Postgraduate
- Postgraduate Study in English
- Postgraduate Students and their Research (English and Creative Writing)
- Milestones in the English PhD
- Guide for Higher Degree Students
Postgraduate Study in English
The English Discipline offers both a Masters and a PhD by research. These awards are intended for students who have already completed a substantial amount of English at undergraduate level, and an Honours degree in English or a related discipline. They can be taken on a full-time or part-time basis.
Topics of research range widely from literary topics to, for example, cultural studies and film. Visit our research pages for an overview of what has been done in the discipline, and to find useful links to search engines, libraries, bibliographies and other online resources. The English discipline also offers coursework and research programs in Creative Writing .
Information about admission to the Masters or PhD Program is available on the University website. Further inquiries should be directed to
Dr Di Schwerdt
Postgraduate Convenor, English
The University of Adelaide
South Australia 5005
Email: dianne.schwerdt@adelaide.edu.au
Phone: 08 8313 5622
See also The Guide for Higher Degree Students.
A Selection of Current and Recent Postgraduate Students and Their Research (English and Creative Writing)
Below is a selection of current and recent postgraduate students (English and Creative Writing) together with their research topics:
| PhD Student | Area of Research | Supervisors |
|---|---|---|
| Henry Ashley-Brown |
'Twigs from a Hedge in Winter' (a novel) and 'Inheriting the Past: |
P: Dr Jan Harrow C: Dr Dianne Schwerdt |
| Michelle Aung Thin | 'The skin of a writer', incorporating 'Winsome of Rangoon: a novel' (provisional title) and 'Skin, writing and ethics in the representation of Anglo-Burmese subjectivity'/ |
P: Prof Brian Castro |
| Chelsea Avard | 'After and Before Now' (a novel) and 'Flow: art, research and numinosity' (critical essay). |
P: Dr Phillip Edmonds C: Dr Susan Hosking |
| Ian Bone |
'Snapshot' (a novel) and 'Defining Moments in History as Narrative: empathy, meaning and a sense of connection' (exegesis). |
P: Professor Nicholas Jose C: Dr Phillip Edmonds |
| Gillian Britton |
'Written on Water' (a novel) and 'Uncertainty and Complexity in the Process of Narrative Invention' (exegesis). |
P: Dr Jan Harrow C: Professor Nicholas Jose |
| Shannon Burns |
"Trauma" in the Post-Auschwitz Literature and Theory of Theodor Adorno, Jacques Derrida, Alain Badiou, W.G. Sebald, J.M. Coetzee, Thomas Pynchon and David Foster Wallace. |
P: Professor Dorothy Driver |
| Jane Camens | 'Like China' (a novel) and 'Writing Between Cultures' (a critical essay) | |
| Emma Carmody | Poetry in Translation: a book-length collection of self-translated, bilingual poetry (English translated into French) and 'Exploring the Creative Potential of Translingual Writing: A Multidisciplinary Approach' (exegesis). |
P: Professor Nicholas Jose |
| Guy Carney | Symbolic Process: theory and practice |
Dr Heather Kerr |
| Lyndall Clipstone |
'They don't have a name for what he is': Examining the Role of the Monster as an Other within Culture. |
C: Assoc Prof AmandaNettelbeck P: Dr Joy McEntee |
| Dylan Coleman | Indigenous literature | P: Dr Susan Hosking C: Dr Janet Harrow |
| Jonathon Dale | 'Messthenics: post-punk literature and DIY culture.' |
Dr Mandy Treagus |
| Sonja Dechian | 'Anthems for Before' (a novel) and Technologies of writing in contemporary culture (critical essay). 'Anthems for Before' is an exploration of the way in which loss, absence and trauma manifest in the lives of two young men. |
P: Dr Phillip Edmonds C: Professor Nicholas Jose |
| Katherine Doube |
