Archive for the ‘Ph.D’ category

The seven secrets of highly successful PhD students

April 29th, 2007

1. Care and maintenance your supervisor

  • Meet regularly with your supervisor
  • Discuss and negotiate your progress regularly
  • Understand your different styles
  • If it is not working out, so someting about it. Don’t just think it will get better or that you can do it on your own.

2. Write and show as you go: This is show and tell, not hide and seek

  • Writing and showing your work focuses you to stay on rack and refine your thinking
  • Set deadlines for your writing and handing in
  • Generally it is good idea to write journal articles (on your exact thesis topic) as you go
  • Practice writing with your peers, this can be very effective

3. Be realistic: It’s noe a Nobel Prize

  • When you are doing a PhD you are learning how to do a PhD, you are not expected to know this in advance
  • Original work does not mean a cure for cancer. In reality it means one small step in advancing existing knowledge
  • Do not go off in tangents in the hope of answering ‘The question’, stay focused

4. Say no to distractions: Even the fun ones you think you must do

  • Set priorities and be ealistic about what you can do
  • Do the important rather than the immediately urgent
  • The golden rule to avoid over-commitment is don’t let anything eat into your set study times, or as you would  with a job, make the time up if interruption is unavoidable

5. It’s a job: That means working nine to five but you get holidays

  • You may not work from nine to five, but you definitely need fixed hours
  • Set up a proper workplace
  • Like a job, if you take time off, make it up somewhere else

6. Get help: You are not owner-operator single person business

  • This means you are allowed to get help
  • Use any and all formal assistance in the University including tutors and graduate schools, skills development and faculty staff

7. You can do it: A PhD is about intelligence and persistence

  • Persistence is at least as important ingredient; this comes from habits like meeting regularly with your supervisors, treating a PhD like a job
  • So in fact the final habit of a highly effective PhD researcher is to know and believe that you can do it, and when the going gets tough, keep going!

Extraxts from “The Seven Secrets of Highly Successful PhD Students” by Hugh Kearns &Maria Gardiner, SDTU, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia

Literature Search Strategy

March 6th, 2007

From

Preventing HIV Infection among Injecting Drug Users in High Risk Countries: An Assessment of the Evidence (2006)

Appendix B Literature Search Stategy

No comments.

How do we generalise?

February 27th, 2007

Two possible models here:

Sampling and Proximal Similarity

I leave this topic to tomorrow, or later….

Hard-to-reach Population

February 25th, 2007

I am not going to talk about “hard-to-reach” population in this post. I am interested in these studies on these hard-to-reach populations or hidden populations.

http://www.laria.gov.uk/content/features/68/feat1.htm

(This URL links to a seminar held by LARIA on 15th. Nov, 2001. I never heard of it before and have no idea which category it should go in, therefore I record it here. This groupd charge about 30 pounds for each its publication. For me, these are hard-to-reach documents. )

It’s said from the seminar that “Most research with hard to reach groups has to be qualitative, as these groups do not usually figure strongly in quantitative surveys.” That’s true.

What’re requirements for a good quantitative research?

  • A population with known mean and variation; or
  • A population with unknown mean and variation but a representative and large enough sample can be obtained.

Instead of defining “hard-to-reach” population, identifying characteristics of the target population is more important. One of key characteristics of a hidden population is “No sampling frame existed, and thus the size of the membership and group boundary is unknown.” The other two are acknowledgment of belonging to the group is threatening, because membership involves being the object of hate or scorn and sometimes fear of prosecution; and members are distrustful of nonmembers, do whatever they can to avoid revealing their identities, and are likely to refuse to cooperate with outsiders or to give unreliable answers to questions about themselves and their networks (Heckathorn 1997; Benoit et al. 2005).

Is it the destiny? All qualitative studies targeted on hidden populations are limited in terms of making generalizations about the entire population since a random sample of research participants is too hard to achieve. There is no a “work-in-all” strategy or method. It’s the same in quantitative research but not so exclusive.

(When MRC said “a study should be generable”. How do they evaluate generalization? To which extension? In which way? I so should think about this. )