Mantex

Tutorials, Study Guides & More

>> Home / Archives for Academic writing

Semicolons in essays

by

sample from HTML program and PDF book

1. If you are in any doubt at all concerning the correct use of semicolons – then avoid using them entirely. They are the most commonly misused and misunderstood mark of punctuation.

2. It is perfectly possible to write clearly and effectively using only the comma and the full stop. Do this if you are in any doubt about the use of the semicolon (and the colon).

3. Remember that the semicolon represents a pause which is longer than a comma but shorter than a full stop (and a colon). It is normally used to separate clauses which could stand alone, but which are closely related.

4. It is used when the second clause expands or explains the first:

Neither of us spoke; we merely waited patiently in silence to see what would happen next.

5. It is used when the clauses describe a sequence of actions or different aspects of the same topic:

There was a sharp, bracing air; the ground beneath us was dry; the sea was calm and clear.

6. It is used before clauses which begin with ‘nevertheless’, ‘therefore’, ‘even so’, and ‘for instance’:

He usually took great care; even so he made a few errors.

7. It is used to mark off a series of phrases or clauses which themselves contain commas:

For this exercise you will need the following materials: some scrap paper; a pen, preferably blue or black; some A4 envelopes; and some good, white, unlined writing paper.

© Roy Johnson 2003

Buy Writing Essays — eBook in PDF format
Buy Writing Essays 3.0 — eBook in HTML format

More on writing essays
More on How-To
More on writing skills

Sentences in essays

by

sample from HTML program and PDF book

1. Short, clear, and simple sentences are usually more effective than those which are long and complex. Avoid piling up clause upon clause. In the majority of essays, you should aim for clarity and simplicity in your written style. If in doubt, remember this rule: Keep it short. Keep it simple.

2. Punctuate your work firmly, making a clear distinction in your writing between marks such as the comma, the semicolon, and the full stop.

3. Remember that all sentences without exception must begin with a capital letter and end with a full stop.

4. Remember that the common word order (syntax) of a simple sentence written in English is as follows:

subject – verb – object

The cat eats the goldfish
Elephants like grass
We are the best team

If you are in any doubt at all, follow this pattern. Sentences which go out of grammatical control often lack one of these elements, or they have them placed in a different order.

5. You should avoid starting sentences with words such as ‘Again’, ‘Although’, ‘But’, ‘And’, ‘Also’, and ‘With’. These words are called conjunctions, which normally belong in the ‘middle’ of a sentence, not at its beginning. Sentences which begin with a conjunction are very often left grammatically incomplete.

6. Remember that speech and writing are two different forms of communication. Avoid the use of a casual or conversational style when writing. For instance don’t string together clauses which are grammatically unrelated. This is quite normal in speech, but it should be avoided in formal writing.

7. What follows is an example of a statement which has too many unrelated clauses, which goes on too long, and which eventually skids out of grammatical control.

Less smoking would undoubtedly lead to redundancies in the tobacco industry, a consequent rise in the number of unemployed, more people dependent upon State benefits to be supported by a government with subsequently reduced income.

8. The same arguments can be expressed far more clearly and effectively by splitting them up into two separate and shorter sentences. (I have also made one or two minor changes to enhance the sense.)

Less smoking would undoubtedly lead to redundancies in the tobacco industry and a consequent rise in the number of unemployed. More people would then become dependent upon State benefits, which would have to be paid out by a government with a reduced income.

9. Most problems in sentence construction are caused by two or three closely related factors:

  • The sentence is much too long.
  • Too many unrelated clauses.
  • The sentence starts with its verb or object, rather than the subject.
  • The sentence start with a conjunction (‘although’, ‘because’).

10. The solution to this problem is worth repeating:

Keep it short. Keep it simple.

