exceptional circumstances, the Board for Graduate Schools, at the author's request and on the recommendation of the Board of Studies or Graduate Committee concerned, may direct the access to a thesis be withheld for a period not exceeding twelve months from the date on which the award of the degree is approved. Such requests may be made at any stage during the candidature for a degree" (Regulation 2.8.4). In practice, however, the provision for restriction of access is invoked by students and department only rarely. Moreover, restriction is granted by the Graduate and Undergraduate Studies Committee only with the utmost reluctance; the Committee believes strongly in the principle of open access to the findings of academic research, and will grant restrictions only when there is a particularly pressing or pertinent reason to do so.
The Graduate Schools Office also gives guidance about word processor typefaces. The criterion is that theses should be in a permanent and legible form; some of the earlier dot-matrix printers do not meet this requirement.
In this positive spirit, we wish you well for your time as a graduate student at York.