Abstract
Online teaching is often not the preferred mode of tuition for students and supervisors (Jisc, 2022), due to the loss of structure, hands-on learning, and feelings of isolation and community loss. Given the international profile of Higher Degree by Research (HDR) candidates, online supervision is, unfortunately, the primary mode of tuition for offshore candidates. Furthermore, international HDR students may also face cultural and language barriers, which underscores the need for simplification and clarity in online supervision >methods (Martin, Wray & Krupa, 2025). Additionally, Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CALD) students often feel alienated and experience discrimination. To address these issues, this study focuses on exploring ways in which supervisors could support CALD HDR students in an online supervision environment. Existing studies on HDR supervision tend to have a narrow focus, exploring higher education supervision in an online or technology-enabled context, cultural nuances associated with international HDR students, or online student engagement. To advance existing literature and address the “limited appreciation for the distinctiveness of student engagement and [online] learning” (Brown, 2024), this study proposes an integrated, all-encompassing supervision framework to build towards collaborative student engagement.< Drawing from the ideas of intellectual humility in supervision (Albertyn et al., 2025), this framework considers the broader HDR, CALD, and online learning environments, the need for cultural competence (Wells, 2000), and critical introspection in supervision (Kolb, 1998)< as a foundation for a threefold contextual approach (relational, diversity, and online) to collaborative student engagement. The framework will be qualitatively explored among supervisors at a Western Australian university to determine its pragmatic relevance. The theoretical and empirical insights will culminate in a guiding supervision framework, providing offshore, HDR students with a sense of belonging and community, and a safe space for engagement. Moreover, the framework promotes lifelong learning through social</p><p>and collaborative engagement beyond the university context, enabling students to co-create solutions and advancing society. References: Albertyn, R., Elliot, D.L. & Sakurai, Y. (2025). Conceptualising intellectual humility in advanced research contexts: Insights for postgraduate supervision. Journal for the New Generation Sciences, 23(2): 76-87. Brown, A. (2024). Online student engagement in higher education – what it is, why we need it, and how we can promote it. In, C. Stone & S. O’Shea (Eds), Research Handbook on Student Engagement in Higher Education. Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd. (pp. 39-53). Jisc. (2022). Survey Shows Majority of University Students Want Blended Learning. [online].
Available at: beta.jisc.ac.uk/news/all/survey-shows-majority-of-university-studentswantblended-learning (accessed 19 October 2025). Kolb, D. (1998). Experiential learning. New Jersey: Prentice Hill. Martin, N., Wray, M., & Krupa, J. (2025). Universal Design for Learning: A Critical Approach (1st ed.). Taylor & Francis Group. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781041057796 Ryan, R.M. & Deci, E.L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1): 68-78. Wells MI. (2000). Beyond cultural competence: a model for individual and institutional cultural development. Journal of Community Health Nursing, 17(4): 189–199. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327655jchn1704_1