© Roy Johnson 2003

Buy Writing Essays — eBook in PDF format
Buy Writing Essays 3.0 — eBook in HTML format

More on writing essays
More on How-To
More on writing skills

Signposting in essays

by

sample from HTML program and PDF book

1. In most essays (up to 3000 words) you should avoid ‘signposting’ your argument. That is, you do not need to use expressions such as

‘Later in this essay I will be discussing…’
‘Let us now go on to consider…’
‘As I demonstrated earlier…’
‘We will now turn to evaluate another example…’

2. Just state clearly the point of your arguments and leave them to speak for themselves, uncluttered by any direction indicators. You do not need to offer a commentary on what you have already said, or what you will be saying later. In a well-planned essay, this progression should be self-evident from the arrangement of your work.

3. A sound essay plan and a coherent structure will reveal the logic of your argument and the relationship of its parts. If you have, for instance, four main topics to discuss, simple state clearly what those topics are, then deal with them separately, one after the other.

4. Each new topic should be clearly identified or defined as soon as you begin dealing with it. This statement will provide all the indication needed of your intentions. Remember that each paragraph should deal with just one principal stage or item of your argument. Each new topic requires a separate paragraph.

5. If you wish to some light indication of structure, it is perfectly acceptable to use formulations such as

‘The first reason … The second…’
‘On one hand … on the other…’
‘However, the main argument against this is…’

These statements will demonstrate that you have control of your argument.

6. Remember that although an essay may take many hours to write, it will only take a few minutes to read. Signposting is only necessary in very long pieces of work. Even then, skillful writers will integrate any direction indicators into their work as unobtrusively as possible.

7. The conventions on signposting may vary slightly from one subject to another. In some of the sciences it is necessary to announce in advance what you will be writing about. However, these pieces of work are likely to be closer to experimental reports than continuous prose arguments.

8. Similarly, in some branches of psychology or linguistics, students may sometimes be required to offer a meta-critique of a written assignment. They will be expected to describe what they are writing. This is to demonstrate their awareness of the processes in which they are engaged.

9. With these few exceptions, you should not normally comment on the manner in which you have written an essay. Your tutor doesn’t need to know in what order you assembled your evidence, or what difficulties you encountered during its composition. Some students try to disarm possible criticism by announcing in advance how difficult the question was to answer. Your tutor will already know its degree of difficulty, and doesn’t need to be told again.

10. However, you may wish to argue that the question raises a certain number of difficulties or crucial issues. This is acceptable – so long as you say what they are. You should then go on to discuss their relevance to the subject in question, and maybe even suggest some answers to them.

11. The conventions on signposting in report writing are different. Reports are normally written to a pre-determined structure or set of headings. These provide the sequence of events which in a conventional essay have to be constructed by the author.

12. A report of an investigation or an experiment will also have its own sequence of events, so it will be quite acceptable to use expressions such as ‘First the X was added to the Y … and then Z occurred … The results were then analysed and are shown in Table One’.

© Roy Johnson 2003

Buy Writing Essays — eBook in PDF format
Buy Writing Essays 3.0 — eBook in HTML format

More on writing essays
More on How-To
More on writing skills

Spelling checkers used for essays

by

sample from HTML program and PDF book

1. Most word-processors have spelling checkers these days. You should use the checker before printing out your documents. This should form part of your regular editing procedures.

2. Checking your work with a spell-checker will help to highlight and correct commonly mis-spelt words such as ‘accommodation’, ‘parallel’, ‘recommend’, and ‘silhouette’.

3. The checker will also highlight mis-keyed words such as ‘hte’ for ‘the’ or ‘nad’ for ‘and’. You may either choose the correct word from a list, or the processor may offer you the opportunity to reverse the mis-keyed letters. [The latest even perform this function automatically.]

4. It will not be able to recognise specialist terms and unusual proper nouns – names such as Schumacher, Derrida, or Nabokov. These will not be in the processor’s memory. You will have to check the correct spelling of these yourself, as you would do with any other unusual words.

