I have always been a journal writer although I usually use a blog/social media posts rather than a “standard” journal approach. Combined with this, my mentoring role at CQU has made me realise I’ve hit some HUGE speed bumps (or walls…walls with sharks in them trying to eat me might be more accurate) on my doctorate journey so far. Not everyone hits these but some people do and just sharing my story has helped reassure others there is a way through it.
I’ve decided to collect all my blog posts. LinkedIn, Facebook, X etc posts over the last 2.5 years (and the coming year of thesis writing hell haha) and edit them into my own little book “Letters to my PhD”.
…because I don’t already have enough things to do 😂
In February of this year, a coach and business leader I know put forward the idea for a collaborative book. It was going to be all about the stories behind successful women in business.
I thought….I don’t fit that shape.
I thought….sure I’ve run small businesses but only little ones to allow me to redirect my career. That’s not success
The ones that no matter how many times we read, we discover something new.
The ones you always recommend to friends when they’re looking for a new book.
The ones that have dog earred pages throughout, signalling hidden gems you want to forever remember.
The 24 authors from ‘Try And Stop Her’ have those books too, and we’re excited to drop a new book into your collection that will be inspiration for many years to come!!
I was lucky enough to be offered a funded spot at a Thematic Analysis Masterclass with Dr Claire Moran in Brisbane over the last few days. She is building a website currently but in the meantime, this is Claire’s info: https://about.uq.edu.au/experts/10684
I flew out of Perth at 8am on the Sunday morning and arrived in Brisbane a day early to ensure I could make it on time for Day 1. Props to CQUs school of graduate research for always being considerate about flight times when I get to visit.
CQU Brisbane is in the city centre and the hotel was walking distance – so a great set up.
Being a teacher and an academic, I’ve been to many PDs and training courses over my career. I’ve had amazing experiences and I’ve had….well, awful ones. Claire was hands down one of the best presenters I have engaged with in 22 years in education. We had 20ish students squished into a small room and she still made it feel personalised and targeted.
So, what made it so good?
Claire was friendly and approachable, used names (name tents) and told jokes etc. Not awkward and very genuine
Claire told us a bit about her but not too much. It was a great balance of personal and professional
Hands on activities progressed from macro to micro. We played with abstract ideas (the buttons) and linked them to concepts being discussed. Then we coded stuff ourselves but we did it with models to support
Pre reading was DIRECTLY relevant. Nobody who did it would have thought it was a waste. She also justified it in the email when sent to us (why these?!).
She used her own data and studies which meant she knew it inside and out. It also felt more authentic as it was real data, not created for example purposes
The third day wasn’t a part of Clare’s structure but was great. I think this should be built in with guidance activities for self paced the next day
Day one made it clear from the get go this would be practical and relevant to everyone. After a get to know you share, we reviewed what TA was then did a great activity with buttons. I won’t spoil it but as a high school teacher I immensely appreciated just how many levels it worked on! Plus, pretty buttons.
After lunch, we launched into learning about, then applying, each step of TA to a provided data set. Some parts I did find very hard….but so did others which was actually very reassuring to see. Perhaps modelling how to get started with themes together was needed as everyone lost time here doing the wrong things. There was a great balance of models and “have a go” here and I say that as an anxious person who needs explicit direction.
At the end of the first day, I went out to dinner with my principal supervisor who I’ve never met in real life! As she had two students attending the workshop days, the uni arranged for her to visit us along with two other supervisors so we had dinner as a group.
One of the things I was most excited about for Day Two was discussing image analysis in TA. This is something I will (hopefully) be doing as part of my data collection and I am aiming to integrate it alongside my interview transcripts as well. We only got a very brief look at this but even that helped answer some of the questions I had. I was also able to briefly chat to Claire in a break and showed her one of my sample drawings (can’t be used for my data set). In just 2 mins she got me thinking about a whole bunch of coding aspects I hadn’t considered.
Sample “draw and write” artwork compilation – not part of data set
Day two ended with microwave pasta in my hotel room while trying to pack, finalise MTeach marking and do all that other admin stuff that comes with a sessional unit coordinator role.
The third day then provided an opportunity for RHD students from the School of Education and Arts to sit together and apply the learning to our own data set. Some of us had data, some (like me) had sample or pilot data and a few were not yet at that stage. We also had a fantastic debrief and sharing of challenges. The opportunity to spend that third day considering and discussing what we learnt was much more valuable than I initially anticipated. Instead of leaping straight back into “the grind” we all had that extra day to decompress, chat, share resources and identify what our next steps would be before travelling home.
What might I change? Feedback I gave?
I would prefer a 9am start and earlier finish but that’s me.
