What do you think?
How to Get a PhD
"A fresh update to a true classic. This is one of the most reassuring and useful books you will ever read about doing your PhD, no matter your topic - or where you are enrolled."
Professor Inger Mewburn, Director of Researcher Development, Office of the Dean of Higher Degree by Research, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia
"How to get a PhD is both honest and thorough and thus immensely helpful, for supervisors as much as for students."
Professor Paul Allain, Dean of the Graduate and Researcher College, University of Kent, UK "The 7th edition! 'How to get a PhD' is proving its status as a must read for PhDs and supervisors."
Dr Hans Sonneveld, Founder and Board member, Netherlands Centre of Expertise for Doctoral Education How to Get a PhD 7e provides a practical and realistic approach for all students who are embarking on a PhD. In addition, supervisors will find invaluable tips on their role in the process, good supervisory practices and how to support students to work effectively. Thoroughly revised and updated throughout, the seventh edition provides an overview of what it means to undertake a PhD within a modern university, exploring both the challenges and rewards of a doctoral degree, - Contemporary challenges for students including transgender issues, sexual harassment, and exploitation within the academic environment
- Time demands, the balance of academia and paid work, and the uncertainty of academic careers and how this can impact students' mental health
- Academic debates surrounding the increased importance of technology and open access
- Emphasising diversity with an increased focus on how students, supervisors and universities can work together to make a more effective and welcoming academic environment The new edition is structured so that users can find the section that will help the specific stage of their work. With practical guidance through the application process, research, viva and post-viva, this book supports PhD students of all disciplines across their journey and beyond, including part-time, those returning to study and those who are practice-based. Estelle M. Phillips has enjoyed a long career as an academic and independent educational consultant. She has published widely on various aspects of the PhD and has spoken at universities on four continents about the skills required to complete and supervise a PhD. Colin G. Johnson is an associate professor at the University of Nottingham, and was formerly Associate Dean for Graduate Studies in the sciences at the University of Kent. He is an experienced PhD supervisor and examiner, and has led training courses for new PhD students and advised on postgraduate strategy for a number of universities. Professor Derek S Pugh (1930-2015) was Emeritus Professor of International Management of the Open University Business School, UK. He published 17 books and over 100 papers in his field and had considerable experience in the design of doctoral programmes and the successful supervision and examination of PhD students.
Professor Inger Mewburn, Director of Researcher Development, Office of the Dean of Higher Degree by Research, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia
"How to get a PhD is both honest and thorough and thus immensely helpful, for supervisors as much as for students."
Professor Paul Allain, Dean of the Graduate and Researcher College, University of Kent, UK "The 7th edition! 'How to get a PhD' is proving its status as a must read for PhDs and supervisors."
Dr Hans Sonneveld, Founder and Board member, Netherlands Centre of Expertise for Doctoral Education How to Get a PhD 7e provides a practical and realistic approach for all students who are embarking on a PhD. In addition, supervisors will find invaluable tips on their role in the process, good supervisory practices and how to support students to work effectively. Thoroughly revised and updated throughout, the seventh edition provides an overview of what it means to undertake a PhD within a modern university, exploring both the challenges and rewards of a doctoral degree, - Contemporary challenges for students including transgender issues, sexual harassment, and exploitation within the academic environment
- Time demands, the balance of academia and paid work, and the uncertainty of academic careers and how this can impact students' mental health
- Academic debates surrounding the increased importance of technology and open access
- Emphasising diversity with an increased focus on how students, supervisors and universities can work together to make a more effective and welcoming academic environment The new edition is structured so that users can find the section that will help the specific stage of their work. With practical guidance through the application process, research, viva and post-viva, this book supports PhD students of all disciplines across their journey and beyond, including part-time, those returning to study and those who are practice-based. Estelle M. Phillips has enjoyed a long career as an academic and independent educational consultant. She has published widely on various aspects of the PhD and has spoken at universities on four continents about the skills required to complete and supervise a PhD. Colin G. Johnson is an associate professor at the University of Nottingham, and was formerly Associate Dean for Graduate Studies in the sciences at the University of Kent. He is an experienced PhD supervisor and examiner, and has led training courses for new PhD students and advised on postgraduate strategy for a number of universities. Professor Derek S Pugh (1930-2015) was Emeritus Professor of International Management of the Open University Business School, UK. He published 17 books and over 100 papers in his field and had considerable experience in the design of doctoral programmes and the successful supervision and examination of PhD students.
