Emerging from solitary weeks of writing, today I went to the first of three days of our dissertation conference. The thirty-six members of the class are presenting their research to date. Presentations are followed by questions.
I am frightened and inspired at the same time. I’m frightened because of the impressive amount of rigour in other people’s study design. I feel like a fraud in comparison. Somehow, I must persuade others that my results are valid and reliable.
I am also inspired by how interesting and useful people’s research is. For eight hours today, my brain was filled with non-Joan-shaped thoughts and that gave me ideas for my own work. I went home, eager to tweak my presentation, looking forward to my turn to present on Wednesday.
Before I started this course, I knew two things about research: that it often a lonely occupation, and that it is a hard slog. I was warned about this and I have experienced it to be true. I also knew that good research practice includes collaborating with people and sharing ideas to ward off loneliness and stagnation, and that the best way to slog through research is to work nine to five, even in the most uninspired times.
Despite forewarning, I did not follow these two guides and it has been to my detriment. Because I didn’t have the willpower to hack through the lows, I feel the pressure now. Because I am under pressure, I feel like I can’t spend the time to talk to people and socialise. Because I don’t talk to people and socialise, I am unproductive and low.
Maybe this conference, enforced interaction, is what I need to break the cycle.
Hi Joan,
if it makes you feel any better I felt the same way when I was working on the podcast series full-time. Speaking of shaped thoughts, my recent work makes me look at everything through gender-focused eyes. I was interested looking through the conference program that the last session of your conference (traditionally either reserved for the best, or worst, presenters), was filled entirely with females. Why do you think it is that most of the girls on the course opted to do construction-related projects?
I’m not going to ask whether you think Fenner put this theme last because he thought the presenters would be in the best or worst category…
Joan,
I just have the confidence you will do well. Much better than many of us would!
Thank you, Yap! I feel more confident, now that I practiced in front of my housemates. And in the college laundry room. I wonder if they have CCTV in the laundry room? The porter probably thinks I’m speaking to the washing machine.
Cobi, I did notice that the programme was girl-dominated towards the end. I didn’t make the connection ‘lots of girls did construction topics’, though. Very strange.
Hmm.
I don’t think there’s one reason for it, nor do I think it’s random. Firstly, we should take Amanda out of the equation because her topic is actually about materials/waste (maybe she got put in that slot because her supervisor couldn’t come at another time).
It’s pretty safe to say that the proportion of girls in civil engineering is higher than in electrical engineering. The electrical engineers are often interested in energy topics. Civil engineers are more likely to be into construction and water.
(You can’t really extrapolate much from this. A significant minority of people in the program have crossed disciplines.)
My topic (energy efficiency in new houses) was selected to match up with my supervisor’s interests. I didn’t actually care much about what my topic was; I was more interested in how I was going to analyse it. I could have looked at any policy issue.
I think the five girls in the construction section (minus Amanda) are all supervised by Dr F. Maybe there’s something about Dr F supervising women, resulting in a focus on construction.
I’m sure it wasn’t active selection on Dr F’s part! Maybe he just took on the indecicive people and girls are more likely to be indecicive than boys. That seems likely 🙂