Placement wellbeing depends on the networks students can reach
Updated Aug 17, 2026
A placement can be well designed on paper and still leave a student carrying the experience alone. The support that matters may sit outside the formal placement structure, in paid work, family relationships, peer contact, digital tools, and the practical routines that keep study manageable. Courtney Ann Shalavin, Bonnie Amelia Dean and Michelle J. Eady's Studies in Higher Education paper, "Students’ perceptions of learning, work and wellbeing networks in work-integrated learning (WIL)", makes those connections visible. For UK universities using student voice to improve placements, it is a useful prompt to ask not only whether an experience worked, but what and who made it workable.
Context and research question
Work-integrated learning includes placements, practicums, internships, industry projects, and fieldwork. Universities often evaluate these activities through learning outcomes, employability, partner relationships, and overall satisfaction. That framing can overlook the network around each student, even though cost, paid work, safety, isolation, and supervision all shape whether a placement supports learning or damages wellbeing, as the wider evidence on wellbeing risks in mandatory placements also shows.
Shalavin, Dean and Eady ask which social and material actors students identify as shaping learning, work, and wellbeing during a placement. Using actor-network theory and participatory diagramming, they analysed four illustrations created by undergraduates who had recently completed placements at a mid-sized Australian university. Each student mapped the people, devices, documents, technologies, and activities they considered influential.
This is an exploratory qualitative study, not a prevalence estimate. Its four-person, self-selected sample is deliberately small, and the authors state that the findings are specific to their context. Its value for UK teams lies in the method and the questions it raises: what disappears when a placement survey reduces a networked experience to one satisfaction score?
Key findings
Each student's placement depended on a different configuration of people, tools, and responsibilities. Lectures, subject coordinators, peers, learning platforms, personal devices, placement staff, friends, partners, and paid employment appeared in different combinations. Learning did not sit neatly inside the university while work happened elsewhere. The diagrams showed the two interacting through everyday relationships and materials, which means a standard placement checklist may miss the conditions that make learning possible for an individual student.
Wellbeing was represented mainly through social connection. Family, partners, friends, and peers appeared repeatedly as sources of reassurance, conversation, and relief from stress. Formal institutional support was far less visible in the diagrams. The paper summarises the pattern simply:
"wellbeing appears as shaped by primarily social actors"
That does not show that university support was absent or ineffective. It shows that, for these four students, the people they could contact in ordinary life were central to how they sustained themselves through placement. Universities therefore need to ask whether peer and personal networks are carrying pressures that formal support has not detected.
Paid employment was part of the placement experience, not background noise. Three students represented paid work and placement as separate but connected areas of life. Flexible employment could support wellbeing, while reduced hours, job loss, and the need to schedule paid work around placement created pressure. This finding complements evidence that placement access can expose cultural and economic inequalities. If feedback asks only about the host organisation or academic learning, it can miss the financial arrangements that determine whether participation is sustainable.
Technology shaped both organisation and professional practice. Students mapped learning platforms, videoconferencing, calendars, personal devices, and social media into their networks. In one diagram, social media helped the student find teaching materials and ideas for classroom management. The authors see value in that access, but also recommend targeted digital literacy support so students can appraise professional content rather than accept it uncritically.
The diagrams exposed relationships that a linear questionnaire might flatten. A friend could support wellbeing, a phone could maintain that relationship, and a peer could contribute to both learning and emotional support. The paper's methodological contribution is to show how one actor can serve several functions at once. For Student Experience teams, that is a reminder that placement feedback categories such as support, technology, workload, and wellbeing may be analytically separate while remaining tightly connected in students' lives.
Practical implications
First, universities should ask students to describe the network around the placement. A short post-placement survey could include prompts such as "Who or what most supported your learning?", "What made it harder to balance placement with the rest of your life?", and "Which tools or relationships affected your wellbeing?" These questions reveal mechanisms rather than asking students to compress a complex experience into an overall rating, giving placement teams clearer points for action.
Second, institutions should treat paid work and time pressure as placement-design variables. Ask about lost earnings, travel, timetable clashes, caring responsibilities, and the flexibility of other employment. Analyse the answers by programme, mode, socioeconomic background, and other relevant characteristics. This helps widening participation and placement teams distinguish an isolated difficulty from a recurring structural burden.
Third, teams should design peer connection and escalation routes before students leave campus. A named university contact, a clear response time, scheduled peer check-ins, and an accessible route for raising safety or supervision concerns can reduce reliance on improvised support. Digital literacy guidance should also cover how students judge advice and professional practice encountered through social media. These measures give students support they can reach while the placement is still under way.
Fourth, universities should combine structured measures with open comments and other qualitative evidence. The four diagrams in this study cannot tell a university how common any pattern is, but they can improve what the institution asks at scale. Local surveys can fill placement-specific gaps when they have a defined purpose and route into action, as illustrated by UCL's final-year survey approach to placement feedback. Student Voice Analytics can then help teams compare recurring themes across large volumes of comments without presenting this small study as a benchmark. The benefit is a stronger link between exploratory student accounts and institution-wide decisions.
FAQ
Q: How can a university apply these findings to its own placement surveys?
A: Keep a small set of consistent rating items, then add open prompts about people, tools, paid work, peer connection, supervision, and wellbeing. Review the comments while placements are active as well as afterwards, and assign each recurring issue to a named owner. This turns the paper's network perspective into a feedback process that can support current students, not only the next cohort.
Q: What are the main methodological limits of the study?
A: The evidence comes from four self-selected undergraduates at one mid-sized Australian university. Participatory diagrams reveal connections that a conventional survey may miss, but they do not estimate how common those connections are, and their interpretation depends on what participants chose to include. UK institutions should use the study to shape local questions, then test the resulting themes across a larger and more diverse evidence base.
Q: What does a network perspective change about student voice?
A: It shifts attention from isolated services to the way an experience is assembled. A student's account of placement wellbeing may involve a supervisor, a parent, paid work, a timetable, a messaging app, and a peer at the same time. Student voice practice becomes more useful when it preserves those connections long enough to identify which part of the system needs to change.
References
[Paper Source]: Courtney Ann Shalavin, Bonnie Amelia Dean, Michelle J. Eady "Students’ perceptions of learning, work and wellbeing networks in work-integrated learning (WIL)" DOI: 10.1080/03075079.2026.2668592
Request a walkthrough
Book a free Student Voice Analytics demo
See all-comment coverage, sector benchmarks, and reporting designed for OfS quality and NSS requirements.
- All-comment coverage with HE-tuned taxonomy and sentiment.
- Versioned outputs with TEF-ready reporting.
- Benchmarks and BI-ready exports for boards and Senate.
UK-hosted · No public LLM APIs · Same-day turnaround