Embracing Multiple Roles: What We Learned about Graduate Students’ Well-Being in this Pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The COVID-19 has impacted everyone in a significant way. Many graduate students have shifted to work and study remotely, requiring major lifestyle adjustments. An increasing number of studies have explored graduate students' well-being as it relates to their studies from diverse perspectives, including remote learning and loss of peer connections. This article adds the stories of two Ph.D. students’ experiences during the pandemic using autobiographical narrative inquiry. Personal tellings and retellings demonstrate the complexity of graduate life and of embracing multiple roles. We encourage a new perception of graduate students as a whole person whose studies are one of many complex factors affecting their well-being. The authors emphasize that graduate student well-being extends beyond academic settings. The study aims to shed light on the wholesomeness of a graduate students’ well-being and apply this perspective to the post-pandemic context.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.017 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.025 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".