Ahrc?

mitten_2

I didn't start this thread to get criticized.
My research is valuable and good and so is so many people's and it still doesn't get funded by the research council as they are over subscribed. There are so many people who have first class degress and have really good masters degress but STILL don't get AHRC funding.

mitten_2

kittymary wrote: »

What I don't understand is why, given that you did not get a first, you felt you were so outstandingly brilliant that you should go straight onto the PhD without doing a masters first?

I did not think that I was outstandingly brilliant and in this thread I have never once said that I am so I actually wonder about your motivation for saying such a thing. It's what many people who have been rejected for PhDs or who have had to do a masters first would say.

Not that I need to justify myself, but i was on track for getting a very high first class degree when my boyfriend of three years died in a car accident. The grief that brought about distracted me from my studies and I had to have 4 months off university while i tried to become emotionally stable again.

That aside, I went straight from my degree to PhD as my university tutors thought that my area of interest was well-developed and my research skills were good so it was not necessary. They knew that without a first class degree i would be unliklely to get AHRC funding and by not doing a masters i was saving thousands which would mean i could make a start on my phd.

My downfall was thinking that once i was engrossed in my PhD and producing work which my superiors were pleased with, then funding would come more easily. The fact is the AHRC are not interested in the work I am producing now as i don't tick the degree/masters box first.

I don't expect to change anything by writing this thread, i was just hoping to hear other people's experiences or suggestions. I was not looking to be criticised.

Voyager2002

mitten wrote: »

I didn't start this thread to get criticized.
My research is valuable and good and so is so many people's and it still doesn't get funded by the research council as they are over subscribed. There are so many people who have first class degress and have really good masters degress but STILL don't get AHRC funding.

Yes, there was someone posting here a few months ago about his son. The son had got a First in History from Oxford, and then funded himself to do a one-year Master's degree. Even after that, and with the full support of his department, he still could not get PhD funding.

And I don't think the horse-riding comparison is fair, since research in the Humanities has the potential to civilise our society. And the project on street names sounds perfectly reasonable to me: it is obviously historical research, and the reasons why particular streets were given their names may reveal a great deal about the values and concerns of people living in a particular place at a specific time.

Anyway, I had to fund myself for my MSc, and it then took me nine years to get funding for my PhD. And it was practical: about how Biotechnology could be managed to help reduce the amount of hunger in the 'Third World'. In the end the Open University gave me their one and only scholarship for the year, so I was very lucky.

A decade later, and I have just spent the last week working on another funding application. My job depends on it, but it is for a larger project, with a budget of nearly two hundred grand over three years.

Never ends, does it?

mitten_2

Voyager2002 wrote: »

Yes, there was someone posting here a few months ago about his son. The son had got a First in History from Oxford, and then funded himself to do a one-year Master's degree. Even after that, and with the full support of his department, he still could not get PhD funding.

And I don't think the horse-riding comparison is fair, since research in the Humanities has the potential to civilise our society. And the project on street names sounds perfectly reasonable to me: it is obviously historical research, and the reasons why particular streets were given their names may reveal a great deal about the values and concerns of people living in a particular place at a specific time.

Anyway, I had to fund myself for my MSc, and it then took me nine years to get funding for my PhD. And it was practical: about how Biotechnology could be managed to help reduce the amount of hunger in the 'Third World'. In the end the Open University gave me their one and only scholarship for the year, so I was very lucky.

A decade later, and I have just spent the last week working on another funding application. My job depends on it, but it is for a larger project, with a budget of nearly two hundred grand over three years.

Never ends, does it?

I hope you're successful with your application.

It is really demeaning asking for money. I have just applied for hardship fund and i am ashamed to be giving over my bank details etc.
Given how the benefits system works in this country it is a pity when the academics of the future have to drop out due to funding or work jobs which take up so much of their time that they fail their PhDs.

GoldenEye

I was agreeing with Mitten. My personal opinion is that the SLC should offer low interest loans to help fund PhD study.

A PhD in "street names" is fine if you fund it yourself. The taxpayer should not fund it though.

mitten_2

I think there is a problem when we start making value judgements on the different types of research.

The truth is, i do see scientific research to be more valuable in most cases. But they have their own research council. So if we agree that the PhDs funded by the AHRC perhaps are not as conventionally 'valuable' as science research, the AHRC do fund people in the arts and the humanities and they have money available to do that.

ftbworried

mitten wrote:

The truth is, i do see scientific research to be more valuable in most cases. But they have their own research council. So if we agree that the PhDs funded by the AHRC perhaps are not as conventionally 'valuable' as science research, the AHRC do fund people in the arts and the humanities and they have money available to do that.

