As a lecturer in higher education with a professional background in primary education and special educational needs and disabilities, the area of difference, diversity and wellbeing has always been a personal interest and it is a fast-developing area of international research.   A literature review established a longstanding and sustained interest in student wellbeing, particularly PhD students (Byrom et al., 2020) with a shared concern surrounding the experiences of post graduate researchers and a consensus on the corelation PhD students’ experiences and depleted feelings of wellbeing (Mackie and Bates, 2018).  Predominantly in the literature a medical model is employed, and the language of deficit dominates the debate focused on a lack of wellbeing which is mirrored in the broader western societal discussions framing a wellbeing crisis (Beasy et al., 2019).   Whilst there is no doubt a need for specialist support and expert interventions for some, there is a recognised risk that problematising experiences leads to an overreliance on overburdened specialist services (Priestly et al., 2021).  However, there is a lack of consensus around the definitions of wellbeing as a result the overall picture is fragmented (Dodge et al., 2012).  Generally, research focuses either measuring (Dodd et al., 2021), identifying stress and mitigating risk (Sverdlik, and Hall, 2020), or designing interventions for those deemed to be in most need of support (Barry et al., 2019).   This research proposes to bring previously unheard voices to the discussions about PhD student wellbeing.  The research objectives are:

a)              to support PhD students in the future,

b)             to relate the stories to the higher education context,

c)              to relate the stories to discourses of wellbeing.

The higher education (HE) landscape, having undergone significant shifts to a marketized approach is now dominated with the language of achievement, performativity, and value for money.  Widening participation in England is at the core of the transformations and part of an international picture with the rationale for the growth attributed to the desire to provide an economic workforce with higher-level skills.  As a result, the student population has become more diverse despite fierce competition for post graduate employment.  Demands on PhD students are complex and diverse, as is the structure and organisation of the PhD.  Standards based on measurable outcomes, including student feedback, are publicly available, emphasising PhD students as consumers with power.  Yet the lack of clarity around the PhD role and blurring of identities as researcher, student and employee can be disempowering.  Emerging research considers the impact of the current landscape on the wellbeing of HE staff as well as PhD students (Brewster et al., 2021).  In recognition of the diverse nature of post graduate research, an attempt to make sense of the experiences of PhD students, specific groups have been the focus of research, for example, underrepresented groups; gender (Haynes et al., 2014) and international students (Laufer and Gorup, 2019).  In many cases the emphasis is on the lack of wellbeing and the contributory factors to the current state such as, the stage of the PhD (Sverdlik and Hall, 2020) and relationships with supervisory teams (Blanchard and Haccoun, 2020).  While it is accepted that understanding the complex nature of wellbeing is necessary and providing specialist support, including interventions, to support those who need it is welcomed, this does not provide the whole picture (Scott and Takarangi, 2019).   This research is focused on an underrepresented group in this specific context, through individual interviews the views of PhD students who have a sense of wellbeing is brought to debate.

This research draws on Antonovsky’s (1996) salutogenic approach. He saw medical research focused on disease and suggested that to develop healthy societies, research needed to consider factors that impact on health. This research elicited the views of PhD students who have a sense of wellbeing. This paper emphasises diversity by bringing to the fore previously unheard voices, the lived experiences of PhD students who have a sense of wellbeing. Due to its recognition of the tension between agency and structure, a critical realist approach was used. In this qualitative research PhD students’ agency is explored within the neo-liberal HE context in England. Thirteen participants, including international students and students studying in England but living abroad, took part in virtual interviews using narrative inquiry (NI). NI provided an invitation for participants to tell stories about their experiences of wellbeing (Clandinin, 2006). The data was analysed in two ways; reflexive thematic analysis (RTA) to identify the nature of wellbeing and through this analysis common themes were explored. RTA contributed to the research by addressing the objective to support PhD students in the future. However, it was felt that this drew the findings away from the stories that were shared and therefore the same data was analysed using dialogical narrative analysis (DNA). DNA maintains focus on the stories told; and contributed to the objectives to relate the stories to the higher education context and to discourses of wellbeing. Humans tell stories to make sense of their experiences (Frank, 2010). Participant reflections gave light to an unexpected outcome that telling stories about wellbeing actually contributed to their feelings of wellbeing by firstly providing a context for reflection and secondly by serving as empowerment though the affirmation of their thoughts, ideas and actions; the process of talking about wellbeing enhanced feelings of wellbeing. These two approaches to data analysis supplemented each other to provide a more diverse insight into the nature PhD students’ wellbeing. The RTA identified how the participants made sense of their wellbeing using thirteen commonalities. The DNA explored three common stories related to the HE context and the participants expectations and attitudes towards their wellbeing including their own definitions of wellbeing, thus providing insight into the nature of PhD student wellbeing. DNA created space to explore story structure, the use of metaphor and the role of time, place and society.

