Most PhD students will quickly discover new depths of the human tendency towards procrastination. We develop an irrational compulsion to immediately complete any given task that pops into our heads, as long as it’s of the order of check emails/make enquiry/arrange meeting; for some baffling reason, the same urgent desire is rarely directed towards the meat of the (humanities) doctorate: writing.

Don’t get me wrong: checking emails is important, and making enquiries or arranging meetings can have significant and energising results. But they’re not The Main Thing. With the third year of my doctoral research looming, I need to make sure The Main Thing gets the lion’s share of my day. So in an attempt to wrest back some control over my skittish thought-train, I’m going to be trying out a few time management techniques.

The first to have privileged access to my precious work-life balance is The Pomodoro Technique®. Developed by Francesco Cirillo in the 1980s, and named after a tomato-shaped timer, it’s designed to quite simply get things done. Even better, it’s extremely straight-forward. Each pomodoro is a unit of time: 25 minutes. First, you decide on your task. Then set a timer to alert you when your pomodoro is completed (dedicated downloads for Mac and PC here). You work for 25 minutes, then take a 5 minute break: repeat as required. At every fourth break you take longer off – at least 10 minutes, maybe half an hour for lunch.

I convinced a friend and fellow PhD-er to partake of a day’s tomatoes with me. No doubt her presence gave me added incentive to behave (read: turn off the wifi and stay at my desk), but the value of the little red fruits (three cheers for botanical pedantry) was marked. My task for the day was re-reading and editing a chapter I’m writing for a book, for which the technique worked well. I imagine it would also work for writing from scratch – although perhaps not so effectively for reading and note-taking, where interruptions might do more harm than good.

Firstly, the concentrated time spent working really adds up, so at the end of the day you know you’ve worked solidly for X number of hours. Compared with a day of slightly more diluted focus, even if that was over a longer period of time, that meant I got the feeling of having achieved something. Which makes me feel confident re achieving more things the next day. Which is good.

Secondly, the fixed bursts of activity slowed down the way I work – but in a good way. Rather than wanting to do every aspect of the task all at once, it made me more systematic, and so more attentive to details.

Thirdly, repeating the pomodoros made me aware of the pattern of my concentration, as it ebbs and flows. Often, I’d spend the first ten minutes getting my head calmed down, then have a flash of insight or inspiration, then toil away on it for the remaining time and arrive at the end before I knew it. Whilst it can be disheartening to realise how long it takes to settle into a task, the Pomodoro Technique® meant I had many more such flashes than I would have done had I tried to focus for an extended time.

Fourthly, the regulated timing helped me begin to realise what’s realistic and possible to achieve, and what’s just wishful thinking. No longer will I start each day planning to ‘finish [insert whatever it is I've been working on for three weeks]‘ – and inevitably end it feeling disappointed. Learning to manage your time over a long period, and make accurate projections about what you can do in a month/six months/a year is an extremely valuable transferable skill. This little tomato will bring your ambitious schedule into line with reality.

So I’d definitely recommend you try it – and please comment below on your experiences! Why not also let me know of any other time management techniques you use, and I’ll give them some blog-space.

Happy pomodoro!

When I reflect on my own research life so far, my overactive (literature student’s) imagination springs into action with the help of some trusty word-pictures. Do these ring true for you?

In the early days I did a lot of archival research.  At this stage, it felt like I was finding lots of tasty morsels to season my thesis with – salt and pepper, maybe some rosemary* – but no big juicy steak to fill the proverbial plate.

On the other hand, writing always feels like catching a nervous horse. You have to walk up to it sideways, looking like the last thing you want to do is write a thesis. I mean, catch a horse. So I approached it from all sorts of angles, whistling nonchalantly, and managed to get a few thousand words on paper in the process.

(Forgive the mixing of metaphors: I’m certainly not suggesting you cook la viande de cheval and hand it in to your supervisor.)