'Hidden' (a novel) and 'Portrait of the artist: relationships between the artist character and the artist author' (critical essay). |
P: Dr Jan Harrow C: Dr Susan Hosking |
| Susan Errington | 'Whiteness' (a novel) and 'Travelling A Different Road To Truth - Writing Historical Fiction' (exegesis). |
P: Professor Nicholas Jose |
| Petra Fromm |
'Lies' ( novel) and 'Enriched by Remembrance: Models of ficto-memoir in Australian writing' (exegesis). |
P: Dr Phillip Edmonds C: Professor Nicholas Jose |
| Holly Gramazio | Sixteen Across (a novel) and 'Constructed languages, light-hearted madness and death' (exegesis). |
P: Professor Nicholas Jose |
| Katherine Greenwood | 'Confronting the limits: renditions of the real in the edge of the Construct Film Cycle' |
C: Dr Joy McEntee |
| Rachel Hennessy | 'The Heaven I Swallowed' (a novel) and 'Whose shoes? Making one's soul fit during the writing of "The Heaven I Swallowed"' (exegesis). |
P: Professor Nicholas Jose C: Dr Jan Harrow |
| Rachel Hennick | 'Ghetto Medic' (a novel) and 'The American Ghetto: Creative Non-fiction as a Social Movement' (an exegesis). Examines Baltimore city through the lens of a white paramedic who worked within its confines for over thirty years, beginning his career at the height of the civil rights movement, raising questions about the development of the African American ghetto while addressing the problem of racial stereotypes, exploring historical influences and providing insight into the global chasm that exists between black and white people today. |
P: Dr Jan Harrow C: Dr Dianne Schwerdt |
| Stephanie Hester |
A thesis in novel form that examines the strange nature of memory, |
C: Professor Nicholas Jose |
| Susan Holoubek |
'Mirror': a novel. 'Negotiating non-violent subjectivity in a de-socialised |
P: Dr Jan Harrow C: Dr Anne Bartlett |
| Keryl Howie |
'Dogs of the government': the portrayal of police in South African literature. |
P: Prof Dorothy Driver C: Dr Di Schwerdt |
| Joanna Jarose | 'Worthy' (a novel) together with ''Pseudo-medievalism in Secondary World Fantasy: How, Why and Moving On'. |
P: Dr Joy McEntee C: Dr Kerrie Le Lievre |
| Christine Knight | 'The food nature intended you to eat': nutritional primitivism in low-carbohydrate diet discourse. |
Dr Heather Kerr |
| Stefan Lashchuk | 'I dream of Magda' (a novel) and 'Form in fiction: the Development of "I Dream of Magda"' (exegesis). |
P: Professor Nicholas Jose |
| Elizabeth Lau |
Centrality of Childhood in Post-Colonial Fiction. | P: Professor Nicholas Jose |
| Stephen Lawrence |
'The Ammonite Stairwell' (a collection of poems) and 'A critical survey of published collections of Australian poetry, 2001–2007' (exegesis). |
P: Professor Nicholas Jose C: Dr Phillip Edmonds |
| Carol Lefevre |
'If You Were Mine' (a novel) and 'Broken Narratives And The Need |
P: Dr Jan Harrow |
| Julia Leigh |
'In the Garden' (a screenplay and a novella) and 'Reworking: what is lost and what is gained when moving between a screenplay and a novella' (exegesis). |
P: Professor Nicholas Jose |
| Sandra Lyne | 'The"Asian woman-Western man" dyad in twentieth century novels: anxiety, masculinity, and identity.' |
P: Dr Di Schwerdt C: Dr Rosemary Moore |
| Damien Marwood | Postmodernity, postcoloniality and the ethics of mourning | |
| Jessica Murrell |
Postmodernism, Subjectivity and Contemporary American Cinema | P: Dr Phil Butterss C: Dr Joy McEntee |
| Patricio Munoz |
'Past Lives' (a collection of short stories) and 'In the Shadow of Good Books: Exploring the Relationship Between the Writer and the Academic Library' (critical essay). |
P: Dr Phillip Edmonds C: Dr Janet Harrow |
