Student Wellbeing at Oxford: Waves of Evidence

Published in the journal Access, co-authors Dr Kevin Matlock, from the Department of Psychiatry, Dr Joris de Henau, from Graduate Admissions and Recruitment, and Dr Elizabeth Rahman, from Education Policy Support, discuss their latest study on University of Oxford student experiences and wellbeing.

What is the current picture on student mental health and why did you decide to focus on this particular area?

Kevin Matlock (KM): I’m involved with a national research project called Nurture-U, and our goal is to find better ways to support university students with their wellbeing. Survey data from this project reveals that 1 in 7 Oxford students rate their mental health as poor or very poor, and 1 in 3 report worrying levels of anxiety or depression. This picture is supported by data from University Student Welfare and Support Services, which show 1 in 9 students access the counselling service each year. Similar figures have emerged at other universities, and yet when researchers try to work together to come up with solutions to help students, they often encounter difficulties with sharing data or using incompatible methods for conducting research that delay timely responses to student needs. With that in mind, we set out to design a new approach that enables rapid, real-time collaboration across different kinds of research projects in a way that isn’t limited by data sharing or using a particular research design.

What were you aiming to do with this study?

Joris de Henau (JDH): This paper introduces a new methodology we call "diffractive collaborative enquiry" – a way of bringing together different ongoing research projects to generate insights in real time, rather than waiting years for completed studies to inform practice. We brought together three distinct projects at Oxford – my own work on the Academic Skills Development Project, the Diversity of Student Experience Research Project, and a multi-site mental health study called Nurture-U – and examined how they interact and illuminate each other. The focus is on demonstrating that when you read different forms of evidence through one another, patterns about student experience are revealed that would remain invisible within any single project. We wanted to show that universities can respond to student needs more rapidly by placing existing research in dialogue, particularly around equity and supporting underrepresented students.

How does Oxford’s collegiate structure affect students’ mental health?

Elizabeth Rahman (ER): Oxford’s collegiate structure can be a real asset for supporting students’ mental health, offering close communities and personalised academic and pastoral support. However, our research shows that it can also feel complex and fragmented, particularly for students under pressure or from underrepresented backgrounds, who may be unsure where to turn or worry about burdening staff. Existing programmes already do important work to address this through college-based provision and whole-university mental health initiatives. Current strategy development is building on this by focusing on better coordination, clearer pathways, and embedding wellbeing into everyday academic life rather than treating it as crisis support alone.

Can you tell us about your methodology?

KM: Our process involved asking project representatives to share findings, co-analyse each other's narratives, and have an interactive conversation where the aim was not to code data into themes or seek consensus, but rather to explore how similarities and counterpoints between projects interact to produce a unique pattern of understanding. This approach is especially beneficial for complex institutions like Oxford where independent research initiatives often struggle to work together and overcome methodological differences and bureaucratic restrictions in order to generate policy recommendations in real-time.

This approach is especially beneficial for complex institutions like Oxford where independent research initiatives often struggle to work together and overcome methodological differences and bureaucratic restrictions in order to generate policy recommendations in real-time.

What are your key findings?

JDH: Our analysis revealed what we call "standing waves" – persistent patterns that emerge when different types of evidence interact. One key finding is the "confidence translation challenge". In surveys of around 120 students across two colleges (Trinity and Somerville) we  found that students report high general academic confidence (around 88%), but this drops significantly when we ask about specific tasks like exam preparation or self-motivation (as low as 48%). This suggests a gap between feeling broadly capable and having the practical skills to execute academic work. 

We also found consistent patterns in how students relate to different levels of the institution. Students report stronger belonging to their college community than to the wider university – at Trinity this gap was 13 percentage points (75% vs 62%), while at Somerville it was smaller but still present. Separately, perceptions of support show an even more pronounced gap across both colleges: at Trinity, 66% felt supported by their college compared to just 38% by the university; at Somerville, 79% felt supported by the college compared to 63% by the university. When we combined quantitative data from the larger Nurture-U study with student narratives, we discovered that different student groups experience academic challenges in different ways. Black students reported lower satisfaction with their own academic performance and achievements compared to white students. However, for students from less advantaged socioeconomic backgrounds (measured by parental education level, regardless of ethnicity), the pattern was different: their challenge manifested through greater mental health interference with academic performance, rather than lower satisfaction scores. This illustrates why looking at single metrics can mask the distinct experiences of different student populations. The existing programmes of academic skills support are valued by students, but our research suggests the need for more coordinated, equity-focused approaches that recognise these interconnected barriers.

What are the implications not only for Oxford and its students, but also the higher education sector more generally?

ER: While this research is grounded in Oxford, the implications extend far beyond a single institution. Many universities are complex organisations with layered support systems, and our findings show how mental health, academic experience and belonging are shaped by how those systems interact. The study demonstrates the value of bringing different kinds of evidence into dialogue, rather than relying on single datasets or delayed evaluations. For the higher education sector, this offers a practical way to generate timely, equity-focused insights that can inform more responsive, preventative approaches to supporting student mental health.

While this research is grounded in Oxford, the implications extend far beyond a single institution. Many universities are complex organisations with layered support systems, and our findings show how mental health, academic experience and belonging are shaped by how those systems interact.

What does your research suggest could work well in future to support students’ mental health, are there any recommendations?

KM: Instead of focusing on individualised support, our findings suggest institutional change can improve student experience by: (a) normalising support structures by integrating them as a standard practice available to all students (e.g., within academic curricula or as part of career development guidance), (b) recognising the diverse ways in which students from different backgrounds can contribute in and out of the classroom as a way to reframe support from addressing deficits to building on existing strengths (e.g. as part of a universal foundational skills training), and (c) incorporating skill development within teaching and assessment rather than as separate programmes. Students navigate a complicated dynamic, benefiting from support while worrying about how accessing such support might affect their sense of belonging at the institution, and these approaches offer ways in which institutions can support students in navigating these tensions.

Kevin Matlock holds a postdoctoral research position in the Psychiatry Department at the University of Oxford where he studies student mental health, as well as a research associate position within the Autism Research Centre at the University of Cambridge.

Joris de Henau is an evaluation researcher at the University of Oxford, previously leading participatory research on academic skills development and equity in student experience and currently working in Graduate Admissions and Recruitment.

Elizabeth Rahman is a social and medical anthropologist at the University of Oxford, working in the Student Data Insights team within Education Policy Support, where she conducts research and evaluation to inform equity, student experience and policy across the University.