Hi. Although I have never attempted a part-time PhD, I can share my experience when I was a full-time PhD student. I began my studies because I was fascinated by technologies and research, particularly artificial intelligence. Also, I wanted a PhD for personal satisfaction.

Before embarking on the journey, I was incredibly naive and completely misunderstood what a PhD journey entailed (I never take a Master, no experience in research). I assumed I needed to be an expert in coding and software usage. I also imagined myself as a researcher who would make significant contributions, sit in the lab, do codings, and invent new things.

When I began my PhD, I realized I was mistaken and that research is entirely about publication. It's more about academic fields than programming abilities. No matter how well I performed in my experiments, I will never perform well if I cannot skillfully write the papers and thesis. At the time, it made me question whether I was on the right track, as it appears as though paperwork takes precedence over technical work (I preferred technical work).

Eventually, I was able to publish my works. It truly taught me a great deal and altered my perspective on pursuing a PhD. It teaches me the value of hard work, not just smart work. After all, I am unable to share the practical approach to obtaining a part-time PhD while working. What is etched in my mind is how I came to understand what a PhD truly is. Similar to someone admired those who are rich, but once they become rich, they realized it's not as what they have fantasized about. I'm sure someone can provide you with a more detailed explanation of the point of view you're seeking.

Wish you all the best and good luck.

This post has been edited by hellothere131495: Jul 10 2021, 03:49 PM

Amazing. Hopefully, you will be able to expand on your Master's research to a PhD. That will be interesting because the progress does not begin at zero.

I agree that academia is distinct from the industry. People in academia will be working hard to publish more papers to advance their careers. Everyone is aiming for top journals and wants to get their work published, so competition is fierce. They don't care if their research is useful (to industry and society) or not. All they want is to publish another paper that requires novelty, which can be accomplished through creativity and some blowing skill after finishing the experiment. In the end, I'm getting used to it, and probably that's how the academic world works.

Well, that sounds very true.

Need to get good result in degree first. Then, I had an interview, and I needed to demonstrate that I am capable of conducting research. This is accomplished by presenting them with a convincing and very detailed research proposal. During the interview, I must persuade them that I know what I'm doing, have a clear vision of the novelty, and have preliminary results (not just coming with empty hands).

I showed all that remains is to compare the results to those of other papers to highlight the improvements made, and I already have a novelty inside my hand. Well, that convinced them, and I miraculously accepted for the PhD program. But then, I realized what I had shown them during the interview was bullshit, and I need to rethink my novelty and read more papers. So since then, I've been working on papers and more papers and tons of theories, with coding being only a minor part of my studies (which I never expect to do so).