5. Remember that a spell-checker will not alert you to a mistake if you write ‘They washed there own clothes’ instead of ‘They washed their own clothes’. That’s because the word ‘there’ is spelt correctly even though it is being used ungrammatically in this sentence. The same would be true of ‘It is over hare’ instead of ‘It is over here’. That’s because ‘hare’ exists in its own right as a correctly spelt word.

6. Most spell-checkers will spot unwanted double words such as ‘going to to the fair’, and will offer you the opportunity to delete the second occurrence. But they will not notice anything wrong with a word broken by a space such as ‘to morrow’. That’s because these two terms exist in their own right as separate words.

7. The checker will not alert you to any mistake if you key the word ‘practice’ instead of ‘practise’, because both words exist separately. The same would be true of ‘advise’ and ‘advice’. [Most grammar-checkers will alert you to these common problems.]

8. If you decide to add to the processor’s memory names which are frequently used in your own subject discipline (Freud, Jung, Adler or Marx, Engels, Bukharin) make sure that you enter them correctly spelt.

9. Beware of adding too many names which might be thrown up in the checking of your document. Some proper nouns may be the same as mis-spelt words. If you were to add ‘Fischer’ to the dictionary as a name, this would mean that the spell-checker would not alert you to a problem if you mis-keyed ‘fisher’ as ‘fischer’.

10. Beware of adding to your processor’s dictionary just because it is easy and seems a profitable thing to do. You might for instance add your own postcode of ‘SE9 6OY’ – but if you then mis-keyed the word ‘TOY’ as ‘6OY’ the spell-checker would not then be able to pick up your mistake. It would assume that you wished to regard ‘6OY’ as an acceptable ‘word’.

11. A spell check is usually performed after all your text has been generated and edited. However, there are good arguments for using the checker at earlier stages. Layout and spacing might be affected; the document will be in a reasonably good condition at any given stage; and it may eliminate the necessity for a search and-replace procedure at a later stage.

12. Finally, here is a cautionary (and amusing) ditty which might help you to remember some of these points:

‘My New Spell Checker’

Eye halve a spelling chequer
It came with my pea sea
It plainly marques four my revue
Miss steaks eye kin knot sea.

Eye strike a key and type a word
And weight four it two say
Weather eye am wrong oar write
It shows me strait a weigh.

As soon as a mist ache is maid
It nose bee fore two long
And eye can put the error rite
Its rare lea ever wrong.

Eye have run this poem threw it
I am shore your pleased two no
Its letter perfect awl the weigh
My chequer tolled me sew.

[Sauce unknown]

© Roy Johnson 2003

Buy Writing Essays — eBook in PDF format
Buy Writing Essays 3.0 — eBook in HTML format

More on writing essays
More on How-To
More on writing skills

Structure in essay plans

by

sample from HTML program and PDF book

1. The structure of a piece of writing is the (sometimes underlying) order of its parts. Good structure usually means that a persuasive or logical sequence of these parts has been created. This is often best established by creating the structure in essay plans.

2. The basic structure of most essays can be very simple:

  • Introduction
  • Argument(s)
  • Conclusion

3. Provided that the individual topics of your argument(s) are arranged in a clear and meaningful order, this basic model should create a firm structure.

4. The order of the parts is often determined by the nature of the subject in question. This order might be created by:

  • logical progression
  • increasing significance
  • equal significance
  • chronological order
  • narrative sequence
  • category groupings

Arranging the parts

5. Imagine you were writing an essay about French wine. You have decided to discuss four red wines and four white wines. The structure for this essay is created by diving the examples into white wines and red wines – as shown here.

Introduction

Part One – Red wines
* wine 1
* wine 2
* wine 3
* wine 4

Part Two – White wines
* wine 1
* wine 2
* wine 3
* wine 4

Conclusion

6. This is clear, simple, and uncomplicated. But you could also create a slightly more interesting structure by arranging the wines by region. This is the arrangement shown here.

