In a previous post, I discussed some of the issues I faced with writing a PhD proposal. In this post, I will go further, providing more detail about my proposal and how it evolved from early ideas into the final submission. I hope it will be helpful to others in the process. To provide some important background, though, let me say a few things at the outset: the proposal was for post-graduate research in the UK, where doctoral programs are intended to be only three years in duration and students begin working on their dissertations right away; my proposal was very specifically designed for admission to a particular programme (PhD in Archaeology at the University of Durham, UK) and for highly competitive funding (ORSAS and Durham Doctoral Fellowship); the proposal had to follow a particular format with a maximum 500-word case for support, but could include additional details. My proposal was successful in gaining an offer for a place in the department, but I am still awaiting the funding decision.
General Format
There was little guidance offered for the format of my proposal. Since the application was online, and all information was entered into a basic web-based form, I could not apply text formatting (e.g. bold, italics) or specify fonts, etc. For admissions purposes, the instructions simply said that I should provide an overview/outline of my intended dissertation topic and what I plan to do with it. Because my application also doubled for funding purposes, the format was a little more prescribed: a 500-word (maximum) “Case for Support” followed by no more than 1,500 words of additional details and references, if needed. A very basic outline, then, is something like this:
Applicant’s Full Name
PhD: “Title of Proposed Dissertation”
Case for support text goes here, no more than 500 words.
ADDITIONAL DETAILS
Additional details text goes here.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
And the bibliography goes here. No more than 1,500 words for additional details and bibliography combined.
Case for Support
Writing the “case for support” was, beyond coming up with the overall idea, the hardest part of this process. Due to the requirements of the funding process, 500 words were all I was allowed. In this short space, I was expected to describe the problem or topic I plan to tackle, how I intend to go about it, why it is important, why Durham is the best place to conduct this research, why my proposed supervisors are the best choices, why I am the person best suited to undertake this task, and to effectively communicate why I and the proposal are worthy of receiving the very scarce funding. I started with my first draft in mid-October 2008, and submitted my final draft in mid-February 2009. At least a dozen versions were born in the interim.
Additional Details
Since my topic is rather complex and 500 words provide little explanatory real estate, it was necessary to expand on the basic proposal included in the “case for support.” In my case, I decided to subdivide this portion into the following areas: Research Context, Research Methodology, Timetable, and Qualifications and Experience. One or two paragraphs further fleshed-out the shortened treatment each area received in the abbreviated “case for support.”
Bibliography
While I was uncertain about including a bibliography, I found it necessary to keep my word count within the limits by referencing previous related works. The works included here do not represent the bibliography of what I will read in the execution of my dissertation research, nor necessarily those works that will find their way into my dissertation’s bibliography. These are, merely, important works from which I have taken ideas to develop my proposal, or which illustrate a point I tried to make in the proposal itself.
Honing the Intro
With only 500 words to catch the attention of readers (i.e those who will decide my fate), getting the introductory sentences and paragraph right is a tough task. Until my final two drafts, I could not get my case for support under 700 words, and still maintain a strong and comprehensive coverage of the expected points. Reading aloud, re-writing, and having friends and supervisors look it over really helped. To illustrate this, look at these three versions of my intro paragraph:
The Antonine Wall (AW) in Scotland was awarded World Heritage Site status in July 2008. A Roman monument, built under the orders of Antoninus Pius, it stands unique for its density of fortifications and represents the northeastern-most frontier of the empire. Despite these qualities the AW has been, in comparison to its southern sibling Hadrian’s Wall (HW), largely neglected by modern scholars. Most studies of Britain’s northern frontiers have focused on HW; those few concerned with the AW have been largely marginalized. Seldom has the history of the AW in post-Roman times been discussed within archaeological circles despite its location across Scotland’s most populous area, where it has been an integral part of the historic landscape for almost two millennia. Likewise, archaeological treatments have failed to explore these later periods. The proposed PhD research seeks to fill this gap, approaching the AW as a living monument: a place where people have continued to live, work and play long after the Romans left in the second century. (early draft, November 2008)
The Antonine Wall (AW) in Scotland was awarded World Heritage Site (WHS) status in 2008. A Roman monument, built on the orders of Antoninus Pius, it stands unique for its density of fortification and marks the northeastern-most frontier of the empire. Despite these qualities the AW has been, in comparison to Hadrian’s Wall (HW), largely neglected by modern scholars. Most studies of Britain’s Roman frontiers focus on HW; those concerned with the AW are largely marginalized. The common approach (Macdonald 1934; Hanson and Maxwell 1983; Breeze 2006) is traditional Roman military history, ignoring survival beyond the Roman period and the Wall’s role within later narratives of mythological landscape. The monument’s status as an integral part of the regional landscape for almost two millennia has never been seriously discussed, and evidence of post-Roman activity remains excluded from synthetic works. A growing collection of grey literature reports and historical landscape data promise to provide valuable insights previously unexplored. The proposed interdisciplinary research will contribute to the AW’s “archaeology” in two senses: its historiography will be explored through an “archaeology” of discourse (Foucault 1972), and its long-term history through now-traditional methods of landscape archaeology. (later draft, January 2009)
In July 2008, Scotland’s Antonine Wall (AW) was inscribed as Britain’s most recent World Heritage Site (WHS). A Roman military frontier, the AW existed as such for only 20-30 years, yet twentieth century research has focused on the Wall as a Roman monument, with little attention given its presence in landscapes of later periods; potential for studies of history and archaeology beyond the Roman period has only recently been recognized. These developments increase the AW’s global visibility and provide a unique opportunity to pursue innovative interdisciplinary research that will contribute to understanding of the WHS at this seminal moment. (final draft, February 2009)
In my opinion, all of these paragraphs provide the immediate “today” context of my topic. The first two provide a lot more background info than the final draft, but it is only in the final draft that a real sense of timeliness is effectively communicated. While I don’t say all that I’d like to, this version is concise, highlights the opportunity for important research, and makes it clear that it’s important to begin this work now. Hopefully, this version draws readers in to the following text better than the others.
