So, I made it through to the end of my MSc. There was an 100% pass rate among the students this year – celebrations all round!
In a previous post I was trying to decide upon a supervisor for my PhD studies. The advice I received here and elsewhere mirror that offered to Anna Vilborg in her post on trying to decide where to do a post-doc – don’t do what I did!
I got on well with the supervisor of the third MSc projects from the outset, and, of the three projects I had to complete for the MSc, this was by far the one I enjoyed the most. The supervisor and I agreed that the MSc project can be considered a preliminary or preparatory study and that I can work on this topic for a PhD.
So after a fortnight’s break, I am back at my desk, writing my PhD proposal, preparing a paper on one part of my MSc project, and writing some code to use for the PhD proper.
Inevitable induction sessions took place early in the first week, including a welcome by the graduate schools. I have blogged before about my penchant for self-help guides. My collection of Imperial’s trio of in-house publications has been completed with my copy of Learning to Research . In common with the transition from taught to research study, Learning to Research has a less softly-softly approach than its predecessors, and includes a comprehensive description of the rights and responsibilities of both student and supervisor.
Whilst it does not make its way formally into the Code of Practice for Students and Supervisors, the phrase A PhD is not a 9-to-5 was reiterated during the welcome session, both verbally (video link) by the Director of the Graduate School for Life Sciences and Medicine and in a written summary of what PhD students and supervisors should expect.
Students are expected to
Work Hard – PhDs cannot be accomplished with only a 9-5 effort.
If I am honest, I am a little intimidated by this.
Professor Morley claims that
_hard work placates supervisors.
It makes us happy when you are here long hours and weekends_
There is one sense in which science never leaves me. I cannot be alone in taking papers home, to read in the evening, because they are not strictly related to my PhD topic, but they are interesting nonetheless. Often, often, the solution to a problem that I have spent half a day staring at hits me when I am walking across the park, or ploughing up and down the swimming pool, or doing the washing-up. If someone asks me what my PhD is in, I can quickly get excited about it and try to explain it, and what I am going to do next, and what it means.
In that sense, my studies are not 9-to-5, they are more like 24/7.
I appreciate that self-doubt is common among postgraduate students (and scientists at any stage of their careers), but the reinforcement of the above expectation has me thinking, do I have it in me to work hard enough? I like my work, but I have many other things I like to do too. Some are science-related, but some are not.
There are many valid work patterns, and to relentlessly evaluate how hard I am working against my perceptions of my peers’ efforts is unlikely to be accurate, but that doesn’t negate the nagging question.
I reassure myself that I have made it this far, with my own study habits and my own way of working, that I have adapted what I do as I go to meet the demands of the courses. My work-life balance over the next three years is not set in stone – I can change my schedule as I need to. Maybe such a flexible approach does not come naturally to a scientist, but I don’t think anyone is able to tell me that if I am in the office at this time and leave at this other time, that will be “sufficient”.
The flexibility of the schedule is both a perk and a burden of research. I hope that someone will let me know, though, if I am not getting anywhere fast enough.
In that sense, my studies are not 9-to-5, they are more like 24/7.
Sounds like the right sense for you to do just fine, Erika.
As long as you continue to want to know what, how and why (in particular; not exclusively!) then you’re probably on the right track, no matter where you are.
Face time in lab is good, but it’s not enough to guarantee success, of course. It’s a surrogate preferable to certain other measurements of performance results, though. Should you have a hard time producing said results (ie. publishable stuff), it’s probably just as well to do your brainstorming and head-scratching in lab as elsewhere. It’s how your supervisor can tell you care and are trying, and even beating your head against the wall in a supervised manner may teach you something useful.
Continue to do those other things you like to do – it’s how you’ll stay sane and keep it all in perspective.
Thanks Heather for your reassurance!
I feel that I was given the opportunity to embark on this PhD because of the way that scientific thinking pervades (almost) everything I do, and not because of my grades on paper. Some of my peers achieved higher grades than I did (and spent more hours in the library) but they agreed with me that there was “no way” they would take on a PhD.
I think that this is what Prof. Morley was getting at. That it shows that you are not giving up, because it is
likelygoing to be frustrating at times.I also get some reassurance that I am in the right place, from the response that every one of my lab mates has to this cartoon (which remains my favourite from xkcd).
The graduate student union of the department where I did my PhD says the following in the FAQ:
And I always managed to find time for things, even with a supervisor who worked 12 hours a day and expected everyone else to do the same. Some of our best grad students and postdocs worked 9-5 and got the most data/papers.
I was one of those who worked 9-5 during my PhD, and managed to finish within 4 years. I think a couple of things influenced my work: my supervisor didn’t tend to work evenings/weekends (so didn’t expect me too), I decided to work when I was at work. I see many grad students pulling long hours (10-12 hours a day), but they spent a good portion of their day on Facebook, MSN, etc.. It’s hard to be productive for so long, so they just took more breaks than I did.
Basically # hours does not equal higher productivity. If you’re an efficient worker, 9-5 is doable!
bq. In that sense, my studies are not 9-to-5, they are more like 24/7.
Just what any supervisor wants to hear!
