Week 19: 21st – 27th January
In many ways practice-led PhDs can be quite different to their theoretical counterparts; the structure of which can generally be separated into 3 sections. Assuming the PhD is full time, each section will coincide with the corresponding year.
The structure of the PhD
For example, the first year will be spent undertaking an extensive survey and literature review of your area of interest. This will probably include elements of determining methodologies used and deciding which of these are appropriate to your research. This also relates to the first condition for achieving doctoral status, that of having a clear understanding of your field.
After completing the survey, you should now have an understanding of the issues, and more importantly the gaps, surrounding your chosen topic. This brings us to the second stage, focusing on the actual research, fieldwork and methodologies involved in answering your question. Again, identifying the gaps in your field and addressing them within the context of your work, constitutes an original contribution to knowledge, which is another condition of academic research.
The third year is generally the write up year, and focuses on bringing together the process and results of your research along with reference to earlier findings from the literature review. Assuming you successfully defend your thesis in a viva, you will now have achieved doctoral status.
Practice-led PhDs
Of course, although this all looks very straightforward, there are lots of ways of undertaking this process, especially as with Practice-led PhDs, there is not only a written element to the work, but a practical one as well. This is mitigated to some extent by the written thesis being shorter than that of a purely theoretical PhD (50,000 words max as opposed to 100,000).
However, as the relationship between writing and making is naturally reflexive, this can create exponentially more problems within the research process. Therefore I find it can be helpful to separate these from time to time.
In my experience, the above research structure is one which my colleagues in art history and cultural studies seem to be well versed in, but which I was blithely unaware of. Presumably this is because the practice of making doesn’t necessarily follow the same logical structure. However, having discussed* the ways in which researchers typically structure their time, I found it a useful guide to keeping myself on track, regardless of whether I adhere strictly to the specific timeframes.
3rd supervision meeting
After one such discussion on dissertation chapter outlines, I went for my 3rd supervision meeting to talk about how I might undertake my transfer paper. The transfer (or upgrade) stage of a PhD typically happens around the end of the first academic year and relies on the submission of an essay outlining your research so far, to ensure successful continuation on the course. PGR students are not classed as full PhD candidates until after this stage is completed, so it can be quite daunting.
Some of my colleagues in the school had suggested possible ways to approach this, either through focusing on a specific chapter of the work (with additional brief information about the other chapters), or alternatively, writing an overview of the research in general. My preference would be to focus on one chapter, which would be a contribution to the final dissertation.
Research methodologies
I was still a little unsure about what to write about specifically but looking back through my notes I found that the research I’d done into other art objects that expressed my concerns (in week 15) was a large element of my research methodology. This could also contribute towards the literature review of my thesis. Thankfully, my supervisor agreed, and was especially interested in how the blogging process had contributed to the formation of my ideas.
So, despite the Practice-led PhD seeming to be somewhat less structured than other disciplines in the school, it is good to have the freedom to be able to develop new ways of working within these structures and I’m looking forward to presenting my initial findings at the end of the first year.
*This is another positive benefit of being in an academic environment, especially with researchers from other disciplines, or with more experience.