Yes but the AHRC have a LOT less money. You have a very good chance of getting a scientific PhD funded, but there is a much smaller chance of getting an arts PhD funded therefore it is more competitive and more people like you will have to self-fund. You obviosuly knew that your chances of funding in the beginning were nearly non-existent so it totally bemuses me why 1yr+ down the line you are on here complaining about why its so unfair that your friend has funding and you haven't.

mitten wrote:

i was just hoping to hear other people's experiences or suggestions. I was not looking to be criticised.

Ahhh, that was the point of your post? because I didn't really get it the first time round. Infact I think I wrote "I don't know what advice you are after" because it just seemed like a rant about how its so unfair that your friend has funding and you don't. I'm not criticising you- I'm just explaining WHY its not 'unfair' it's just the realistic situation that your area is in and why your friend might have found it easier to get funding than you. I suggested that if you need funding to survive your PhD then you should perhaps look at changing your research area to one that is more 'fundable' or perhaps one where you guarenteed fairly good job prospects to pay for the debt you'd rack up in funding it yourself.

Voyager2002

ftbworried wrote: »

Yes but the AHRC have a LOT less money. You have a very good chance of getting a scientific PhD funded, but there is a much smaller chance of getting an arts PhD funded therefore it is more competitive and more people like you will have to self-fund. You obviosuly knew that your chances of funding in the beginning were nearly non-existent so it totally bemuses me why 1yr+ down the line you are on here complaining about why its so unfair that your friend has funding and you haven't.

I don't think that comment is entirely fair. The OP made it clear that while she had no chance of funding when beginning her PhD, she believed that once she had demonstrated her aptitude and made good progress some funding might become available. In fact, I know a number of people who have had this experience and have moved on to scholarships after a year of self-funded research.

ftbworried wrote: »

Ahhh, that was the point of your post? because I didn't really get it the first time round. Infact I think I wrote "I don't know what advice you are after" because it just seemed like a rant about how its so unfair that your friend has funding and you don't. I'm not criticising you- I'm just explaining WHY its not 'unfair' it's just the realistic situation that your area is in and why your friend might have found it easier to get funding than you. I suggested that if you need funding to survive your PhD then you should perhaps look at changing your research area to one that is more 'fundable' or perhaps one where you guarenteed fairly good job prospects to pay for the debt you'd rack up in funding it yourself.

Changing a research area is not simple: a graduate in an Arts or Humanities subject cannot just walk into a PhD in Engineering! Furthermore, it is clear that these funding decisions are based on some very simplistic assumptions about what is "useful" or "valuable to society", and a couple of years later the fashion changes. People who try to spot what is likely to be funded are liable to 'miss the boat' and end up being specialists in topics that not only bore them silly but are out of fashion and no longer attract funding. The only sensible approach is to maintain your integrity and concentrate on what you, as a researcher, believe is both interesting and worthwhile. And you just have to hope that the fashion in funding will move in a similar direction.

Voyager2002

mitten wrote: »

It is really demeaning asking for money. I have just applied for hardship fund and i am ashamed to be giving over my bank details etc.
Given how the benefits system works in this country it is a pity when the academics of the future have to drop out due to funding or work jobs which take up so much of their time that they fail their PhDs.

Nothing demeaning about asking for money. You are offering to do good work that they want done and are willing to fund, so explaining what you are going to do is just the process of setting up a deal. I just wish it didn't take so long.

Anyway, providing your bank details is just the same when you are getting paid a salary. And the Access/Hardship fund has money to pay to people who meet particular criteria, so you just confirm that you meet those criteria. Nothing remotely shameful about it.

And once someone becomes a lecturer, they spend as much time teaching and doing admin as an "ordinary" job takes up, and still have to maintain a high research profile, so doing a s**t job while working for a PhD is probably a good preparation for life as an academic.

ftbworried

Voyager2002 wrote:

I don't think that comment is entirely fair. The OP made it clear that while she had no chance of funding when beginning her PhD, she believed that once she had demonstrated her aptitude and made good progress some funding might become available.

I don't think it is unfair. She obviously asked her supervisor/tutors what her chances were and I quote: "They knew that without a first class degree i would be unliklely to get AHRC funding".

If the OP made a CHOICE to embark on a degree after being advised that she was "unliklely to get AHRC funding" then he/she took a gamble. One that unfortunately for her didn't pay out. He/she has to accept that and stop blaming other people who are getting £12k stipends as the reason that she is struggling to fund something that he/she CHOSE to do.