postgrad course

DrFluffy

Sit down with the Education Grants Directory, published by the Directory of Social Change, and available at most if not all local libraries, or contact the Educational Grants Advisory Service (http://www.egas-online.org/fwa/) and make a list of every charity that might help you. Write to them, call them, email them, whatever!!!

I've already managed to secure £2600 for next year in this way, so it is doable...

Eoin_McLove

Barcode wrote:

A 2:1 does diminish your chances in my area, but not to the extent it is not worth applying (unless perhaps, it's a low 2:1).

Absolutely.

The AHRC distinguishes between 2:1 marks. They break 2:1s into three classifications so they can assess applications more fairly: high 2:1 (68-69.9); average 2:1 (65-67.9); and low 2:1 (60-64.9). I don't know for certain, but I would have thought that of those with 2:1s who did get funding in 2005, most, if not all, would have been in the 'high 2:1' bracket.

But anyway, the most important thing is to write a bollocking good application and ensure that you do as well as you can in your final exams.

And then apply for a Career Development Loan...

Barcode

Problem is that the CDL tends to be for vocational / taught masters courses.

I would also think that your institution plays a part in the selection process, in terms of the percentage of people achieving a 1:1, then a high/mid/low 2:1. In the past few years, perhaps one or two people will achieve a 1:1 on my course. A starred-first (75 plus) is unheard of. In other institutions, I've known people somehow get an average of something like 77%.

In my second year, I had three firsts and three 2:1's, resulting in a 'high' 2:1 overall. I'm still waiting for the breakdown of my scores (I know I have a 2:1 overall) and assume I won't have deviated too much from last years average.

That said, it pays to be realistic. I've investigated other sources, and will likely take out a postgraduate loan or/and borrow money from my partner. Goodness knows what will happen if I don't get funding for a PhD, but I've heard of many cases where people have so-so undergraduate grades, go on to an MA, and are then able to secure research council funding. It's just with the MA, you tend to be left in limbo-land, whereas funding seems somewhat easier to obtain at PhD level.

I do think that once you meet the AHRC criteria, other factors will become important, namely, the research proposal. I spent about two months working out mine and enlisted the help of my tutor. Not everybody does under the mistaken assumption that their grades will carry them through. My advice would be to put a lot of effort into the 500 or so words you have to write. It really can make the difference between funding and none at all. Grades are important, but there really isn't that much difference in ability between the 69 and 70 is there? Seems a bit arbitrary to base funding on a difference of one or two points (although obviously, I'd imagine there is a difference in ability between the 69/75 or the 69/65 etc).

Eoin_McLove

Barcode wrote:

Goodness knows what will happen if I don't get funding for a PhD, but I've heard of many cases where people have so-so undergraduate grades, go on to an MA, and are then able to secure research council funding. It's just with the MA, you tend to be left in limbo-land, whereas funding seems somewhat easier to obtain at PhD level.

Again, I'll reel out some stats from when I applied last year. Around 22% of applicants for the AHRC's Masters funding are successful, compared to 38% for the AHRC's PhD awards. You're right: once you've got past the hurdle of the MA, you have a good chance of PhD funding. Your chances are still reasonable even if you didn't secure funding for your Masters, but needless to say, they are much better if you did. Off the top of my head, I think I read that of those who got Masters funding and then go on to apply for PhD funding, 58% are successful. It's very good odds indeed.

Barcode wrote:

I do think that once you meet the AHRC criteria, other factors will become important, namely, the research proposal... Grades are important, but there really isn't that much difference in ability between the 69 and 70 is there? Seems a bit arbitrary to base funding on a difference of one or two points (although obviously, I'd imagine there is a difference in ability between the 69/75 or the 69/65 etc).

Abso-bloody-lutely. My housemate also applied to the AHRC last year; he got a First, but only got a '3' on the AHRC ranking. I got a high 2:1, and got a '2' on the ranking. Of course it's vital that you have an outstanding personal statement; you're competing with the best of the best. But still, statistics show that a First is essentially a prerequisite for obtaining funding, which is kind of a shame, but perfectly understandable given the huge numbers of applicants.

Incidentally, someone started a thread in the student forum on personal statements for internal/research council funding, so that may have some advice for people who are looking into Masters funding for next year. My very own 500-word AHRC personal statement is there.