Introduction

Loire
* red wine
* white wine

Bordeaux
* red wine
* white wine

Cotes du Rhone
* red wine
* white wine

Bugundy
* red wine
* white wine

Conclusion

7. It’s the same number of examples, but the arrangement is slightly more complex. This might also make the essay more interesting. Notice how each item is kept separate – so they don’t get mixed up. And each one would be discussed in a paragraph of its own.

8. Next – this process can be taken one step further with a slightly more complex question. You might often be asked to write an essay considering the arguments for and against some topic or proposition. For instance – “Consider the arguments for and against congestion charges in city centres.”

9. There are two ways you can arrange the structure for an essay of this type. Here’s the first, which we’ll call Strategy A.

Introduction

Part One – In favour of congestion charges
* [traffic] reduces volume
* [ecology] less air pollution
* [economy] generates local income
* [politics] positive social control

Part Two – Against congestion charges
* [traffic] public transport alternatives
* [ecology] transfers problem elsewhere
* [economy] reduces profitable activity
* [politics] punishes tax-payers

Conclusion

10. The arguments in favour of congestion charges are kept separate from the arguments against. The structure is simple, clear, and uncomplicated. Notice that the same topics (traffic, ecology, economy, and politics) are covered in both the case ‘for’ and ‘against’. Next – look at an alternative strategy, Strategy B.

11. You can see that in this example the structure is arranged in the form of TOPICS – and each one contains an argument for and against the proposal.

Introduction to congestion charges

TOPIC 1
* [traffic] reduces volume
* [traffic] public transport alternatives

TOPIC 2
* [ecology] less air pollution
* [ecology] transfers problem elsewhere

TOPIC 3
* [economy] generates local income
* [economy] reduces profitable activity

TOPIC 4
* [politics] positive social control
* [politics] punishes tax-payers

Conclusion

12. It’s fairly important if you are using this structure to keep a balance. And the topics must be clearly identified and matched. That is, you must not put an argument FOR economy alongside one AGAINST traffic

13. If there is no natural order for your topics, you might deal with them in order of their importance. You could deal with the smaller, less important items first. This leaves the larger, more important issues until the end of the essay. Discussing the detail first in this way leaves the larger items for general consideration in approaching your conclusion.

14. On the other hand you might wish to deal with the major item(s) first, then turn to a consideration of the detailed evidence which supports the argument you are making. Using this approach, you could then return to your main points again and give them further general consideration as your conclusion.

© Roy Johnson 2003

Buy Writing Essays — eBook in PDF format
Buy Writing Essays 3.0 — eBook in HTML format

More on writing essays
More on How-To
More on writing skills

Student Writing in Higher Education

by

essays on problems and solutions for academic writing

Student Writing in Higher Education is a collection of academic research papers which reflect the work being done in what the editors call the ‘new contexts’ of higher education. By this they mean the writing which goes on in non-traditional subjects such as dance or computer conferencing, as well as the new types of writing such as ‘journals of learning’ and ’empathetic writing’ which are now used in a number of subjects.

Student Writing in Higher EducationThe essays deal with many of the problems faced by typical students – the unspecified audiences for which they are expected to write; the debate about skills-based writing tuition versus ‘writing in context’; and the new problems created by the collapse of traditional subject boundaries.

There is an interesting paper which analyses tutor feedback on students’ written work. This includes some scandalous examples of marking which offer nothing more than marginal ticks and an overall grade. As the authors chillingly observe:

Those tutors who give minimal responses perhaps see the task of reading students’ writing as largely administrative, and/or do not consider students to have the sort of role in the academic community which merits engaging in dialogue with them.”

This chapter should be required reading for departmental heads and anybody with a responsibility for training tutors in marking skills.

A chapter on academic writing in the study of dance throws up the fundamental problem that not all subjects make the same types of intellectual demand. Terpsichoreans are allowed to describe their own practice and reflect upon the Self in a way which would be unthinkable in traditional disciplines. The same seems to be true of ‘Reflective Learning Journals’ in anthropology [which includes the example of a Death Journal!] – though at least these have as a primary function encouraging students to think about interdisciplinary studies and ‘map’ their experiences of learning.