| Michelle Phillipov | 'A "Nihilistic Dreamboat to Negation"? The Cultural Study of Death Metal and the Limits of Political Criticism'. |
P: Dr Mandy Treagus C: Dr Heather Kerr |
| Robin-Ann Potanin (with Media) |
Videogames | P: Dr Mandy Treagus |
| Belinda Schenk |
'The Slower People' (working title for a collection of poems) and 'The Aftermath: Human connections in the wake of a crisis in literary fiction with particular reference to Ian McEwan, Haruki Murakami and Greek poetry' (critical essay). The collection of poems will focus on three inter-linked characters, each trying to get home during a near future fictional New York City blackout. |
P: Dr Phillip Edmonds |
| Bernadette Smith | 'August' (a novel) and 'The Nostalgic Postmodern Character' (exegesis). |
P: Professor Nicholas Jose C: Dr Janet Harrow |
| Anna Solding | 'The hum of concrete: a novel constellation' and 'The Mother Question: Writing about the Diversity and Complexity of Contemporary Motherhood' (exegesis). |
P: Dr Susan Hosking |
| Hannah Stark | 'Deleuze and love'. |
P: Dr M Treagus |
| Heather Stuart | 'The White Crane: a poetic novel'. |
P: Dr Janet Harrow |
| Reg Taylor |
A series of short stories set in the Riverland area in the 1950s and 1960s together with a critical essay together with a critical essay investigating a founding member of the radical ‘New Australia' colony in Paraguay, who, on his return to Australia, opened a newspaper in the Riverland. |
P: Dr Phillip Edmonds C: Jill Jones |
| Jared Thomas |
'Calypso Summers' (a novel) and '"Culture Code": An essay that explores research undertaken in the writing process of the novel Calypso Summers' (exegesis). The novel follows the story of Kyle ‘Calypso’ Summers, a fictional 25 year old Nukunu man devoted to all things Caribbean. Calypso gains work in a health food store and is approached with an offer of a small fortune to supply natural items that Aboriginal people know possess healing and relaxant properties. |
P: Professor Nicholas Jose C: Dr Dianne Schwerdt |
| Kristel Thornell | 'Clarice on Night Street' (a novel) and 'Border Territories in the Writing of "Clarice on Night Street": drawing on the oeuvre and biographical details of the Melbourne painter, Clarice Beckett (1887-1935)' (exegesis). |
P: Professor Nicholas Jose |
| Catherine Wait | A. S. Byatt and postmodern realism |
P:Dr Heather Kerr |
| Lesley Williams | Unsettling Habits of Mind: Journeys Through Landscape | |
| Dominique Wilson | 'The Yellow Papers' (a novel: working title) and 'Peering into cracks and crevices: Western cross-cultural (historical) fiction - retelling or inventing?' (exegesis). |
P: Dr Phillip Edmonds C: Professor Nicholas Jose |
| Alison Wood (MA) |
Gwen Harwood's Libretti: opera, texts and transcriptions. |
P:Dr Heather Kerr |
Milestones in the English PhD, or How to get your PhD sometime before you retire.
Prepared by Joy McEntee: English
Break the job down into tasks
The finished PhD should be from 60,000 to no more than 80,000 words maximum. If you have a scholarship, you have three years to write them before you run out of money. If you're overwhelmed, consider how much you used to write during a semester as an undergraduate: at third year, you produced at least 8,000 words for each of your English subjects.
Each chapter should be between 8,000 and 15,000 words, so you should be aiming to write about one chapter each semester, on average. In fact, it is a good idea to try to write faster than this: you are unlikely to get up to full speed in your first year, and you should allow a good four months for the careful revision of your thesis during your final year. Accordingly, you really should be writing fast and furiously during your second year to get a whole draft together. 