Lots of things we were shown had examples but no resources on the reflective journals. Still no detail on how or when or what to do? Maybe some templates or models? With positives and negatives labeled for people to create their own….kinda how thinkwell has their repository
Themes was still a bit up in the air. More time on that? Another go at coding would have been great as well….maybe a 3rd day is needed! Clare mentioned she does 2 as most people can get 2 days off but 3 or more is a lot harder. Interesting data point!
Image and multimodal was rushed and only got about 25 mins right at the end. I would have preferred less time on some of the other parts but I also acknowledge nobody else was using images in the group. Assumptions activity was good but could have been shortened significantly as everyone was very tired and not really wanting to talk to “new” people
Slides beforehand (tricky I know, want to make sure people show up)
And finally…I never realised how much I appreciate candy / mentos on the table until it wasn’t there.
I won my university’s 2024 three minute thesis competition! This means I move forward as the CQUniversity representative in the international (Asia pacific region) 3MT competition. In October 2024, representatives from universities across Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Hong Kong, Malaysia, and Singapore will compete for the title of the 2024 Virtual Asia-Pacific 3MT Winner.
I was also runner up for the CQU people’s choice award.
The 3MT competition allows Higher Degree by Research candidates to hone their communication skills, receive international peer review, and gain skills surrounding the presentation of their research to a wider audience.
Imagine this: you’ve spent years crafting an 80,000-word PhD thesis. Now, you’re expected to condense that research into 3 minutes for the 3MT (Three Minute Thesis) competition. If you’re aiming for the VYT (Visualise Your Thesis) competition, you’ve got just 1 minute!
Turning an academic masterpiece – whether it’s an 80,000-word thesis or a 15,000-word confirmation of candidature – into a 1-3 minute performance isn’t just about simplifying; it’s about presenting your ideas in a tight, captivating art form.
For context on these tips, I’m nearing the end of my second year and have completed my confirmation of candidature and ethics approval. I’ve submitted a 15,000-word literature review and methodology framework, made changes based on external reviewers, and commenced a pilot study.
Tips from a first-timer for 3MT and VYT:
• Scripts and video planning: Creativity is key. Shorter is necessary. Review and edit obsessively. Read it aloud! I edited my VYT captions around 20 times, and my 3MT script even more. Align your captions with visuals and get a range of feedback.
• The Importance of Visuals: VYT allows flexibility (video, images, slides). One of the very early pieces of VYT feedback I got was on a slide where I say “now imagine that dog wagging its tail as the child reads aloud….” and to use a video of a kid reading to a dog while the tail wags. Cue 4hrs of attempting to film that! For 3MT, I will use a single evocative image—think minimalist.
• Title Changes: Use a snappy, descriptive title that grabs attention. Avoid your thesis title!
• The Hook: Avoid the overused “imagine that…” start in 3MT. Go for a fresh, engaging opening that situates the viewer in your research. Build connection and emotion.
• Jargon Be Gone: Simplify complex terms like pedagogy, emergent, fluency, phonemes for a general audience without being patronising.
• The Art of Storytelling: Use “I think…,” metaphors, similes, and rhetorical questions. Follow a story structure – start with a hook, provide details, and circle back to your opening.
• Significance: Explain why your research matters. Don’t overlook this, especially in the early stages. I missed it in my first drafts, as I’m in my second year with limited “output” yet.
Here is my V1 versus V6 script after sitting through lots of amazing training opportunities provided by my uni, including two extremely helpful sessions run by Simon Clews.
In short, distilling a thesis into an ‘elevator pitch’ is like condensing a complex recipe into a single bite-sized appetiser. It’s a challenge, but with the right approach, you can effectively capture the essence.
As big a call as it was to quit my ongoing academic role (eeek) back in May, I am glad that I did. It freed up my “work week” so I was able to fly to Rockhampton and participate in CQUniversity’s 5 day intensive workshop for RHD students. Previously, I have attended an online intensive but because I was teaching on campus back then, I couldn’t fly to the east coast for a week. The face to face experience just adds so much value! Plus lets you build some great relationships.
Coming from Perth, I flew over a day early…about 30hrs after I arrived back in Australia from a month holiday in Vietnam. So I was very tired but definitely a keen bean ready to learn and make new friends. The uni arranged accomodation for us at a local motel and also had cars shuttle us back and forth each day so we didn’t have to walk 20 mins up a hill. It was very well run and people had come from all over the east coast – I was the only WA student.
With approximately 35 students in attendance, the workshops over the 5 days were fantastic. They ranged from time management with the amazing Maria Gardiner at Thinkwell to proposal feedback via speed dating to ethics processes…all the way to public speaking and pitches! Dr Cait Wilson’s session on conference presentations was also a highlight. There were lots of wonderful sessions that were just SO RELEVANT for pre confirmation of candidature students. I wish I had seen them last year – particularly the methodology and lit review info. Very useful for all candidates at all stages. On the last day we built Lego dinosaur defences and used a “grumpy balloon” to give feedback to each other.
