PhD Research Plan Review

Most PhD proposals are rejected before they are fully read. Not because the applicant is weak, but because the proposal makes structural mistakes that signal inexperience to the committee in the first page.

In this one-to-one session, we'll go through your research proposal together and I'll tell you honestly whether it works. We'll look at your research question — is it actually answerable in three to four years, or is it a book project pretending to be a PhD? Your literature framing — does it show a gap, or just summarise what others have said? Your methodology — does it convince a committee you know how you'll do this, not just what you'll do? And your fit — does the proposal speak to the department and supervisor you're targeting, or could it have been sent anywhere?

Please note: this session is for humanities and social sciences proposals only (law, politics, IR, sociology, history, and related fields). I don't review STEM proposals — different disciplines, different rules, and you deserve a reviewer who knows yours.