More recently, it seems my daily work most closely resembles that of a shepherd. Spring has sprung, and the pastures of the last two years are now populated by lots of lovely little thought-sheep. My job is to get them into a straight line, and through yonder gate… “Baa-ram-ewe!”

Do you see your PhD in pictures, too?

*you’ll be grateful I avoided making a bad joke about not having enough thyme

• The challenge -  A PhD will challenge you in many ways. You have to be disciplined, organised (although people that can see my desk may disagree with this point) and have endless energy and enthusiasm for your subject.
• You enjoy learning – You have to have detailed in depth knowledge of a subject (you should  become an  expert on your particular niche subject) and constantly keep learning more about your subject area.
• You love research – and I mean REALLY LOVE research. You have to get a feeling of excitement from results or findings (this feeling can be the only thing that keeps you going).
• You can deal with disappointment – this is unfortunately something that will happen along your PhD journey. Something will not work, someone may publish something you have been researching for the previous 12/18 months before you do and you may not get a job at the end. These things happen, you have to be ready to face it, deal with it and move on.

If you still feel like you would really love to do a PhD then go for it! PhDs are not all doom and gloom…. if you are already doing a PhD, then remember why you started it and learn to love it!

Normally, abstracts should have the same logical flow which one would expect for an article. The abstract starts with the motivation behind the paper, which could discuss the open problem that the paper solves, progress towards the research community’s goals and the difficulties of the research problem. The abstract should also briefly mention the approach/proof technique/methodology etc. A precise statement about the results in the paper is the most important part of the abstract. An abstract should then conclude with possible implications and utilizations of the paper.

Editors also expect the abstract to obey the word limit. It is not good practice to use formulas or terms which are not defined. Although most papers have a separate section for keywords, it is useful to use most of the key words within the abstract. Many keywords are standard categories so it is good practice to be consistent and use similar keywords to previously published related papers. Moreover, the keywords should be precise as they are often the basis on which the paper is assigned to a specific reviewer with the same interest.
If all this was not that helpful, then one could always use the following tongue in cheek template proposed by phdcomics.com for writing a suitable abstract!

The saying rang true when a colleague in the engineering department recently underwent his PhD viva. Traditionally, people have the idea that when someone gives a PhD viva, either he gets the degree after the viva or not. However my colleague has been asked to make corrections to his thesis, which may take some months to complete. This means that apart from ‘yes’ or ‘no’, there may be other outcomes of a viva. For example our university guidelines include the following sentences:

A candidate will frequently be asked by the examiners to make minor corrections to his/her thesis before the examiners recommend the award of the degree and the thesis is in a satisfactory state to be lodged in the University Library. Such corrections will typically include removal of typographical errors and possibly re-writing of very limited sections of the thesis. …

…If you are asked to resubmit your thesis you will be informed by the Graduate School Office which will send you notes for guidance prepared by the examiners on the revisions you are required to undertake. A time limit will be set for the resubmission and this must be strictly adhered to.

Therefore, if a friend of yours is going for his viva, hold off the celebrations for a while even if you don’t expect a disaster,. As Yogi Berra said, ‘It ain’t over till it’s over’

The following are some of the generalized points which I have summarized:

• Each supervisor has his own way of doing things so there is no set method.
• Some supervisors have funding for a well-defined project and they require some one who will fit in with that project.
• Other supervisor mights show more flexibility and let students find their feet (and interests).
• A sensible way is to define a narrow enough area where a research proposal will have some meaning but broad enough to give some flexibility.
• Some previous research experience in the proposed area of research is very helpful for the applicant. The ideal thing would be to do an MSc research project in which research of the proposed PhD supervisor is cited or directly related.
• The research proposal should demonstrate that you already have knowledge of the literature. Try to cite some key classic and latest publications for your proposed research area.
• It is worth browsing the website of the research group one is interested in and checking which faculty members are more likely to take you (there is less chance of joining some one who is going on sabattical or is on a long visit to another country etc.)
• Make sure your email and proposal use impeccable English.
• Strong references from people in the same research area will be helpful.
• Have a chat with the person you want to work with. This is the best way to check how both you and the supervisor see things.

