Embarking on a PhD: how I got here

by Jagon Chichon

A PhD is obviously a huge commitment, so an understandable level of consideration ought to go into a decision like that. Typically on hearing that yours truly is doing one, I’m inevitably asked: what I’m doing; why I decided the PhD was right for me; and how I got to this point. This blog is an attempt to answer those questions and hopefully provide some insights for those considering doctoral study.

The End of the MA

It all began in 2018 whilst working as an EAP Tutor at a university in Swansea. Having recently returned to the UK from Japan and with the end of my MA fast approaching, I needed a new direction. At the time, Olivia, my daughter, was a distant gleam in my eye and Tomomi, my partner, was still in Tokyo, so aside from teaching, climbing and occasional visits to Rhossili Bay, I had a lot of free time. I had genuinely enjoyed studying for an MA because the idea of contributing knowledge and influencing the world in some way was appealing – but at that stage, I wasn’t sure whether I could independently produce something that others would want to read. So, I decided to give it a go and put what I had learnt on the MA to the test.

Becoming a Researcher

As much of my time was spent teaching that inevitably led me to the classroom. During that time, I was teaching on a foundation programme but unlike CALD’s, it was much, much smaller and far less diverse. With a solitary group of just 12 Chinese learners, studying academic literacy, it was a continuous challenge to encourage English use in and outside of the classroom. It did, however, provide me with the inspiration for one of my first research projects post-MA. Using a combination of semi-structured group interviews and stimulated recall activities, I gained insights from these students as to the factors that influenced their Willingness to Communicate (WLC) (see Sallinen‐Kuparinen, McCroskey & Richmond 1991; MacIntyre & Charos 1996) in English in the second language (L2) classroom. Once that was accepted for publication in the Journal of English for Academic Purposes (JEAP) (Chichon, 2019) in mid-2018 and following advice and support from my line manager, Professor Thomas Jansen, I felt empowered to begin applying for doctoral study.

Confusion and Rejection

It may seem surprising, but I hadn’t fully considered what a PhD might entail, or the commitment involved, which is probably why my batch of applications received widespread rejection. The research proposal I hastily put together on spoken interactions in EAP contexts was ill-thought out and incredibly vague, so unsurprisingly just one, the University of Manchester, showed an interest. Manchester is of course a top university so it would have been easy to accept that offer – but it was difficult to ignore the wider consensus that I was way off the mark with my application. So, I went back to the drawing board to seriously think about whether this was right for me and if so, what I wanted to focus on.

Back to the Drawing board

During that time, I did the things I should have done at the very beginning. I reached out to professors at different institutions, looked at the research areas of prospective universities and made a list of possible topics that interested me. Critical Discourse Studies (CDS) (formerly Critical Discourse Analysis) leapt out because I had a long-term interest in how politicians and the media influence discourse and society, and it seemed like a possible way for me to affect positive change. CDS also had a clear transferability to my own profession as it involved analysing the functionality and use of language, which is essentially what EAP professionals do.

From EAP to CDS

So, I hunkered down and delved into the vast literature surrounding CDS. Writers such as Richardson (2017), and his analysis of conflict reporting, and Hart’s (2010) research on evolutionary psychology and immigration, were engaging and accessible, though Van Dijk’s (1990, 1994, 2009) Socio-Cognitive approach to CDS was particularly appealing. Its emphasis on the internal processes involved as audiences engage with and interpret what they see and hear resonated, since cognition clearly affects how ideas circulate and manifest into social practices and actions. That foray into the world of CDS broadened my critical gaze in many senses and I began to consider what I could direct that towards.

Inspiration came in the form of Brexit Britain and immigration. Lots of CDS research concentrates on the representation of migrants in print media, particularly in right-wing tabloids where prejudice is more likely to reside (Polonska-Kimunguyi, 2022), so other media that inform and shape discourse escape the same scrutiny (Goodman & Speer, 2007; Smith & Deacon, 2018; Threadgold, 2009). While listening to one of these alternative media sources, Any Questions, during yet another discussion of Brexit and immigration, I heard the uninhibited use of the collocate illegal immigrant in discussions about people seeking asylum. The casual way in which such a pejorative term was used (see Lyn and Lea, 2003; McKay, Thomas & Blood, 2011) attracted my attention. And when I considered using Any Questions as a possible dataset, it also ticked a lot of boxes; for example, it is generally considered trustworthy (Nielson, Schulz & Fletcher, 2020), it has a broad listenership and affects wider debate, since BBC Radio 4 is accessible to all and the BBC has a significant cross platform reach (Gunter, 2024). Another positive was that it provided access to spoken rather than written discourse, so in many respects an analysis of discussions on Any Questions would add something unique to CDS.

Another attempt, but this time …

Buoyed by this eureka moment, I set to work on a new research proposal in late-2018 analysing the representation of Refugees, Asylum Seekers, Immigrants and Migrants (RASIM) on BBC Radio 4’s Any Questions, before, during and after Brexit (2014-2020). My new research proposal was met with far greater enthusiasm and two universities (the Open University and the University of Brighton) invited me for interviews. However, although I had an understanding of CDS and I was confident in the originality of my research proposal, I once again felt the need to put what I had learnt about critical textual analysis into practice.