We also got to meet the whole SGR support team, chat to the Dean and had the opportunity for professional head shots we could use for things like LinkedIn, conference bios etc. This isn’t my proper headshot but I did get to wear my awesome shirt for it haha.
As a newly appointed RHD Student Mentor (a paid casual role) I had to be quite social and engaged with everyone. They were long days and my “social battery” did struggle. Breakfast at 7am was as a group and we would then spend all day together in the intensive. We also had dinner together most nights. I think if I had not been “touristing” the month prior I may have coped a little better with that side of things. As it was, I ended up skipping Day 3 and the quiz night as I got sick and needed a day of rest. Staying in bed for the day was a good decision…I perked right up for Days 4 and 5. Day 4 included a short visit to look at some of the CQU Rockhampton crop experiments and cattle research. Cows!
I also got to play around with my iPad mini and Apple pencil which has allowed me to build my note taking strengths (writing notes/drawing connections by hand) while addressing my note taking weakness (losing every piece of paper or notebook I’ve ever owned). It was also good practice as that is going to be the approach for my researcher reflective journal once I start data collection.
As an external and interstate student, I simply don’t meet many other RHD students…this has been an excellent opportunity to build my support networks. As we learnt first up on day 1, students with good support networks are the students who make it through the doctoral degree journey.
Bye Rockhampton, hopefully I get to see you again next year!
I attended an RHD intensive presentation today (an AMAZING presentation I should add!) by Melanie Hayman. Aside from participating in all the awesomeness of research proposal speed dating, I also wrote down and highlighted “Twitter/X has been replaced by LinkedIn for networking now + Instagram for younger target groups”.
Personally, I started my “teacher twitter” 11 years ago and had built quite a community of educators and academics over the years…including a number of my former MTeach students. I definitely agree X has decimated the platform though and I rarely use it now. In fact, at dinner the other night when a few other RHD students and I exchanged details it was all LinkedIn connections.
I’ve read through many RHD student posts recently (catching up on my internet scrolling after travelling!) and noticed a recurring theme: people feeling overwhelmed by their confirmation of candidature and writing. I wanted to share some of my journey. It’s been an eye-opening experience since I started full-time in February 2023.
For context: I’m an expert in my field. I was a high achiever – winning awards, leading programs, mentoring. Entering a doctoral program has been a shock because I am not at the same level now.
Initially, I felt lost. Meetings used unfamiliar terms, and directions were vague. I struggled. Thankfully, my uni required a coursework unit (at that time) to build confirmation of candidature sections, providing structure and examples. My first drafts were heavily criticised by my supervisors, which was a little bit distressing. I had to process the critical feedback. A senior colleague advised me “criticism of your writing is not criticism of you as a person.” It’s true, but separating the two is challenging when it’s your passion.
By Nov 2023, I was ready to submit my CoC. Though not perfect, my supervisors agreed. I submitted in early Dec, the same day both supervisors went on leave. Around the same time, I was awarded an RTP Stipend Scholarship. To incorrectly quote the Lego movie “everything was awesome”
Three days later, I received an email. The program central to my research had withdrawn their support without notice. I quite literallly threw up. I had to call my supervisors who advised me to take leave to extend the finish date, have a break and take time to process what changes I would need to make to my (now withdrawn) confirmation of candidature
Do you think I took time to relax and process? Haha no. I contacted every smaller organisation in my field, spending hours researching, calling, and emailing. By Feb, I had a list of smaller organisations willing to support my research. We rescoped the method and lit review and by April, it was ready to resubmit.
Finding external reviewers took time but eventually two agreed. This was tricky as both areas of my research (dogs and books) were quite different so reviewers were worried they would be okay with one but not the other. The feedback I received was one very positive and one very negative with many, many revision requests and some fairly harsh personal comments. My supervisors were amazing, as were the school of graduate research at my uni and it was decided I would respond to all of the feedback and action it where relevant. So, I responded to every comment in my response table which ended up being 27pgs long. Working through them one by one, I found much of it was helpful when viewed discretely. My CoC document grew from 10,000 to 12,000, then 15,000 words.
With my supervisors’ support, I completed the changes and the review table (most edits were where I had been too sassy with my reviewer comments) and resubmitted (now at 16,000 words) in June. We also submitted my university-level human ethics committee application early, as my ethics process involves state education departments and will be lengthy. That had 24 attachments and was a mammoth effort!
While I was on holiday in July, both my CoC and uni human ethics app were approved. It’s been quite a journey to here, but it’s a huge step forward and a relief to know I am on the right track.
Here’s a photo of my favorite shirt ready for the upcoming RHD intensive week with CQU!
Melissa Smith 