The application process for postgraduate degrees in the UK typically requires academic referees to assess applicants' suitability for their chosen programmes. Reference letters are a critical component of university admissions, often serving as key factors in shaping a student’s academic trajectory by providing personalised insights that academic transcripts cannot capture (Wright and Ziegelstein, 2004). Additionally, they serve as valuable supplements in evaluating less quantifiable aspects of an applicant’s profile (Springer et al., 2023). According to Koh et al. (2023), teachers who provide references play a crucial role, acting not only as advocates who highlight students’ strengths but also as challengers of institutional norms. They position themselves as authoritative figures who navigate and, at times, push the boundaries of the rigid expectations associated with the reference letter genre.

Despite the significant role reference letters play, this important task is often underappreciated in research. Most existing research focuses on enhancing referees’ ability to craft compelling letters—ones that effectively highlight candidates’ strengths and uniqueness while carefully balancing consideration of students’ backgrounds, with an emphasis on prioritising those from disadvantaged groups (e.g., Houser and Lemmons, 2018). Ideally, a key responsibility of educators is to “translate their student’s actions and words through the lens of their perspectives, so as to present it to their audience of admissions officers in as positive and promising a light as possible” (Koh et al., 2023, p. 726). While teachers and academics are generally supportive in articulating their students’ suitability for postgraduate study (Mavis et al., 2006), there is a significant under-explored research area addressing the specific challenges academics face when handling reference requests. Limited understanding exists on how academics are supported institutionally in this task, how they navigate writing recommendations for students with whom they have varying levels of familiarity, and how their perceptions of the actual effectiveness of reference letters influence their approach to writing them.

Research Question: How do academic staff perceive and navigate the challenges of writing reference letters for undergraduate students applying to Master’s programmes?

Objective: This research aims to explore how academic staff approach reference letter writing, examining key aspects such as the availability of templates and institutional guidance, the criteria used to determine whether to write a letter, and the content they choose to include. It also seeks to highlight the emotional labour involved, the ethical dilemmas faced, and the potential biases present in the process. By addressing these areas, the study contributes to a deeper understanding of the support structures needed to assist academics in fulfilling this underappreciated role effectively.

Conceptual/Theoretical Framework: This study is framed within the concepts of emotional labour (Hochschild, 1983) and institutional habitus (Reay et al., 2001), which provide insights into how academic staff experience the demands of writing reference letters within the broader institutional context. Emotional labour theory helps to explain the cognitive and affective efforts involved in crafting reference letters, particularly when academics must advocate for students they may not know well. Institutional habitus offers a lens to explore how university policies, norms, and expectations shape academics’ approaches to this task, influencing both their writing practices and their perceptions of fairness and transparency.

The research also draws on Bourdieu’s (1986) theory of capital, considering how reference letters contribute to students’ accumulation of cultural and social capital in the highly competitive postgraduate admissions process. Furthermore, internationalisation of higher education (Knight, 2004) is considered, reflecting the European and international dimension of reference letters as a globalised practice influenced by diverse cultural expectations and institutional standards.

This study, based on qualitative interviews with academic staff from various UK universities, aims to explore how the challenges of writing reference letters intersect with workload pressures and institutional expectations. The interviews will be structured into the following key areas: (1) Background and Experience with Reference Letters, (2) Institutional Policies and Support, (3) Challenges and Ethical Considerations, (4) Writing Practices and Decision-Making, (5) Emotional Labour and Workload Concerns, (6) Impact and Perception of Reference Letters, and (7) Recommendations for Improvement. Sample interview questions include: How frequently do you receive requests to write reference letters, and how do you decide which ones to accept? What kind of institutional support or resources (e.g., templates, guidelines) are available to you when writing reference letters? How do you handle requests from students you do not know well or have had limited interaction with? What key aspects do you consider when writing a reference letter (e.g., academic performance, personal qualities, extracurricular activities)? Do you find writing reference letters to be a significant addition to your workload? Do you believe reference letters effectively represent a student’s potential beyond transcripts and grades? Semi-structured interviews: These will be conducted online and in-person, allowing participants to reflect on their experiences, challenges, and the institutional support available to them. Auto-ethnography: Given that this research is largely inspired by my personal experience as a new lecturer at a UK institution, an auto-ethnographic approach is incorporated, with myself participating as one of the data sources by responding to the same interview questions. Sampling Strategy: A purposive sampling approach will be employed to ensure a diverse representation of participants across various universities, disciplines, and levels of experience. Given the significance of institutional support in this research, the goal is to gather data from 10-15 participants across at least five UK institutions. The recruitment process will begin within my own academic network at two UK universities to identify suitable participants who have experience serving as academic referees for undergraduate students applying to Master’s programmes. Following this, a snowball sampling technique will be utilised, where initial participants will be asked to recommend colleagues from other institutions to broaden the sample and enhance diversity. Data Analysis: Thematic analysis will be employed to identify recurring themes related to workload pressures, ethical considerations, institutional guidance, and the perceived impact of reference letters on student success. NVivo software will be used to facilitate coding and organisation of the data.

One of the anticipated findings of this research is the identification of underreported complexities within the reference letter writing process. Drawing from personal experience, it is evident that providing a reference letter extends beyond simply drafting and uploading a document. A particularly challenging aspect is the requirement to compare students against their peers, which raises significant concerns regarding fairness and bias, as it assumes that academic staff possess comprehensive knowledge of the entire cohort. Furthermore, this study is expected to shed light on key tensions that academics navigate, particularly between their role as advocates for students and the need to maintain objectivity. It is also anticipated that the research will reveal inconsistencies in institutional guidelines and the varying levels of support available to staff across different institutions. Additionally, the study aims to uncover insights into how staff determine the content and framing of reference letters, the emotional labour involved in the process, and the potential conflicts between institutional expectations and personal values. The findings will contribute to ongoing policy discussions by advocating for clearer institutional guidelines, the development of standardised templates, and enhanced training opportunities for academic staff. These insights are expected to spark broader conversations around transparency, equity, and the recognition of the often-overlooked emotional labour within the higher education reference letter process.

Bourdieu, P. (2011). The forms of capital.(1986). Cultural theory: An anthology, 1(81-93), 949. Hochschild, A. R. (2003 [1983]) The Managed Heart: Commercialization of Human Feeling (University of California). Houser, C., & Lemmons, K. (2018). Implicit bias in letters of recommendation for an undergraduate research internship. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 42(5), 585–595. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2017.1301410 Knight, J. (2004). Internationalization Remodeled: Definition, Approaches, and Rationales. Journal of Studies in International Education, 8(1), 5–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315303260832 Koh, J., Dominic, H., Elmendorf, H., & Cowgill, S. (2023). Student voice and teacher agency: Storytelling in letters of recommendation for college admissions. Language and Education, 37(6), 717–730. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2023.2217147 Mavis, B. E., Shafer, C. L., & Magallanes, B. M. (2006). The Intentions of Letter Writers for Applicants to a Baccalaureate-M.D. Program: Self-Report and Content Analyses of Letters of Reference. Medical Education Online, 11(1), 4586. https://doi.org/10.3402/meo.v11i.4586 Reay, D., David, M., & Ball, S. (2001). Making a difference?: Institutional habituses and higher education choice. Sociological research online, 5(4), 14-25. Springer, D. G., Royston, N. S., & Allen, A. D. (2023). Admissions and Selection Criteria for Master’s Students in Music Education Degree Programs. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 32(2), 71–85. https://doi.org/10.1177/10570837221120761 Wright, S. M., & Ziegelstein, R. C. (2004). Writing more informative letters of reference. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 19(5), 588–593. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.30142.x