There’s also an interesting chapter on the new use of computer conferencing, with two Open University courses as examples. This throws up the problems of asynchronous and informal academic discourse, as well as the potentially ambiguous role of tutors, who can act as ‘fellow participants’ or as ‘knowledge holders’.

One of the persistent weaknesses of these papers is that they often don’t seem to reach any conclusion or have very much to offer by way of insight. As one contributor observes: ‘I am aware that this chapter has raised questions which have not been answered’. I was also surprised by the amount of heavy signposting – such as a chapter whose final paragraphs begin ‘To conclude this chapter I turn finally to issues of pedagogy…’. The other surprise is that so few – almost none – of the studies actually deal with or quote any of the very subject under consideration – student writing itself.

One of the most interesting chapters is – perhaps strategically – the last, in which Barry Stierer describes the plurality of writing demands in the Open University’s MA in Education. It’s interesting that a careful explanation of the pedagogic requirements of a well-constructed course are more interesting than any amount of strangulated theorising about ‘epistemic modality’ and ‘intrinsic and embodied readings’.

The editors make it clear that they concentrate specifically on the implications of their research for the work of teachers rather than students. In fact this collection will be of most interest to those in the field of educational research striving to generate publications for the next Research Assessment Exercise. But there are also some practical lessons and observations which might actually help those tutors interested in improving students’ writing skills.

© Roy Johnson 2000

Writing in Higher Education   Buy the book at Amazon UK

Writing in Higher Education   Buy the book at Amazon US

Mary R. Lea and Barry Stierer, Student Writing in Higher Education, Buckinghamshire: Open University Press, 2000, pp. 205, ISBN: 0335204074

More on study skills
More on writing skills
More on online learning

Students Must Write

by

writing skills guide for coursework and examinations

Robert Barrass begins this guide Students Must Write with the important observation that students are judged largely on the quality of what they write. It is therefore very much in their interests to sharpen their writing skills for all forms of academic work. He starts from basics, covering taking notes in lectures, and how writing about something helps you to understand and remember it. His advice is punctuated with well-chosen quotations from famous writers, indicating that they struggle too. They write, re-write, plan, edit, scrap drafts, and treat writing as a process. It’s not a one-off action. He analyses examples of slack writing and shows both the weaknesses and how they might be overcome.

Students Must WriteThere’s also a chapter on words – choosing items of vocabulary to make your writing more effective. To support this he adds some wonderfully useful lists of misused words, circumlocutions and malapropisms – but they are somewhat buried inside the chapters when I think they could have been highlighted to greater effect.

There is a particularly good chapter on how to deal with numbers, diagrams, graphs, charts, and tables. This includes such nice points as the order of presenting the slices of a pie chart – clockwise, starting from the largest at noon. [Bet you didn’t know that!]

His tips on exam technique are sound enough – as is his advice on longer pieces of work such as dissertations and reports. He even covers writing letters – applying for that job after you have graduated. And he ends with tips on using word-processors, a few words on punctuation, and a brief guide to spelling and how to overcome some of the common problems.

This is a book for people who want a general stroll through the process of language and writing. It moves from one topic to another in a casual manner. There is a downside and an upside to this approach. The downside is its weakness in terms of organisational rigour. But the upside is that it might make some of the issues of writing less intimidating for the very students to whom this book is addressed.

© Roy Johnson 2005

Students Must Write   Buy the book at Amazon UK

Students Must Write   Buy the book at Amazon US

Robert Barrass, Students Must Write: A Guide to Better Writing in Coursework and Examinations, London: Routledge, third edition, 2005, pp.232, ISBN: 0415358264

More on study skills
More on writing skills
More on online learning

Succeeding with a Masters Dissertation

by

a step-by-step guide to post-graduate writing

Many students find the idea of writing a masters dissertation at postgraduate level a daunting prospect. And that’s quite understandable. They will probably never before have had to produce a work of 10,000 to 15,000 words; they will be uncertain about its content; and they will almost certainly never have seen what a dissertation looks like. John Biggam’s book is a guide to the entire process of developing postgraduate writing skills, from start to finish, and the most useful aspect of his approach is that he breaks the procedure down into separate steps and explains each of them in detail.

