Reflections from the peer-supported writing and wellbeing program, Write Smarter Feel Better

Abstract

Purpose

This paper aims to provide an overview of a peer-supported writing and wellbeing pilot program for higher degree by research (HDR) students in Australia. It proposes a six-month program is a beneficial service to HDR students that improves not only their productivity and writing confidence but assists with their perceived mental wellbeing as well.

Design/methodology/approach

This paper offers a perspective of the piloted writing and wellbeing program for HDR students during the recovery period during the COVID-19 global pandemic. It includes generalized reflections of participation, content, and structure alongside future directions and further implementation.

Findings

This research includes generalized, anonymous data regarding the success of the writing and wellbeing pilot program for HDR students and components to improve upon. It suggests that the overwhelming response from participants was positive, especially during various COVID-19 related lockdowns and travel restriction measures.

Research limitations/implications

As this paper involves a small cohort of preliminary impressions from the pilot study, results will lack generalizability. Therefore, it is acknowledged that further research will ensue to examine the program further.

Practical implications

The success, measured by adherence and wellbeing improvements, of the Write Smarter: Feel Better program can influence the way in which universities address and protect mental wellbeing of their HDR students.

Originality/value

This paper fulfills an identified and growing need for mental wellbeing to be strengthened among HDR students.

Keywords:

• Mental wellbeing
• postgraduate
• research
• student
• workshop

Author contributions

Caitlin Fox-Harding: Data curation, Investigation, Methodology, Formal analysis, Investigation Writing—Original Draft.

Melanie Carew: Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation, Writing—Original Draft.

Karra Harrington: Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation, Writing—Original Draft.

Conflict of interest disclosure

The authors have no conflicts of interest to report. The authors confirm that the research presented in this article met the ethical guidelines, including adherence to the legal requirements, of Australia and received approval from the Human Research Ethics Committee.

Funding

Dr Harrington is supported by National Institute on Aging Grant T32 AG049676 to The Pennsylvania State University.