A PhD dissertation is a lengthy, formal document that argues in defense of a particular thesis…Two important adjectives used to describe a dissertation are “original” and “substantial.” The research performed to support a thesis must be both, and the dissertation must show it to be so. In particular, a dissertation highlights original contributions… The essence of a dissertation is critical thinking, not experimental data. Analysis and concepts form the heart of the work… In general, every statement in a dissertation must be supported either by a reference to published scientific literature or by original work.

Although a dissertation does not have to follow rigid organization rules, the article gives a canonical organization of a dissertation: “Introduction”, “Definitions”, “Conceptual Model”, “Experimental Measurements”, “Corollaries and Consequences”, “Conclusions” and “Abstract”.

Among other things, Comer has listed certain things which should be avoided in a thesis:

• Adverbs (overused and weak)
• Jokes or puns (They have no place in a formal document.)
• Moral or qualitative judgments such as “bad”, “good”, “nice”, “terrible”, “stupid”, “ideal solutions” and “perfect”
• Inexact words such as “soon”, “seems”, “different”, “few, most, all, any, every”.
• Vague terms such as “in terms of”, “based on”, “number of”, “due to”
• Colloquial terms such as “in light of”, “lots of”, “kind of”, “type of”, “something like”
• “This” and “that”.
• Writing in the first person “I have done…”
• Writing in the second person such as “you will read about…”
• Using “prove” or “show” if there is no mathematical proof.
• Self assessment

‘Elements of Style’ is a short and sharp text which gives valuable tips on improving writing style. Although many of the tips might be basic, it is impressive that so many useful points are compressed in such a short book. The book has five main sections:

1. Elementary rules of usage
2. Elementary principles of composition
3. A matters form
4. Words and expressions commonly misused
5. An approach to style

The fourth section gives common misuses of expressions. It is useful to review them and become more careful when writing. This may help to avoid the embarrassment of having written mistakes highlighted in a referee’s report. The book places special emphasis on writing compactly. This emphasis is even evident from the size of the book (105 pages).

I am not entirely convinced that this book is perfectly suitable for academic writing. For example, the book is vigorous in its emphasis on active voice. Although active voice is more direct and powerful, it is not always preferred in formal academic writing. In any case, ‘Elements of Style’ is a useful little book.

Among mathematical writers, Paul Halmos was unique because of his clear exposition and introduction of clever notations. Halmos, known for his famous autobiography, also wrote an insightful essay on how to write mathematics. Halmos claims in the beginning that the essay should be titled ‘How I write mathematics’. However, he is simply showing humility and we can get some important lessons from his essay. Here are some of his tips:

1. Say something (Don’t communicate something non-substantive or with too many ideas)
2. Speak to some one (Have the target audience in mind)
3. Organize first (to maximize understanding and logical flow)
4. Write in spirals (re-writing previous sections is required as the big picture emerges)
5. Organize always (organization is required even while writing and after it)
6. Write good English (correct and unobtrusive English will not distract the reader)
7. Honesty is the best policy (clarity is better than pedantry)
8. Down with the irrelevant and the trivial
9. Do and do not repeat
10. The editorial `we` is not all bad (Using a neutral voice is good but use of ‘we’ is preferable at times)
11. Use words correctly (words of mathematics and logic should be used be used in an unambiguous way)
12. Use technical terms correctly
13. Resist symbols (minimal symbols makes the writing clearer)
14. Use symbols correctly (correct and consistent usage of symbols is desirable)
15. All communication is exposition (lectures, letters, articles and books should all be treated seriously)
16. Defend your style (against editorial assistants who may mess things by mechanical implementation of style rules)
17. Stop (one can’t keep improving the writing indefinitely)