Timetable for an ideal full time candidacy:
|
Stage |
Departmental activity | Product |
|---|---|---|
|
First year, |
Induction |
Literature review First paper |
|
First year, |
Plan of the PhD structure |
|
|
Second year, |
Second and subsequent year workshops |
Second chapter to supervisor: think about presenting it at a Departmental seminar Third chapter to supervisor |
|
Second year, |
Fourth chapter to supervisor Fifth chapter to supervisor |
|
|
Third year, |
Second and subsequent year workshops |
Introduction draft Conclusion draft |
|
Third year, |
Tighten chapters up to argumentative line Revise literary presentation of the thesis |
Don't hold back on 'writing up'
The notion that you have to know the field before you set pen to paper is an unhelpful one for the English PhD process. For most English students, writing and research can and should be simultaneous and continual processes. You should complete a literature review very early, to make sure you formulate a topic that is not re-inventing the wheel, but having done that, you should start writing. It is true that subsequent research and writing may reveal the inadequacies of your first effort, and it is very unlikely that the first thing you write will make it into your finished thesis without revision. However, writing something early on is very important: the longer you go without writing, even if you are reading, the harder it will be to get back to writing.
Further, this first piece is often a very good way of refining a topic that is hard to pin down. Sometimes, a rough, experimental chapter (not the introduction) is the best way to work out what it is you really want to say. In some cases, you may need to get this done BEFORE you can proceed to a sensible PhD plan. Whatever you do, do try to do something in the first year: it will help unblank the page, and it does not have to be perfect.
Sometime toward the end of your first year or the beginning of your second, produce a PhD plan
First, try this: write your argument in 50 words or less. Believe it or not, it is something like this that your supervisor will present to your examiners when he or she asks them to take on the task of reading your 400 page opus. It is something like this that will be read out just before you cross the stage to take your degree. If the argument cannot be encapsulated in 50 words, chances are that you've got more than one thesis on your hands. There is a limit to what you can do, even in a PhD.
Second, try this: write a 250 word abstract. This can develop the argument, giving it a little more flesh, but obviously, not too much.
Third, try this: work out how many topics you want to cover. Each topic will probably translate to an 8,000 word chapter. Work out how many of these you have, bearing in mind that you need some words for Introduction and Conclusion. You should be able to work out a 'word budget' from this list: if you have more chapters than you NEED, start eliminating them. Work out a list of priorities: are some topics more important than others? Write those chapters first, and then work out how many words you still need. You may find you don't need as much material as you think to make a complete PhD, and you should not, under any circumstances, go over the word limit.
Sample programme for a full-time student
Fictitious thesis plan: Redheads
Topic: 'Dirty, dangerous and idiotic: Racism and the portrayal of the redhead in children's literature'
Fifty word statement:
In popular discourse, the redhead is frequently portrayed as dangerous. Redheads are seen as socially subversive influences in 'children's' literature from David Copperfield to Ginger Meggs. This thesis aims to explore the origins of these portrayals in the anglo-centric discourse of race.
- Introduction: 10,000 words
- 2,500 words: quick overview of redheadedness in discourse of race in children's literature and TV
- 2,500 words: establish the connection between anti-Irish, anti-Scots sentiment, stereotype of redheads as fiery, bullies, uncivilised, disorderly
- 2,500 parameters:from Dickens to Ginger Meggs
- 2,500 theoretical approaches:post-colonial
Chapter One: The redheaded criminal 8,000 words
- Fagin in Oliver Twist: redhair, race and criminality
- Uriah Heap in David Copperfield: redhair and moral deviance
Chapter Two: The redheaded bully 8,000 words
Chapter Three: The redheaded alien 8,000 words
Chapter Four: The redheaded vandal 8,000 words
Chapter Five: The redheaded strumpet 8,000 words
Conclusion: Red is Nature's warning. 10,000 words
Aim to produce a full draft quickly
You can tighten it up to an argumentative line later. If you think that the chapter you complete in your first year will go unaltered into the final thesis, you're probably in for a rude shock. Your ideas and your writing style will evolve over the years between your writing the first line and the last. If they don't, you clearly aren't learning much. What this means is that you should probably treat each chapter as a very well-worked-up draft. It will probably be necessary, in the final months, to 'tighten' the whole thesis up to the argumentative line, and some chapters will be extensively revised (or sometimes, eliminated altogether). Obviously, it will be more difficult to eliminate a chapter you have polished to a pearly lustre. Don't invest this kind of time in any one chapter until you know where your whole thesis is going.