Using van Dijk’s (2009) Socio-Cognitive approach as the methodological basis and Tindale, et al’s. (2001) work on cognitive centrality, I critically analysed an episode of the Nigel Farage show on the radio station LBC as he celebrated Trump’s decision to send American troops to stop a group of asylum seekers from entering America. The approach and topic had a clear link to my research proposal (e.g., spoken discourse and immigration) and I gained a more concrete understanding of the methodology and how to critically analyse language, argumentation and genre. Those experiences, together with the positive feedback I received from the editors of the Discourse and Communication journal, instilled a belief in me that I could produce research in CDS and that helped me to approach the PhD interviews with newfound confidence. Subsequently, both institutions offered me a place, but I accepted the University of Brighton’s offer and that decision to pursue doctoral study is one that I certainly don’t regret.

Reflecting on the before-times

So, that has been my PhD journey thus far, though obviously it is still ongoing so I can’t provide a conclusion to it all just yet. However, in terms of key take aways for anyone considering a PhD, do some of what I did and ignore the rest. For instance, the reason I mentioned my published work is because it was an essential step for me towards studying for a PhD and something I would highly recommend. Indeed, on reflection when applying for doctoral study, we are attempting to cross the threshold and enter a new and unfamiliar community of practice, so asserting one’s credentials by producing research helps to at least get a partial foot in the door. Another piece of advice would be to approach it all in a considered way; know what you are getting yourself into and do your research. As I pointed out, these things seem obvious but maybe some of you reading this are like me and you have a tendency to just dive in. That’s a positive in some instances but certainly not when thinking about committing to a PhD.

Further Reading

In terms of further reading, I’d be remiss if I didn’t direct readers to my own research contributions in CDS. I’m most proud of this one:

Chichon, J. P. (2021). Working Royals, Megxit and Prince Andrew’s disastrous BBC interview: The online media’s representation of the British Monarchy between 2010 and 2020. Journal of Language and Politics, 20(4), 585-606.

Interestingly, as I finished writing this article, the scandal around Prince Andrew broke and when it was submitted for publication, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle relinquished their Royal duties and fled to Canada, so it was fortuitously topical, though it did require a significant rewrite and re-focus. The other, which is less impressive, was the Nigel Farage analysis referenced earlier:

Chichon, J. P. (2020). (Mis) leading Britain’s conversation: The cultivation of consent on the Nigel Farage radio phone-in show. Discourse & Communication, 14(1), 3-21.

For a general understanding of the different approaches to CDS, I recommend this text:

Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. (2009). Critical discourse analysis: History, agenda, theory and methodology. Methods of critical discourse analysis, 2(1), 1-33.

But for a more practical orientation, this book is great and very accessible:

Machin, D., & Mayr, A. (2023). How to do critical discourse analysis: A multimodal introduction.

 

References

Chichon, J. (2019). Factors influencing overseas learners’ Willingness to Communicate (WTC) on a pre-sessional programme at a UK university. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 39, 87-96.

Gilardi, F., Gessler, T., Kubli, M., & Müller, S. (2022). Social media and political agenda setting. Political communication, 39(1), 39-60.

Goodman, S., & Speer, S. A. (2007). Category use in the construction of asylum seekers. Critical Discourse Studies, 4(2), 165-185.

Gunter, B. (2024). What Future for the BBC? In The BBC and the Public (pp. 209-233). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland.

Hart, C. (2010). Critical discourse analysis and cognitive science: New perspectives on immigration discourse. Springer.

Lynn, N., & Lea, S. (2003). A phantom menace and the new Apartheid’: the social construction of asylum- seekers in the United Kingdom. Discourse & Society, 14(4), 425-452.

MacIntyre, P. D., & Charos, C. (1996). Personality, attitudes, and affect as predictors of second language communication. Journal of language and social psychology, 15(1), 3-26.

McKay, F. H., Thomas, S. L., & Warwick Blood, R. (2011). ‘Any one of these boat people could be a terrorist for all we know! ’Media representations and public perceptions of ‘boat people’ arrivals in Australia. Journalism, 12(5), 607-626.

Nielsen, R. K., Schulz, A., & Fletcher, R. (2020). The BBC is under scrutiny. Here’s what research tells about its role in the UK. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.

Połońska-Kimunguyi, E. (2022). Echoes of Empire: racism and historical amnesia in the British media coverage of migration. Humanities and social sciences communications, 9(1), 1-13.

Richardson, J. E. (2017). Analysing newspapers: An approach from critical discourse analysis. Bloomsbury Publishing.

Sallinen‐Kuparinen, A., McCroskey, J. C., & Richmond, V. P. (1991). Willingness to communicate, communication apprehension, introversion, and self‐reported communication competence: Finnish and American comparisons. Communication research reports, 8(1), 55-64.

Smith, D., & Deacon, D. (2018). Immigration and the British news media: Continuity or change?. Sociology Compass, 12(9), e12618.

Threadgold, T. (2009). The media and migration in the United Kingdom, 1999 to 2009. Washington DC.

Tindale, R. S., Meisenhelder, H. M., Dykema‐Engblade, A. A., & Hogg, M. A. (2001). Shared cognition in small groups. Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Group processes, 1-30.

Van Dijk, T. A. (1990). Social cognition and discourse. Handbook of language and social psychology, 163, 183.

Van Dijk, T. A. (1994). Discourse and cognition in society. Communication theory today, 107-126.

Van Dijk, T. A. (2009). Critical discourse studies: A sociocognitive approach (pp. 62-86).