Postgraduate student experiences
4.20-4.40pm
Presenters
- Prof Shawana Andrews and Dr Odette Mazel (with Tahlia Eastman and Dr Emily Munro-Harrison), University of Melbourne
- Dr Saule Bekova (with Ivan Smirnov), University of Technology Sydney
- A/Prof Dawn Gilmore, Dr Chinh Nguyen and Yuvraj Mahendru, University of Melbourne
- Dr Edward Waters, University of Sydney
Advancing Indigenous research: The experience of Indigenous PhD scholars in Australia, Canada and New Zealand
Professor Shawana Andrews and Dr Odette Mazel (presenting authors), Tahlia Eastman and Dr Emily Munro-Harrison, University of Melbourne
In this paper we explore the experiences of Indigenous PhD scholars in Australia, Turtle Island/Canada, and Aotearoa/New Zealand with a focus on how they are advancing community-informed and Indigenous-led research in higher education. Through a strengths-based international comparative approach and drawing on in-depth interviews and a yarning circle, we investigated the factors that contribute to developing the intellectual, cultural, and social capital that enable Indigenous PhD scholars to conduct their projects in self-determined ways. The findings of this research revealed a shared experience across Indigenous PhD cohorts at the three fieldwork sites. While participants faced racism and discrimination within their institutions, contributing to feelings of inadequacy and alienation, participants actively sought strategies to cultivate a sense of belonging and remained committed to their research using Indigenous knowledges and methodologies. They also pursued culturally-informed intellectual support to ensure that they carried out their projects in culturally appropriate ways in each context. The outcomes of the research inform the ways in which universities can better support Indigenous PhD scholars to undertake their doctoral research with an emphasis on Indigenous ways of knowing, being and doing. Understanding the successes of Indigenous researchers in higher education creates stronger pathways to equity within the academy. This research addresses the vital need to centre the experience of Indigenous researchers in higher education and highlights the strength of Indigenous intellectual capabilities internationally.
Beyond supervision: Contextual correlates of mental-health talk in PhD posts
Dr Saule Bekova (presenting author) and Ivan Smirnov, University of Technology Sydney
Introduction / rationale: Supervision is widely seen as the decisive factor in doctoral success and issues, including mental-health related issues. We asked a broader question: In which day-to-day contexts does mental-health (MH) talk actually surface and where does supervision sit among them? Objectives: (1) Map the contexts in which MH talk appears across the doctorate; (2) quantify associations between contexts (e.g., supervision, progress, exit/transfer, funding, coursework, isolation, visa, teaching) and MH talk; (3) translate findings into context-matched responses for students, supervisors, and services. Methods / approach: We analysed N = 5,106 Academia Stack Exchange posts authored by doctoral students. Using OpenAI text embeddings, we projected to 2D with UMAP and identified topic clusters with HDBSCAN. We isolated a mental-health cluster, then audited misclassified items across clusters via transparent lexicons for MH mentions (depression, anxiety/panic, burnout/overwhelm, grief/chronic illness, therapy/medication, suicidality) and everyday contexts. On this set we computed: (a) rates, the share of posts within each context that also included MH talk; (b) correlations between MH tags and contexts; and (c) a logistic model (binary MH tag as outcome; contexts as predictors) to estimate adjusted odds. Findings / outcomes: MH talk was not confined to supervision. The highest rates occurred in progress/productivity and social/isolation, followed by exit/transfer and visa/international; supervision was high-volume but mid-rate. In adjusted analyses, progress and exit showed odds comparable to or exceeding supervision. Symptom pairings suggested depression/burnout co-occur with supervision and exit, while grief often co-occurred with coursework. Conclusion / implications Focusing solely on supervision risks missing key signals. Progress stalls, exit talk, isolation, and visa constraints are practical flags for timely, proportionate support.
Does orientation matter? Linking online onboarding to student retention and success at Melbourne Online
Associate Professor Dawn Gilmore, Dr Chinh Nguyen and Yuvraj Mahendru, University of Melbourne
As more students embark on their studies through online pathways, the importance of structured orientation experiences has grown significantly. Melbourne Online’s onboarding course was designed to equip students with the foundational skills, knowledge, and networks required for online learning success. The course is structured across four modules: (1) Online study at the University of Melbourne, (2) How to study online with confidence, (3) Eight Strategies for Learning Online, and (4) Your University Support Networks. Together, these modules introduce students to the online learning environment, provide strategies for effective study, and connect them with essential academic and support services. This study investigates the relationship between engagement with the onboarding course and student outcomes, focusing on retention, academic performance, and future academic success. It seeks to answer three key questions: (1) To what extent does completing all, some, or none of the modules impact student success? (2) Which modules are most predictive of sustained engagement and achievement? (3) How does participation in onboarding influence subsequent subject and course participation? A mixed-methods design is employed, combining quantitative analysis of student engagement and outcome data with qualitative insights from student feedback. This approach provides a comprehensive view of how onboarding experiences contribute to retention, performance, and participation in the first online term. By examining student engagement data and outcomes in the first online term, this study aims to identify the value and limitations of online orientation in fostering student success. Findings will inform the design of more effective onboarding strategies, ensuring that online learners are not only welcomed into their studies but are also supported to thrive throughout their academic journey.
Aesthetic judgement: a factor in poor student experience in dental education?
Dr Edward Waters, University of Sydney
The national Student Experience Survey consistently shows that dental students have poor overall learning experiences. Dental education involves students carrying out procedures on real patients, under supervision by a clinical educator. Almost uniquely within health education, assessing the outcomes of many dental procedures involves both aesthetic and clinical considerations. Any procedure done by a student that does not meet the aesthetic expectations of the patient or the clinical educator may be adjudged as unsatisfactory. Additional to this, dental students professional behaviour is often assessed in clinical sessions, and many measures of professionalism include aesthetic considerations such as attire and communication style. Whether aesthetic appraisals contribute to poor learning experiences in dentistry has not been studied to date. The objective of the project is to explore whether epistemic problems in aesthetic appraisal could contribute to poor learning experiences in dentistry. This project uses a philosophical exegesis to develop a provocation. Specifically, the theory of aesthetic judgement developed in Immanuel Kant’s third critique is developed as a hermeutic to problematise learning experiences in dentistry. The assessment of procedures and professionalism in dentistry is shown to devolve to Kant’s taxonomy of aesthetic judgements. The subjective aspects of such assessments are linked to negative student experiences, using examples. The proposition that aesthetic judgements can be reasonable grounds for assessment is challenged. This philosophical project critiques accepted norms in the assessment of dental students, and challenges the unconscious position that these norms are defensible and reasonable. It associates these epistemic problems in the assessment of dental students with their overall poor learning experiences. It ends with a question – can we assess what we claim to be able to, and if not, should we? This question is not only significant for dentistry, but for any areas of education where aesthetic considerations are important.