Does my back-end look big from here?
A blog as I near the end of the PhD journey. What does progress look like, and how far away does the finish line forever seem to be? Hence asking if my back-end looks big from here.
It is July 2025. This is month 34 out of 36-42 of my full-time PhD. It has been too long since I last blogged but that is the reality of this time in the process. Writing is the constant, and if not writing then preparing to present the writing for another academic audience. If you want a brief summary of the back-end of the PhD, and why all other things take a back seat, that is pretty much all you need to know. Academic writing is the one constant.
I am currently also preparing my next annual progress report (APR). That will be submitted at the end of this month; my last APR. It is all ready to be submitted, already. I wrote it in draft at the weekend, as I know well enough where I am at. As I have reported in the APR, I may well have finished all written progress as planned by end of September, and if not I am going to be close. I will have finished (or almost finished) writing my thesis by then. I am, however, here-and-now, a long way from that finished written phase. Indeed, even now I wonder if any words I have written to-date will stand as my final 70,000 or so. By example, last night I had new feedback on my results chapter; I am going to now rewrite that entirely. Accordingly, my schedule of work-in-progress is starting to stack at the back-end. The result chapter is required before the discussion chapter and the conclusions chapter can be moved on. There is plenty more academic writing left to do. My back-end is looking bigger by the day.
One thing I can now say – with the conviction only possible from experiencing the reality – is that as a PhD candidate you do stop fearing harsh feedback. It actually matters not that the volume of outputs stacks up. All becomes welcome criticism. The next draft of a thesis chapter is better because of it. In the context of the results section for example, it is more likely that justice will be made to the data collected and analysed. This is the priority after all – the quality not the speed. The feedback is the nature of being a peer under review. It reflects the process in action by being shown what is still wanting and in need of another redo. Nonetheless, it remains the case, in my opinion, that peer criticism remains the toughest part of the PhD process to get used to. The timing is forever, and the progress sometimes hard to stay attuned to. It is also the most important to understand and come to appreciate. The wounds never truly heal, but instead become scars or the itchy felt reminders that one uses and is prompted towards via the robust challenge still to be asked. The back-end of a PhD looks bigger because the front-end of post-doctoral challenge is bigger still.
The reward of this forever critical process becomes the modest acknowledgements towards progress. Between bouts of criticism are small accolades. In 2025 I have had papers accepted at conferences, had them presented by my supervisors on my behalf, presented them myself, defended the specifics of such papers, accepted pointers to improve them, been awarded best presenter, awarded best paper, and on the same day been shown why a chapter of the underlying thesis needs to be written all over again. Take both praise and criticism equally. In this space both have meaning and means to help the contribution to knowledge-in-progress. The back-end looks bigger than the front because more is known as not known.
Does my back-end look big from here? Yes it does. That is both a compliment and a concern. As is the norm.
to be continued…