How to Complete and Survive a Doctoral Dissertation

by David Sternberg

Mastering these skills spells the difference between "A.B.D." and "Ph.D."

-refuting the magnum opus myth
-coping with the dissertation as obsession (magnificent or otherwise)
-the fine art of selecting a topic
-writing the dissertation with publication in mind
-when to stand your ground and when to prudently retreat if the committee's conception of your thesis differs substantially from your own
-dealing with obstructive committee members, and keeping the fences mended
-how to reconsider "negative" findings as useful data
-reviewing your progress, and getting out of the "dissertation dumps"
-defending your paper successfully-distinguishing between mere formalities and a serious substantive challenge
-exploiting the career potential of your dissertation
-and much, much more

Genres: Writing, Academia, Nonfiction

240 pages, Paperback

First published June 15, 1981

About the author

Dr. David Sternberg has been advising graduate students on this subject since 1969 as an integral part of his professorships at New York University, Washington State University, and in his present position as professor of Sociology at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, City University of New York.

Reviews

[Robertson · Rating 2 out of 5]

Has some useful points, but it is mostly outdated. This book seriously needs to be pulled from the market or at least given a major overhaul. It reflects a kind of cynicism on the part of the publishers to even have this book still out and being reprinted. It was published in 1981 and it shows. There is a totally useless, but still fascinating, chapter on whether or not one should use a computer in writing your dissertation. The relationship between grad students and professors seems to have changed since the publication of this book as well, or at least my own experiences do not largely reflect those which are discussed in the book as being an average dissertation experience. The author rather "annoyingly" uses "unnecessary" quotations throughout the "book" and is "long winded," relating many boring personal anecdotes about the writing of his (surely boring) dissertation in sociology on students at a chiropractic school. There are a few gems in later chapters, but mostly this book should be approached as a historical artifact and not as any self-help guide that is applicable to contemporary dissertation writing practices.

[Fred Putnam · Rating 4 out of 5]

Somewhat dated (in 1981 mainly scientists, engineers, and graphic artists had computers) and (as some reviewers mention) cynical, but lots of solid advice on thinking through a topic, organizing materials and time (caveat: he recommends jettisoning all relationships that might hinder your completing your dissertation--highly questionable advice), and your relationship with your advisor. I had a great relationship with mine, which is probably why some of his advice seems cynical; your response to these sections will likely depend on your own experience. I also suspect that some of his advice is more or less applicable according to the fiend in which you are working. Overall, I like this, found it helpful, and have recommended it to many grad students and students who are considering doctoral studies; many of them have thanked me.

Alongside Sternberg, I recommend The Clockwork Muse: A Practical Guide to Writing Theses, Dissertations, and Books, by Eviatar Zeruvabel (Harvard U.) and The Office of Assertion: An Art of Rhetoric for the Academic Essay, by Scott F. Crider (ISI). The first is on figuring out how *you* write and working with and within your self; the second is on organizing and finding cohererence within ideas. Together with Strunk & White's Elements of Style, these form a v. helpful little "Shelf on Academic Writing".

[G A · Rating 5 out of 5]

Interesting book for those who want to learn about an experience of a PhD student. Good advice to understand how a PhD works before, in the middle and at the end. It’s an honest and clear review of an experienced student and graduated PhD who wants to let you know what is waiting for you and how to be ready. From his point of view of course. Here a couple of valuable insights:

- One of the most troublesome aspects of the dissertation is the relative absence of short-term, even middle-term rewards. Dissertation writers constantly complain about not being able to see the end of the road as the months and seasons of proposal, research, analysis and writing go on. Page 34.
- Developmental psychologists have demonstrated that children with their rooms perform better in school than matched children without one. ... There is every reason to believe that such differentials stretch into adult performance of intellectual tasks. Page 43.
- I have discovered that some time each day (or at least five days a week: even the most zealous candidate has to reward himself with an occasional day of rest) at the office is the key effective variable. Page 45.
- I like to see fifty or more pages to a proposal. It is all right, too, if it is wordy, loquacious, even gushy; such excess can always be edited. Page 81.
- Get the book. It’s a weekend reading ;)

-

[James · Rating 5 out of 5]

The only problem I had with this book is that I discovered it a bit too late in my dissertation process. His description of committee member types -- and those to avoid -- was uncanny. I felt like photos of a couple of my crazies could have been included.

Seriously, this book explains why so many people end up ABD (all but dissertations) and in what fields. Humanities and social sciences -- not surprisingly -- are the worst. He gives useful guidance and perspective on how not to get trapped and why not to internalize the imposter syndrome that some departments (certainly to include mine) actively seek to cultivate.

For example, had I read this sooner, I would have run screaming from the room when a professor told me I was a decade behind in my reading -- in a program that was supposed to take three years!

[Kathy Godwin · Rating 4 out of 5]

I recommend this book for the ABD who is struggling. A colleague recommended it to me as I try to restart the process again and again.

This book was helpful. Some points are a bit dated but others are helpful regardless of the timeline.

[Nico · Rating 2 out of 5]

Very dated. Sexist language. Long digressions. But not entirely useless?

[Rebecca · Rating 3 out of 5]

While it contains some good information, the writing style is very dry...not unlike a dissertation.

[Tristan Miller · Rating 1 out of 5]

As a piece of humour, this book works well. Some choice quotations:

Hard and life science doctorates require a "dissertation," but the form and strict faculty supervision of these projects are not like a full dissertation… Hard science and professional-degree candidates know that if they attend two to four years of classes along with their mates and carry out the last-year project, closely supervised by their advising professor, they will—excepting contingencies like banana-peel slippage—almost always receive their doctorates.

The Computer: To Use or Not to Use? The issue whether to use computer technology in the data-processing and/or analysis stage of a dissertation is usually a serious one only in social science dissertations…

Survey data, demographic data, large-scale, large-sample questionnaire data are all good candidates for computer processing. The larger that observational data, collected firsthand, looms, the less the importance or even legitimacy of the computer…

Many students, and faculty, are terrified of the computer. Indeed, computer folks are able to get a leg up on the rest of us by exploiting that fear; they possess some powerful, specialized, "scientific" skills to which we don't have a clue… There are also very serious questions about the validity or (limited) applicability of mathematical procedures in research about people, but most of us can only intuit objections to mathematical models of social behavior, since we don't have the math that the specialists keep urging upon us.

I have my doubts as to whether any of this was valid back in 1981 when the book was published, though it certainly isn't valid now. How embarrassing it must be for the author for this book to remain in print. No doubt it contains some useful information on the writing and research process, though it's in desperate need of an update.

[Paul Smith · Rating 1 out of 5]

Since I have to translate this book word by word. This is the worst book since I have read in my life. I am strongly agree with Robertson. The author used many complex sentenses with many long anedotes, added up with difficult idiom (what the hell for?). The book has descriptive writing style which It wasted my brain to imagine. The author should directly describe what he want to inform us. This book should assist doctoral disseration writer to save their time, not WASTE their time. There are many idioms in this book which I do not have any clues why the authors used it. May be.... He thought it was the way that made him so smart and wise. (What the stupid thing?)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For example, "Jill's marital with jack can also be handled with role-playing, where other members take the parts of her husband and children. I believe that both-sex groups work best, since many of the interpersonal dissertation problem center in one way or another around disrupted relationships with loved ones of opposite sexm or with families" blah blah blah.......
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just say "Dissertation writer should make a role play, in case, dissertation can be trouble for relationship between lovers. It can help you"

That's enough. stupid and annoying author!

[Ege · Rating 4 out of 5]

Quite good advice! Some of the hard-to-formulate questions are tackled head-on, what a relief!