- GenresNonfictionAcademia
296 pages, Paperback
First published September 1, 2010
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
Read
August 13, 2026Intelligence- or information-gathering – the ‘what’ questions
*****
There are a lot of things that we don’t know and that we could fi nd out.
What are the age, sex and subject distributions of doctoral students in British higher education?
*****
Since this work is descriptive, answering the ‘what’ questions, it can be considered as ‘intelligence-gathering’
*****
Research – the ‘why’ questions
*****
Research goes beyond description and requires analysis.
*****
expla-nations, relationships, comparisons, predictions, generalizations and the-ories.
*****
information is used for the purpose of developing understanding – by comparison, by relating to other factors, by theorizing and testing the theories.
*****
All research questions have comparisons in them,
*****
All research questions also involve generaliza-tion
*****
These are the focus of PhD study.
*****
Characteristics of good research
*****
Research is based on an open system of thought
*****
You are entitled to think anything.
*****
non-researchers often regard research results as being demonstrations of the obvious or trivial elaborations of established knowledge.
*****
The key to the approach is to keep fi rmly in mind that the classic position of a researcher is not that of one who knows the right answers but of one who is struggling to fi nd out what the right questions might be!
*****
Researchers examine data critically
*****
most important single element in distinguishing a research approach from others and researchers from practitioners and laypeople
*****
Researchers examine data and the sources of data critically so that the basic research approach to provocative state-ments
*****
is not to agree or disagree but to ask: ‘What is your evidence?’
*****
Researchers are continually having to ask: ‘Have you got the facts right? Can we get better data? Can the results be interpreted differently?’
*****
Politicians and managers, for example, often need to make decisions under constraints of public pressure or time.
Their need to act is more important than their need to understand.
*****
Researchers’ priorities are of course different. They have to go to great trouble to get systematic, valid and reliable data because their aim is to understand and interpret.
*****
Researchers generalize and specify the limits on their generalizations
*****
It is the aim of research to obtain valid generalizations because this is the most eff i cient way of applying understanding in a wide variety of appro-priate situations
*****
‘All generalizations are dangerous – including this one!’
*****
research may be said to proceed by insightful but dangerous generalizations, which is why the limits of the generalization – where it applies and where it does not apply – must be continually tested.
*****
The way generalizations can best be established is through the develop-ment of explanatory theory, and it is indeed the application of theory that turns intelligence-gathering into researc
*****
Would measuring the pH value of the water in a swimming pool be research? The answer would depend upon what we were going to do with the result, not on how complicated or how ‘scientif i c’ the measurement was. If the result were used to develop and test a theory of the factors that determine the acidity of water, it would be research; if it were used to make a decision on whether the pool was safe according to established criteria, then it would be intelligence-gathering.
*****
examination of the adequacy of generalizations, formulated as hypotheses, is the cornerstone of research.
*****
Hypotheses
*****
are imaginative and inspirational in character’; they are ‘adven-tures of the mind’
*****
A popular misconception about scientif i c method is that it is inductive:
that the formulation of scientif i c theory starts with the basic, raw evidence of the senses – simple, unbiased, unprejudiced observation.
*****
Out of these sensory data – commonly referred to as ‘facts’ – generalizations will form.
*****
The myth is that from a disorderly array of factual information an orderly, relevant theory will somehow emerge. However, the starting point of induction is an impossible one.
*****
There is no such thing as unbiased observation.
*****
Every act of observation we make is a function of what we have seen or otherwise experienced in the past.
*****
All scientif i c work of an experimental or exploratory nature starts with some expectation about the outcome.
--
Importante
*****
This expectation is a hypoth-esis.
*****
Hypotheses
*****
inf l uence the method
*****
It is in the light of an expectation that some obser-vations are held to be relevant and some irrelevant, that one methodology is chosen and others discarded, that some experiments are conducted and others are not.
*****
Hypotheses arise by guesswork or by inspiration, but having been for-mulated they can and must be tested rigorously, using the appropriate deductive methodology
*****
In a deductive argument, the truth of the con-clusion must necessarily follow from the truth of the starting premises
*****
There are a lot of things that we don’t know and that we could fi nd out.
What are the age, sex and subject distributions of doctoral students in British higher education?