Masters Dissertation He starts from what is often the most puzzling stage of all – defining the project. Many students know the topic which interests them most, but turning this into a research proposal can be a long and frustrating process. It’s easy to lose a lot of time changing your mind and pursuing ideas which shift amorphously the very moment you think you have pinned them down.

He offers templates to help solve this problem, outlines the key issues at each stage, and even points to the most common traps that students fall into. This is valuable advice – and it comes from a research supervisor who has seen hundreds and hundreds of examples.

His chapters follow the stages of the process of producing the dissertation itself. How to define the project; making a start with the writing; doing a literature review; choosing the right research methods; dealing with the evidence and producing a conclusion; writing an abstract; and how to present the finished work.

Embedded within all this there are other important issues such as how to create structure, how to define your terms, and how to link one part of your writing to the next so as to create a continuous argument.

He also deals with the issue which many students right up to PhD level find difficult – how to quote from secondary sources and use a referencing system accu rately. He recommends the Harvard system as being popular with both students and tutors alike. Also included is how to conduct both qualitative and quantitative surveys, and what to do with the results when they have been assembled.

One of the suggestions he makes more than once which I thought very useful is that students should make their claims clearly and boldly. Your piece of research may be modestly (and wisely) limited in scope, but there’s no reason why you shouldn’t treat it as something important, even if it is only to make your purpose clear to the person reading and assessing it.

He also offers some very good tips for dealing with the oral defence of your work – the viva – and he ends with what many students will probably find the most useful of all – sample extracts of introductions, literature reviews, research methods, project structures, and questionnaires.

Read the advice, follow it, even use the book as a source of reference, and I’m fairly confident that it will help you to produce a masters dissertation that succeeds. Just like it says on the tin.

© Roy Johnson 2008

Buy the book at Amazon UK

Buy the book at Amazon US

John Biggam, Succeeding with your Masters Dissertation, Berkshire: Open University Press, 2008, pp.268, ISBN 0335227198

More on study skills
More on writing skills
More on online learning

Successful Writing for Qualitative Researchers

by

guidance on advanced academic writing techniques

Yet another writing guide. Successful Writing for Qualitative Researchers is aimed at post-graduates in the social sciences and education. It covers the process of writing from the first steps in conducting research, through to the production of papers for scholarly journals and full length published books. The emphasis throughout is on work which is non-quantitative – that is, writing which knowingly includes a degree of subjectivity and impressionistic reporting – a side of research Peter Woods describes as ‘ethnography’ and which much of the time seems to come dangerously close to creative writing.

Successful Writing for Qualitative ResearchersHe starts with a chapter describing the problems and pain of writing, with copious illustrations from authors who have found it difficult to make a start and just as hard to keep going. This is intended to reassure those struggling that their experience is not unique. Next he discusses the separate parts of a typical academic article, with illustrations from his own work – though strangely enough, he doesn’t spell out first of all what these parts should be.

On the other hand, a chapter on ‘alternative forms of writing’ [non-standard approaches to academic writing] struck me as more interesting, because it offers practical advice on the manner in which writing projects can be presented. Similarly, the best parts of his comments on editing are those in which he examines specific examples, with plenty of good advice on content editing for bias, ambiguity, weak structure, and even libel – though he has an unfortunate tendency to keep bringing in his own publications as source material. [Readers might keep in mind that in the UK ‘researchers’ are assessed on the number of times their work is cited in published works. This might be one sneaky way of pushing up the score.]

There’s a section on collaborative writing where he describes the benefits and dynamics of working as part of a team – though rather too much of this fell back into personal anecdote for my liking. There are other weakness too. His approach often switches disturbingly between guidance and speculation; the mode of address occasionally wobbles uncertainly between ‘one’ and ‘you’; and his exposition switches from surmise to an analysis built on quotes from other writers.

