Conference Agenda

RQ: How can sympathy be transformed into deep empathy within cross-cultural PhD mentor–mentee relationships?

How can sympathy be transformed into deep empathy within cross-cultural PhD mentor–mentee relationships? International doctoral students often encounter formidable hurdles, from adapting to unfamiliar academic practices and cultural expectations to managing personal pressures. Traditional supervision, although foundational for academic guidance, frequently leaves many needs unmet, resulting in a critical support gap. Mentoring emerges here as an indispensable resource that addresses these underlying challenges.

This paper tackles the issue by employing duo-ethnography, as enacted by two international postgraduate researchers a mentor from India now embedded in UK higher education, and a mentee from China progressing through her PhD. Their extended relationship, grounded in authentic support and mutual understanding, moves beyond superficial sympathy to deeper, reciprocal empathy.

Over the course of eighteen months, the mentor and mentee initiated monthly conversations, recorded their meetings, and maintained reflection journals, fostering ongoing dialogue and self-awareness. These interactions, systematically shared and analysed, embody the dual ethnographic method and reflect the dynamic interplay of their personal and academic identities (Valdez et al., 2022; Burleigh and Burm, 2022). Our findings highlight how the cultivation of empathy—not mere sympathy—contributes meaningfully to both academic achievement and emotional wellbeing in doctoral studies.

We propose a transformative model for evolving sympathy into empathy within cross-cultural mentorship, demonstrating its practical value in relieving the isolation and tension experienced by international doctoral scholars. This approach not only bridges gaps left by conventional supervision but also enhances academic environments through more holistic support. Our research offers actionable insights for institutions aiming to design more effective mentoring systems for diverse doctoral communities.

This paper presents and discusses methodological considerations on workshopping as collective thinking and doing when tracing students’ academic writing in higher education. It is contextualized in the research project CO-WRITE (2025–2027), which explores students’ collaborative academic writing in hybrid learning spaces in higher education. The subproject that this paper more particularly builds on explores what students use in their academic writing, how they use it, and why, understanding academic writing as created in relations between humans and non-humans through thinking with posthuman and sociomaterial theories (e.g., Barad, 2007; Latour, 2005). Rather than performing the data generation as a process of eliciting student responses about what they use, how they use it, and why, four workshops were enacted with the purpose that the research participation could become valuable for the students (cf. Kara, 2015). The intention was that something of value might emerge not only for the research but also for the students themselves. Altogether, 30 students in educational, political, and caring sciences participated in the workshops (2,5 h/workshop) and were tasked with mapping and discussing their academic writing processes, based on questions from the researchers. The workshops were designed not merely as a means of generating data, but also to provide the students with opportunities engage in reflective dialogues about their writing together with peers, which previous research has suggested to be valuable in developing as and becoming an academic writer (Jusslin & Widlund, 2024). Data includes audio–recorded conversations and text/maps on paper from the workshops. In this paper presentation, we discuss methodological considerations, potentials, and challenges with the workshop design, focusing particularly on the collective mapping as a material and embodied research-creation process.

Prior research has found that Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) centers are central to the development and maintenance of student of color and LGBTQ+ groups at colleges and universities. DEI centers provide funding for diverse student organizations, organize DEI-centered trainings, and provide spaces for students of color and LGBTQ+ students to meet. Despite their importance, nine states have passed legislation that dismantles DEI centers and diverts funding away from DEI initiatives. How has this recent legislation impacted activism and feelings of belonging among marginalized students? This study utilizes a multi-method approach to examine how students at a regional state university are responding to the passing of a bill that led to the closing of the campus DEI center. First, archival data is examined to holistically understand the historical significance of the DEI office on this regional campus. Second, student interviews (N=10) and observational data help illuminate how marginalized students and their organizations navigate institutional challenges while centering resilience and community.

The mental health needs of university students have increased since COVID-19 and more needs to be done to promote well-being. When in distress, students turn to each other for support. There is evidence that peer mentoring can facilitate new students’ adjustment to higher education and is associated with wellbeing and student satisfaction. In Greece only two pilot peer mentoring programmes appear to have taken place. There is a lack of research on peer mentoring with university students in Greece, indicating that this study provides a significant contribution to knowledge.

Fourteen students undertook 30 hours of training in the principles and techniques of peer mentoring, in the NYC Department of Psychology in 2024-25. Afterwards, 19 students received mentoring sessions, whilst the Peer Mentors attended a weekly support group. All participants were invited to take part in a semi-structured interview to explore experiences of mentoring at the end. The interviews were recorded, transcribed and analysed using Thematic Analysis. The research was approved by the NYC Department of Psychology Research Ethics Committee.

This qualitative investigation provides valuable in-depth information about the lived experience of mentoring in higher education. In line with previous research findings, both the mentors and mentees reported enhanced professional identity, an increased sense of belonging, increased campus connectedness, and improved interpersonal skills and personal strengths. Mentees emphasized how mentoring relationship was supportive in itself, but how it also led to greater campus connectedness. Mentors emphasized the opportunity to practice their counselling skills. Peer Mentoring services can be organized in a relatively easy and effective way (complementing existing student counselling services), as a low stigma pre-counselling supportive experience that helps reduce distress and promotes help-seeking attitudes. Further research should incorporate quantitative methods and a longitudinal design.