The PhD community is diverse, PhD students are individual, their contexts are specific and dynamic. They respond throughout their PhD experiences. They adapt to changes in their personal lives, and many adapt to the changes in their employment. COVID-19 affected everyone without exception, but it affected their wellbeing in different ways - positively and negatively. The participants’ stories resist the concept of crisis. They told stories of success with problems presented as catalysts for change rather than barriers. Being a PhD student involved constant negotiation within the neo-liberal landscape, with an understanding and a shared view that they have choice and capacity to adapt and respond to the demands made on them by the PhD. Challenge was not a problematic concept; participants welcomed academic challenge and pursued it in other ways, such as physical challenges in their leisure time. Participants spoke holistically about themselves and told stories that emphasised balance as key. Methodologically, the recommendation is to analyse data using more than one approach. There is potential to delve deeper into data by analysing from different perspectives. The findings are practical and may be relevant to not just PhD students, but to the wider student population. In addition, the research suggests that telling stories can be a positive experience in itself. Sharing stories about wellbeing serves as a reminder for the teller whilst having potential for the listener. The research recommends empowering PhD students by opening dialogue and creating opportunities for sharing wellbeing experiences, framing wellbeing openly rather than positioning it as deficit. The process of talking about wellbeing was seen to be positive and being listened to has potential to empower. For HEIs an important message for PhD wellbeing is to shift the emphasis towards processes of communication and away from the search for the solution.

Antonovsky, A. (1996) The salutogenic model as a theory to guide health promotion. Health Promotion International, 11(1), pp.11–18. Barry, K. M., Woods, M., Warnecke, E., Stirling, C. and Martin, A. (2018) Psychological health of doctoral candidates, study-related challenges and perceived performance. Higher Education Research and Development, 37(3), pp.468–483. Beasy, K., Emery, S. and Crawford, J. (2019) Drowning in the shallows: an Australian study of the PhD experience of wellbeing. Teaching in Higher Education. 26(4), pp.602-618. Brewster, L., Jones, E., Priestley, M., Wilbraham, S. J., Spanner, L. and Hughes, G. (2021) ‘Look after the staff and they would look after the students’ cultures of wellbeing and mental health in the university setting. Journal of Further and Higher Education. 46(40), pp.548-560. Blanchard, C., & Haccoun, R. R. (2020). Investigating the impact of advisor support on the perceptions of graduate students. Teaching in Higher Education, 25(8). Byrom, N., Dinu, L., Kirkman, A. and Hughes, G. (2020) Predicting stress and mental wellbeing among doctoral researchers. Journal of Mental Health, pp.1-9. Clandinin, D. J. (2006) Narrative Inquiry: A Methodology for Studying Lived Experience. Research Studies in Music Education, 27(1), pp.44-54. Dodd, A.L., Priestley, M., Tyrrell, K., Cygan, S., Newell, C. and Brom, N. (2021) University student well-being in the United Kingdom: a scoping review of its conceptualisation and measurement. Journal of Mental Health, 30(3), pp. 375–387. Dodge, R., Daly, A., Huyton, J. and Sanders, L. (2012) The challenge of defining wellbeing. International Journal of Wellbeing, 2(3), pp.222–235. Haynes, C., Bulosan, M., Citty, J., Grant-Harris, M., Hudson, J. C. and Koro-Ljungberg, M. (2012) My world is not my doctoral program. Or is it?: female students’ perceptions of well-being. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 7, pp.1–17. Mackie, S. A. and Bates, G. W. (2019) Contribution of the doctoral education environment to PhD candidates’ mental health problems: a scoping review. Higher Education Research and Development, 38(3), pp.565–578 Priestley, M., Broglia, E., Hughes, G. And Spanner, L. (2022) Student perspectives on improving mental health support services at university. Counselling and Psychotherapy Research, 22(1 Scott, H. and Takarangi, M. K. T. (2019) Measuring PhD students’ well-being: are we seeing the whole picture? Student Success, 10(3), pp.14–24. Sverdlik, A. and Hall, N. C. (2020) Not just a phase: exploring the role of program stage on well-being and motivation in doctoral students. Journal of Adult and Continuing Education, 26(1), pp.97–124.