So in UK, people generally complete their PhD in 3.5 to 4 years.

Before, I intended to finish in 4 years as I wanted time to publish everything before writing up. Towards the end of 3rd year, I applied for a grant to do research abroad which could be anywhere between 1 and 12 months which I got accepted for earlier this year. I originally planned to do 2 to 3 months for experience (and a mini-holiday), but in the end decided to work for 12 months as it is in a good research group and I would like a publication out of it.

For this to work within the time period, I have decided to start this position 2 months before the PhD submission deadline, in which I will come back to UK after to submit - meaning I have put my PhD on suspension for a year (which has been accepted). I will not be able to finish my thesis before I go so that is why I am doing it this way.

The position itself counts as a post-doc, even though I have not graduated my PhD. I understand this may look good as I have applied and got my own funding for this, but also thought it might look strange in academic bios, as graduation years are usually listed. Therefore people see that I took 5 years to complete it (whereas in reality it is 4 years + 1 year suspension).

Any thoughts on how academics may perceive this kind of bio?

  • In my area (electrical/computer science), candidates are evaluated on the quality of their publications. Another consideration is types of works; these will determine whether a candidate will flourish in our university. – Prof. Santa Claus Jul 5 '17 at 22:18
  • I don't think it will look particularly strange - it will be clear to anyone looking at your CV (or at least, you should make sure that it is!) that you had a break during those five years during which you were doing something useful. – user2390246 Jul 6 '17 at 12:24
  • @user Thanks for your comment, that is a very good suggestion that I should reinforce myself. – Cloud Chem Jul 6 '17 at 14:40

I'm not in the UK, but if you would accept that your question is "Does graduating with a PhD 1 year later than normal look bad?" I would say no, it doesn't, and especially if it results in 1 additional good publication, it might even look better. As @ProfSantaClaus mentions, publication records are typically most important.

Additionally, having received a presumably competitive grant looks good, doing work with an additional research group looks good, and expanding your network by working with another research group is also good.

I wouldn't worry too much about this as long as the whole process makes good sense for you in other ways, and it sounds like it does.

|improve this answer|||||
  • Thank you for your detailed reply. You definitely made me feel more confident in my choice! – Cloud Chem Jul 6 '17 at 0:11

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.