PhD Expectations

I consider myself in these first one and a half month as in the exploratory stage of PhD. I was lucky to be able to participate in the Easter Seminar where there were talks on Research and Methodology in Law, Generic Skills for PhD Students, Critical Thinking and The Challenges of Doing a PhD Thesis.

The main thing in PhD of which I understand, is to find gaps in the existing knowledge, potential issues/ problems and then contribute in the area. It is all then stem to whether or not you will succeed in the viva. In viva, a PhD student is supposed to potray:
i- adequate knowledge in the field
ii- significant contribution to the knowledge
iii-evidence of originality
iv- publishable material
v- presented in an acceptable academic style

My centre adds the sixth criteria:
vi- practical impact (to the niche interest of the centre- oil and gas/ energy / policy/ international investment and the like)

And woops, another one:
vii- to EXCEL! Stand out / be different from others.

That's quite an expectation I suppose...
So as they always say, the first six months is very crucial to identify the gaps/potential area of study from the literature reviews done. As in my case, I have to succeed the upgrading process before I am actually allowed to continue as a PhD student.

Among the things I took from the talks were phrases like:
1. Remember, the clock ticks!! (brr...that's scary)
2. Don't mess about! (as the clock ticks of course)
3. You should'nt have time to do other things!(in this context, the presenter referred to publishing/presenting papers...he said, publications can wait, but PhD can't...but there were other views on this by other presenters)
4. Don't be Mr. Deaf or Mr. Slow! (showing no progress)
5. Don't waffle! ( especially when people ask you 'whats your topic?' and you go like 'er..er...bla..bla..', it should be clear, short and precise)
6. Write and throw away!(the more you write, you don't mind of throwing them away if people criticise your work for betterment, but if you write too slow, you'll get heart attack when somebody suddenly say that your work/ approach is inaccurate, because your work becomes too sacred for you. In PhD, get ready to throw your writings away, that's normal)
7. Don't apply the magician approach! (in selecting your topic, it must be from literature reviews, not suddenly from your head like magic)

And then came the group activities on legal methodology terms like empirical, deductive, inductive, normative, positivist..bla..bla..

The conclusion was somewhat powerful: THE WORST STAKEHOLDER AFFECTED IF YOU FAIL YOUR PHD IS NO ONE BUT YOU...
and I understand that fully.

And during the two days seminar...I slept very early at night, without fail.