This may not be a perfect thesis: it only has to be a 'good enough' thesis
One of my friend's supervisors used to say "You can read about this for 4 weeks. Then you have to stop reading and write it. I want to see a draft in 6 weeks." Terrifying as that might sound, this is one way to make sure you get the thesis done. While it is important to get good PhD reports (if you want to get an academic job, there is no grade scale in the marking of a PhD: either it passes or it does not. If you are a perfectionist, you may spend decades agonising over each semi-colon, or hunting for the last extant copy of an arcane nineteenth-century pamphlet. In this case you may end up without a PhD, and in a somewhat worse position than a candidate who just got a passable PhD, but who got it done. Early onset perfectionism is one of the most reliable ways I know of getting an unfinished, and unfinishable thesis.
Schedule several months for a really thorough revision of the thesis text towards the end
There are two stages in this revision: tightening the argument (which takes a couple of months at least) and tightening the literary presentation of your thesis text. The importance of the last step cannot be over-stated. This is the time to exercise all of those perfectionist muscles. You should check every quote, every reference, and every bibliographic entry. Your examiners are quite likely to do spot checks on your quotes, and if they find basic typographic or transcription errors, they are likely to lose faith in the rest of your thesis. This is tedious, but you may be surprised at how worthwhile it proves: I found lots of things I am very happy my examiners didn't get to see.
Acknowledging common difficulties, or How to get a PhD in spite of your real life
If you must work, make sure that your work supports your study, not the other way around.
We know: scholarships are not enough to live on, your spouse/parent/cat won't support you forever, and you need to pay for that conference/fur coat/facial massage... so you've got to work to get money. In addition, doing paid work while studying seems to offer emotional benefits: it breaks down the isolation PhD students can feel, it gives routine to time that might otherwise be unstructured, and it seems to offer contact with the 'real' world (always a useful defence against charges of onanism, which are frequently levelled at PhD students, mostly by other PhD students).
However, bear in mind that there are ways of working, and attitudes to work, which can get thoroughly in the way of your PhD. If you suddenly take on a demanding job towards the end of your PhD candidature, it becomes extremely difficult to finish the PhD. In the current climate, it is almost impossible to get any LASTING appointment without a completed PhD. I know what the 'end of scholarship' panic can be like: I have seen my friends suddenly develop a devotion to air-line-stewardessing, and various other arcane career bypaths, in the months before the end of their scholarships. Try not to succumb to the temptation of leaping at that job teaching ESL in Korea just because your scholarship is running out: it's unlikely to pay off in the long term if it means you abandon your studies. If you think it is likely that your candidature will over-run your scholarship, you might be better off getting a small and controllable part-time job early in your candidature, so you can put some money aside to help you through the last few months, when you really have to focus.
Also, paid work seems to present itself as a kind of insurance policy, particularly in a climate which emphasises the difficulties of getting academic work. It is true that doing sessional teaching or research assistant work while you are studying can look very good on your CV, but one of the things to say about this is that it is impossible to get an appointment these days UNLESS YOU COMPLETE YOUR PhD. If you allow sessional work to get in the way of this goal, you may not be helping yourself as much as you think. There is nothing like finishing that doctorate for improving your job prospects: a recent national survey found that unemployment was still lowest among those with completed higher degrees. Even if you next job is not an academic one, do you think 'PhD incomplete' is going to impress your employers?
If you feel the need to switch topics or supervisors, make sure that it is for the right reasons.
Entering a populated area
It is very rare to get a field to yourself. If you devise a topic, and then discover that someone else (call them 'Gazumper') has already done it, your best option may NOT be a radical change. Rather, you should consider whether you can develop a possibility Gazumper may not have seen, or may have suppressed. Use Gazumper as your launching pad. If Gazumper leaps into print as you are in the final stages, then write Gazumper in as well as you can: this is why it pays to leave 'tightening up' to the last stages. It leaves you room to manoeuvre around last minute scholastic developments.