*****
Since this work is descriptive, answering the ‘what’ questions, it can be considered as ‘intelligence-gathering’
*****
Research – the ‘why’ questions
*****
Research goes beyond description and requires analysis.
*****
expla-nations, relationships, comparisons, predictions, generalizations and the-ories.
*****
information is used for the purpose of developing understanding – by comparison, by relating to other factors, by theorizing and testing the theories.
*****
All research questions have comparisons in them,
*****
All research questions also involve generaliza-tion
*****
These are the focus of PhD study.
*****
Characteristics of good research
*****
Research is based on an open system of thought
*****
You are entitled to think anything.
*****
non-researchers often regard research results as being demonstrations of the obvious or trivial elaborations of established knowledge.
*****
The key to the approach is to keep fi rmly in mind that the classic position of a researcher is not that of one who knows the right answers but of one who is struggling to fi nd out what the right questions might be!
*****
Researchers examine data critically
*****
most important single element in distinguishing a research approach from others and researchers from practitioners and laypeople
*****
Researchers examine data and the sources of data critically so that the basic research approach to provocative state-ments
*****
is not to agree or disagree but to ask: ‘What is your evidence?’
*****
Researchers are continually having to ask: ‘Have you got the facts right? Can we get better data? Can the results be interpreted differently?’
*****
Politicians and managers, for example, often need to make decisions under constraints of public pressure or time.
Their need to act is more important than their need to understand.
*****
Researchers’ priorities are of course different. They have to go to great trouble to get systematic, valid and reliable data because their aim is to understand and interpret.
*****
Researchers generalize and specify the limits on their generalizations
*****
It is the aim of research to obtain valid generalizations because this is the most eff i cient way of applying understanding in a wide variety of appro-priate situations
*****
‘All generalizations are dangerous – including this one!’
*****
research may be said to proceed by insightful but dangerous generalizations, which is why the limits of the generalization – where it applies and where it does not apply – must be continually tested.
*****
The way generalizations can best be established is through the develop-ment of explanatory theory, and it is indeed the application of theory that turns intelligence-gathering into researc
*****
Would measuring the pH value of the water in a swimming pool be research? The answer would depend upon what we were going to do with the result, not on how complicated or how ‘scientif i c’ the measurement was. If the result were used to develop and test a theory of the factors that determine the acidity of water, it would be research; if it were used to make a decision on whether the pool was safe according to established criteria, then it would be intelligence-gathering.
*****
examination of the adequacy of generalizations, formulated as hypotheses, is the cornerstone of research.
*****
Hypotheses
*****
are imaginative and inspirational in character’; they are ‘adven-tures of the mind’
*****
A popular misconception about scientif i c method is that it is inductive:
that the formulation of scientif i c theory starts with the basic, raw evidence of the senses – simple, unbiased, unprejudiced observation.
*****
Out of these sensory data – commonly referred to as ‘facts’ – generalizations will form.
*****
The myth is that from a disorderly array of factual information an orderly, relevant theory will somehow emerge. However, the starting point of induction is an impossible one.
*****
There is no such thing as unbiased observation.
*****
Every act of observation we make is a function of what we have seen or otherwise experienced in the past.
*****
All scientif i c work of an experimental or exploratory nature starts with some expectation about the outcome.
--
Importante
*****
This expectation is a hypoth-esis.
*****
Hypotheses
*****
inf l uence the method
*****
It is in the light of an expectation that some obser-vations are held to be relevant and some irrelevant, that one methodology is chosen and others discarded, that some experiments are conducted and others are not.
*****
Hypotheses arise by guesswork or by inspiration, but having been for-mulated they can and must be tested rigorously, using the appropriate deductive methodology
*****
In a deductive argument, the truth of the con-clusion must necessarily follow from the truth of the starting premises
October 6, 2021
I read this book right before starting my PhD. I felt it was quite interesting and it made me think a lot about the relationship between the PhD candidates and their supervisors. It is an interesting read but it focus quite a lot on the UK system. I think this is a good start but there might be more general books out there.
June 2, 2024
Very relatable for me as a current postgraduate student. It really tells you the things to look out for. Although it is written in a UK education system, I think we can apply the "theories" to experiences in other countries as well. Definitely will go back to this book whenever I need some motivation.
August 7, 2020
a good reference book about the process of general phd research and some precautions.
May 8, 2021
I have the first edition and it was helpful in assisting me at the outset
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews