Author Archives: Mel

RHD intensive reflections from July 2024

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!

LinkedIn is the new Twitter

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.

My confirmation of candidature journey and the bumps along the way

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!