Exploring a justly neglected topic
A better reason for switching topics is finding out that there just isn't enough to say. This is not a problem which often confronts the PhD candidate, but the earlier you find out about it, the better off you are, so start writing as soon as you can. This will help you discover whether or not you're onto a going concern.
Getting the jitters
The most common reason for switching topics, however, has nothing to do with scholarship. Many topic changes are driven by a version of writer's block: a candidate will start something and go ahead with research, but when it comes to writing up, he or she just can't bring him- or herself to do it. The candidate may then switch topics, only to go through exactly the same process (research and then stall) again, and (possibly) a third time. What this says is that the problem may not lie with the topic, but with the candidate's confidence. Chances are, if you have managed to make it through all the selection processes that precede selection for the PhD, you can do it, and you could do it whether your were writing on the preservation of lark's tongues in aspic or the cut of a leprechaun's swash. If you start writing early, you stand a better chance of changing a genuinely dud topic in time to do something about it without derailing yourself. Who knows, you might even find that you can do the topic you embarked upon. Let's face it: the only time you're NOT going to feel anxious or guilty about you PhD is when you're actually sitting at your desk writing it. So do what makes you feel better: get on with it.
Being unable to find the 'perfect' supervisor
Among many other scary things to confront about the PhD experience is the fact that you, the candidate, become the expert in the nominated area. Finding a supervisor who has done work in exactly your field might well be impossible, and indeed, the supervisor who is best qualified in academic terms may not be the supervisor with whom you have the most productive work relationship. A good supervisor is one who helps you get the job done. If the person who can help you get the job done is not the one who knows how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, so what? That's your job. Like the search for the perfect topic, the search for the perfect supervisor can be a massive procrastination device. Sometimes there are genuine reasons for wanting to switch supervisors, but make sure you not doing it just to defer the inevitable confrontation with the fact that you have to DO the thesis.
Guide for Higher Degree Students
NB: What follows is calibrated for full-time students. If you are part-time, the milestones listed below will take longer, twice as long probably, to reach. This guide can be read in conjunction with the Adelaide University Postgraduate Students' Association website.
The first tasks to be undertaken once candidature has started are to
- attend the University’s Induction, for all starting higher degree research students
- attend and complete the Core Component of the Humanities and Social Sciences Faculty Structured Programme and
- complete a Research Proposal, 3000-5000 words in length.
In addition, there is a short meeting with the Centre’s Postgraduate Co-ordinator. If you are an international student, you will need to attend the Integrated Bridging Programme. See also assistance from the Centre for Learning and Professional Development. You will be informed about these when you enrol. For students starting at the beginning of the year, events take place in February, in the first week of Orientation Week.
It is recommended that you fill out and hand to your supervisors at an early meeting an Expectations of Supervision form, so that you can come to a mutual understanding as to how your supervision should be conducted. You will be given this by the Postgraduate Co-ordinator.
Induction Session
You will receive notification of the time and place of this from the Adelaide Graduate Centre. The AGC administers all higher degree candidatures and is the source of almost all information that you need to fulfil the requirements of a higher degree.
There you can find various documents setting out the university’s policies and procedures, and what is required for an MPhil or PhD thesis.
Core Component
This involves 4x2 hour sessions held during first semester at fortnightly intervals. If you start mid-year, there will be 3x2 hour sessions in second semester. Attendance at these sessions, which are about preparing you for a research degree, are compulsory, and you cannot progress without completing this programme and yes, filling out another form.
Research Proposal
This is a tool for getting you to focus on just what it is you are trying to do and to think about how you will do it. In some ways, it is like a draft of your thesis introduction. It needs to be approved by the Centre’s Postgraduate Co-ordinator and is then submitted for approval to the university Higher Degrees Committee. You may need to present an oral summary of it (perhaps lasting 20 minutes and therefore half or two thirds of your written proposal) to some staff and fellow postgraduates and to take into account any feedback you receive.