You have the right attitude towards doing science. But a PhD is a long hard slog, so try not to make a habit of working 24/7 (or even 15/6). Even when I was hacking through the mildew I’d collected in the field for 3 or 4 months, I made sure I only worked 6 days a week, and rested (God-like) on the seventh. it was the only way to get everything done whilst still keeping my sanity. If you can work 9-5 and get everything done, that’s perfect: you can then go into overdrive for short periods, when you have to.
bq. But a PhD is a long hard slog, so try not to make a habit of working 24/7 (or even 15/6)
This is advice I have heard too! It also takes some discipline, when there is a lot of things to do, to leave them and to take time for yourself. When I was worrying about all the things I have been given to do, my lab mates were surprised.
I’m not sure that that attitude will help me! I have only been given small things to do and like everyone I get frustrated when they take me a long time.
To balance work with other things while doing the PhD is definitely difficult. First you have to argue with yourself to take breaks or go home (and admittedly at points when nothing works and science is your worst enemy to keep at it). Then there is also the pressure from around – it get’s a bit like a competition, and the person with the most hours in the lab “wins”. Still, as Alyssa points out, it is also about working effectively. And sometimes the answers come when you are taking a walk or doing laundry. And for us over-achievers it can be a bit of a problem that you never know . Am I working enough? Is this good? Do I deserve a weekend of? I can’t say that I think it has gotten much easier with time, but you learn to live with it. Good luck – I’m sure you’ll do great!
I found the best advice to be that you spend as much time in the lab as you like. If the lab pulls you out of bed in the morning and you have to find some activity (sports, music, friends) to drag you out of it in the evening, you’ll be fine. If some clock rules your lab hours, something is wrong.
Science is a lot like play and requires what the old ethologists have called a “relaxed field”. Unfortunately, much of today’s science not only puts scientists under pressure, but is also so highly automatized, that raw hours translate into raw data. In this “factory science”, hours indeed can make or break careers. I recommend staying out of these fields.
Lots of PhDs work 9-4 here.
It doesn’t stop them from graduating.
In fact at every Christmas party the director of the institute has a bit of a similar speech where he emphasizes that the best work is done in the evenings.
And this speech is usually caused by the fact that the hallways are usually deserted by 17:00.
@Anna, you are right, there is noticeable “presenteeism” at every level, and it is a challenge not to get into that mindset. How many hours are “enough” (or “too many”) is not a definite quantity, and working out what is sufficient and what is detrimental is likely to be to some extent trial and error.
@Bjorn, I like that approach! When things are going well I am happy to spend lots of time in the lab and get irritated when I have to break the flow of work to do other things. But when I hit a brick wall I find a change of scene is helpful.
“But you have three years!”
And that is SO short compared to everywhere else in the world. We made fun of postdocs coming from the UK being only the same age as our PhD students who were in the MIDDLE of their grad school career. But actually we were just jealous, of course. How come it’s so short, what are you NOT doing?? 😉 It took me 3 years for just one paper, and then another 3.5 to fail at getting another paper, and I just graduated when I had enough to fill a thesis.
Piffle. I’ve known students who worked efficiently during 9-5 (or 8-4, or whatever), and others that were around at all hours of day and night and didn’t accomplish nearly as much. Good experimental planning goes a long way to cutting down the number of hours you end up doing research. And I believe any supervisor worth working for will be impressed by diligence and results, not whether you’re there at 9:00 PM or whenever.
Of course, some experiments required odd schedules – that’s a different story (N.B. – I do not recommend working on Drosophila, or Zebrafish, if you don’t like being in the lab in the middle of the night). But this whole thing of “you must be in the lab all the time” seems awfully archaic to me, particularly these days when you can be getting non-wet-lab things done from just about anywhere.
I have no idea why I italicized “Zebrafish”. Sorry ’bout that. 😛
@ Richard
It looks more exciting that way – The Zzzzebrafish!
I would echo Richard’s (and others’) sage advice about it being quality rather than quantity that will really impress. Hopefully you have embarked on a project that you find truly fascinating and that occupies you mind beyond 9-5, because you want it to.
But at the same time, it is important not to lose sight of the other things in life and to make time for them. These can be particularly good at allowing your brain the downtime to sub-consciously process all the info that you may have been stuffing into it (hence the flashes of insight while washing up).
On an unrelated note, I’m afraid I’m going to have to report you for ‘ploughing’ in the Imperial College swimming pool. No horses allowed.
is not 9-5
I think it is mainly what people said here before “it’s not necessarily the hours but what you do with them”. That said though, it might be hard (impossible) to plan things as exact that you may leave at 5 if you for example are working with bacteria. I think it might be better to say “you can’t expect to be able to leave whenever you want and suceed with all your lab work sometimes”.
Also, some supervisors would be more ok with you “failing” to get results from an experiemnt if they have seen you in lab trying to make it work. As I said to grad student the other month “in the end it comes down to getting results, and if you don’t have ’em – it is at least comforting (for me) to know that I tried and tried again in the lab so it is not due to lacking effort”. If it really matters? I dunno…
To end Erika, I think it is mainly in your head. If you really want to do one, I think you will do fine. Most of my PhD peers remember two word; resilience and persistance. (and some luck)