Too often, his emphasis is on describing problems, rather than showing how to solve them. Sometimes, the subject of consideration in any chapter slithers around alarmingly. Chapter sub-headings fail to clarify the internal hierarchy of contents (though this could be the publisher’s fault) and at one point he even includes a personal anecdote into the middle of a bulleted list. These are not examples of good quality writing.

The chapter which I suspect is most likely to be of interest and use to his audience is the last – ‘Writing for Publication’. In this he provides valuable advice on researching the market, with real-life examples. These include how to cope with rejections and how to learn from examples of readers’ reports – which he quotes. He even includes guidance on submitting book proposals, and on negotiating a contract if you have the good luck to have one accepted (and it is often luck). There are also specimen publishers’ guidelines and a sample book proposal which intending writers, from the field of social sciences and education (and well beyond) would do well to study closely.

So, in a sense, this is a book which gets better as it goes along, though the good advice he offers would be more effective if he had followed his own recommendations on clarity of structure, thematic coherence, and rigorous editing.

© Roy Johnson 2005

 Buy the book at Amazon UK

Buy the book at Amazon US

Peter Woods, Successful Writing for Qualitative Researchers, London: Routledge, 2nd edition 2005, pp.200, ISBN: 0415355397

More on study skills
More on writing skills
More on online learning

Supervising the Doctorate

by

good practice for supporting research projects

Now that supervisor training is compulsory, this practical, no-nonsense handbook is essential reading for both the novice and the experienced higher degree supervisor. But I suspect it will be just as useful for the serious postgraduate research student as well. It is reassuring to know that the book is based on the experiences of a postgraduate research skills workshop run at Cardiff University, and the authors illustrate the procedures and problems with real life examples – all of which ring convincingly true to me.

Supervising the Doctorate They start out by recommending that firm guidelines should be established for the nature and structure of the relationship between supervisor and student. Everything needs to be made explicit, and in my experience students need to be made aware of exactly what they are undertaking. Next comes drawing up some sort of schedule of work which is loose enough to give the student flexibility, but firm enough to prevent wasteful ‘drift’. It’s also essential at the outset to establish if the project is feasible. Can it be done? Are any ethical issues raised?

They then go on to the literature review. How to find the literature; how to read it; and how to write about it, including the all important issue of accurate referencing and citation. If you are a supervisor, they offer some good exercises: if you are a student, this section tells you what you should be doing.

They include advice on what is often the laborious issue of data collection. This includes the interesting phenomenon of using post-doctoral researchers as a bridge between supervisor and student.

There are also personal matters to take into account – isolation, poverty, and low morale- all of which can easily develop in the three years or more of doctoral research. They provide useful and realistic advice on these matters, as well as on what they see as the core issue – developing the student’s sense of judgement and good taste.

Of course for most people the hardest part of doing a PhD is writing up to 100,000 words. It’s not something you do often. Their key advice is good: ‘write early and write often’. And they also offer some useful tips on helping to overcome writer’s block.

Probably the most frightening part is the PhD viva, and since it’s something that only happens once for the candidate, it’s not easy to prepare for. But the supervisor can prepare, and they show some case studies to prove the point.

Finally they offer the bonus of advice for activity beyond the degree – that is, helping successful post-docs to advance their careers through networking, teaching, attending conferences, and publishing their work.

This is a very thorough and a thoroughly decent guide to what is often a long and complex process. It’s written for supervisors, but it’s worth reading, whichever side of the examination process you are on.

© Roy Johnson 2005

Buy the book at Amazon UK

Buy the book at Amazon US

Sara Delamont, Paul Atkinson, and Odette Parry, Supervising the Doctorate: a guide to success, Berkshire: Open University Press, 2nd edn, 2004, pp.220, ISBN 0335212638

More on study skills
More on writing skills
More on online learning

Get in touch

info@mantex.co.uk

Content © Mantex 2016