In your Research Proposal you need to address 3 main questions:
- What am I doing? (This may involve stating not just the main question you are seeking the answer, but important subsidiary ones)
- Why am I doing it?
- How will I do it? that is, what is your methodology?
Part of answering the first two questions involves a literature review, which helps indicate the current state of the problem you are dealing with. This means that you should list a preliminary bibliography. You should also include a provisional contents page, outlining your chapters.
You could also ask your supervisor to let you look at copies of previous theses in your area.
Along with the Research Proposal, you will need to submit a Minimum Discipline Resources form, which will be given to you at an early meeting with the Postgraduate Co-ordinator. If you are a full time student, aim to complete the Research Proposal within 6 months of commencing study.
Annual Review
If you started at the beginning of the year, you will need to complete an annual review by 31st October (If you started at or around mid-year, you will need to complete this review the following April. Remote students also have an April review). The forms will be sent to you in mid-September and you will need to record what progress you have made and what you intend to do in the next 12 months. Your supervisors will add their comments and sign in the appropriate sections and then you will need to see the Postgraduate Co-ordinator for his/her signature, before you sign it yourself and get it to the Graduate Centre.
Twelve months into candidature
This period has essentially been a probationary period and you need to undergo a major review of progress to confirm your candidature. The forms and checklist of minimum requirements for confirmation of candidature can be found at the Graduate Centre.
The supervisors, Postgraduate Co-ordinator and Head of Discipline/Centre/School will need to certify that the probationary period has been successfully completed.
Second year of candidature
Before this second year half completed, aim to get at least one post-introduction chapter to your supervisors completed. At some time in the year, you should make at least one 20-minute seminar or conference presentation. There will be another October review and once again, supervisors and students will summarise progress made in the last 12 months and outline goals to be met in the next 12.
Third year of candidature
This may be the last year of your candidature, if all has gone well. Being a part-time candidate or taking longer than expected to gather information away from Adelaide or some other difficulty may have delayed you and may require a fourth year of study. (Note, however, if your are holding a scholarship or postgraduate award, funding may only last for 3 years, unless you can make a case for being funded for an additional period. This is possible but don’t assume it will be a simple matter.) However, you will still need to make another presentation to an appropriate audience on you work and complete the annual October review which may, if you have reached that stage, include plans for and the date for submitting the thesis. Before you start on the final draft of your thesis, consult the Faculty’s thesis presentation guide (see under 'Information and Resources'). You do not have to follow it slavishly, but it contains some useful advice that will help you to present your thesis in the best way. Before you submit, you must complete a Notification of Intention to Submit form at least 3 months before submission. Supervisors must also certify that the thesis is properly presented and worthy to be examined. This certificate must accompany the thesis when submitted. See the Graduate Centre's website for forms.
Examiners should take no longer than 4 weeks after they have received it to examine your thesis but sometimes delays are unavoidable.
Some further points
- If you are a Remote Student or have to spend a long period outside Adelaide, you should keep in regular contact with at least one of your supervisors, say, once a month.
- Full-time MPhil students should try to complete in 2 years, and so, the above milestones will need to be compressed into a shorter period.
- If you need to change your supervisory arrangements, including suspending your research by taking leave of absence, you should contact your Principal Supervisor or the Postgraduate Co-ordinator. See the Graduate Centre's website.
- If you need to undertake research related travel away from Adelaide, you should fill out the appropriate form. To be eligible for coverage under the corporate travel policy, you must fill out a Study Leave form available from either the University Contact Centre or the Adelaide Graduate Centre, have it authorised by your Discipline and return it to the Adelaide Graduate Centre. On this form you must complete your travel details, including associated holidays or private travel. Note the need to fill out a return from any kind of absence form.
- If you need to change your address and contact details, please do so at Access Adelaide.
- If you have been allocated a computer and are having a problem with your machine, ring ITS on the internal phone, 33000.