Conclusion & Advice
I was originally planning to post my entire proposal on here. I have since, however, decided against doing so for the time being. I still await a final funding decision, and am unsure if I’ll even be able to begin this project in the Fall. If you’re really interested, you can send me a friendly email, and I may be willing to send you the proposal on a case-by-case basis. I will also be willing to help anyone who has questions on developing and editing their own proposal for a PhD at Durham or elsewhere. Just drop me a line via email or in the comments below.
Now for a bit of advice: think long and hard about what you want to do for your PhD. If you have no idea what you want to cover in a dissertation, then you may need to reconsider whether or not now is the right time for you to apply for a PhD. This is particularly true for programmes at British universities. If you have some rough ideas, start contacting the experts in the field, or closely related fields. Don’t be afraid to contact big-shot academics… you will need to deal with them in the course of your research and will probably find them more than willing to help you out. Often times, the major players will be hoping that someone comes along and fills a certain gap in knowledge, or looks at something from a new perspective… these people may be potential supervisors or external examiners, and making the contacts now can go a long way towards getting your proposal accepted and funded. Start writing your proposal early. You should know your deadlines several months in advance. Do not wait until a week or so before submission to start drafting. Getting your ideas down early really helps, and having the ability to run various drafts past former, current and future supervisors will go a long way towards an even better proposal. I absolutely hated going through this… but I’m quite satisifed with my final submission.
Popularity: 37%
Darrell J. Rohl BSc (Hons) (Andrews), MA (Dunelm): I'm a PhD candidate in 
Good summary of the process. I’ll add one note of advice that I received (and followed): Even though the website application limits the word count of different sections, I submitted a hard copy of formatted text that was longer than the web word count. In the end the web version is quite important in that it serves as an abstract to the larger project, which shows that you see the key question and the thesis. However, a little extra detail in a longer document also shows the contours of your proposal and is easier on the eyes since you can use subheadings, etc.
Thanks for the advice Ben. I got the same. In fact, for my funding phase, I submitted a slightly more advanced document that was formatted how I wanted and which included additional details for non-specialist readers (who will be the ultimate judges of my funding app). It’s important that people who are seeking funding are aware of this fact: the people who decide on funding will probably not be familiar with your topic, the sources, or the usual departmental lingo… be sure to not overuse any of these and, if you do use them, try to be as simple and explanatory as possible without submitting a dissertation-size tome. I was also told not to be over-prescriptive: they want to see that you know what you’re doing and have a well-thought-out plan without “knowing” everything to begin with. You should demonstrate careful thought and planning, but also ability to be guided through and adapt to the problems that will (always) crop up during the course of research.
Unfortunately, I have just found out, my application was not successful for funding at this stage. I was considered, within my department, the strongest candidate for the ORSAS award scheme and received the departmental nomination for this award. When competing with all the other nominees from the Faculty of Social Sciences and Health, however, I did not come out on top.
Hi, What a good post! Rare quality found here. I really enjoyed reading it. Posts like this one are really helping the scholars over net. But would like to add more. Most of the websites have now started providing service like providing Complete Thesis Preparation Guidance packages. These packages are really helpful for the scholars as these contains sample thesis, presentations, ebooks etc. etc. Any person writing a thesis or dissertation should use such packages for making great thesis and dissertations. A good site which is coming to my mind at this time is http://www.thesisplus.com