The Yegiora Files

On April 2, 2025, I launched the main survey for my PhD research exploring how China’s HEEPs influence the relationship between PNG and China. Since then, I’ve been working steadily to reach participants from seven distinct groups across PNG and abroad. While participation from some groups has been encouraging, others have proven more difficult to reach. In light of these challenges—and to ensure all voices are fairly represented—I have extended the survey closing date from July 9 to August 2, 2025 . The purpose of this survey is to gather diverse perspectives from Papua New Guineans who have participated in CGSPs, CLPs, PSTPs, as well as those who were self-funded, sponsored by the PNG government through STEM or district-level scholarships, or participated in private training programs. These respondents are grouped into seven survey categories to enable clean data collection and analysis. To date, the strongest response rates have come from students currently studying in China and al...

As part of my PhD research on how China’s Higher Education Exchange Programs (HEEPs) influence PNG’s bilateral relations with China, I’ve spent the last few months collecting survey data from students, alumni, and public servants who participated in various HEEPs. These include the Chinese Government Scholarship Program (CGSP), Chinese Language Programs (CLPs), Public Sector Training Programs (PSTPs), PNG’s STEM scholarships, district-sponsored students, and privately funded learners. Now, with survey responses coming in from across the country and abroad, the focus shifts to analyzing the data. There are several statistical tools available for analyzing survey data, but not every technique is suited to every research project. Because my study uses an explanatory sequential mixed-methods design , the quantitative phase is not an end in itself—it informs the qualitative phase that follows. My goal is to choose analytical techniques that allow me to describe trends, compare experiences ...

One of the most important aspects of data collection in a PhD research project is knowing when to pause, reflect, and adapt. For the past few months, I’ve been collecting responses for my survey exploring the influence of China’s Higher Education Exchange Programs (HEEPs) on Papua New Guinea–China relations. The survey has been a key part of the quantitative phase of my explanatory sequential mixed-methods design, and I initially planned to close it on July 2, 2025 . However, after reviewing current response rates, I have decided to extend the closing date to July 9, 2025 . Screenshot of the change. This additional week will allow me to concentrate efforts on reaching three groups that are yet to meet the minimum response target of 80 participants per group . These are: PNG students currently studying in China , and students enrolled in the Chinese Language Programs (CLPs) at the University of Technology (UoT) and the University of Goroka (UoG) . While other participant groups—such as ...

As part of my PhD research at Divine Word University, I’m examining how China’s Higher Education Exchange Programs (HEEPs) are influencing PNG’s bilateral relationship with China. These programs include scholarships, language courses, and public sector training opportunities. To capture the breadth of experiences, I designed my survey to target seven distinct participant groups. This structure ensures I collect nuanced data that reflects the different pathways through which Papua New Guineans engage with China’s educational diplomacy. The first group consists of PNG students currently studying in China . This includes those on Chinese Government Scholarships (CGSP), those sponsored by PNG’s STEM program, those funded by their district or provincial governments, and privately sponsored students. Many of these students have been reached through WeChat groups, LinkedIn, and university contacts. Their experiences are key to understanding China’s appeal and influence on future PNG professio...

A well-developed literature review is the foundation of any research project. In my study, which investigates how China’s Higher Education Exchange Programs (HEEPs) influence Sino-PNG relations, the literature serves a dual purpose. First, it provides the theoretical grounding—mainly soft power and education diplomacy—to frame the research. Second, it identifies empirical and policy gaps that justify the study. The literature not only supports my main research question but also helps address each of the three supporting questions. This review draws on academic literature and regional case studies spanning diplomatic theory, international education, and PNG’s foreign policy. Photo courtesy of Lake Media, showing me concluding my PhD confirmation seminar and taking notes of audience questions and comments, alongside Professor Maretta Kula-Semos, Professor of Humanities and Director of Higher Degrees.   The first category of literature addresses soft power and educational dipl...

As part of my PhD research exploring the influence of China’s Higher Education Exchange Programs (HEEPs) on PNG–China relations, I have refined the way I categorize participants. Rather than lumping all student pathways into a single group, I now group them into three categories based on their funding source and facilitation method: Chinese government–sponsored, PNG government–sponsored, and privately sponsored programs. This typology offers a more accurate reflection of the student experience and supports a more nuanced analysis of education diplomacy. The first category is Chinese government–sponsored programs , which includes the Chinese Government Scholarship Program (CGSP), Chinese Language Programs (CLPs), and Public Sector Training Programs (PSTPs). These programs are typically administered through the Chinese Embassy and Confucius Institutes, and target university students, public servants, and professionals. The goal is to build long-term people-to-people ties and enhance Chi...

When I designed the pilot survey for my PhD project in late 2024, one of the most important questions was also one of the simplest: Which Chinese Higher Education Exchange Program have you participated in or are you currently participating in? This was listed as Question 10 in the pilot and served a critical function—it allowed me to identify which program each participant had joined: the Chinese Government Scholarship Program (CGSP), Chinese Language Program (CLP), Public Sector Training Program (PSTP), or “Other.” At the time, it was a broad but essential tool to classify responses because all 30 invited participants received the same link. No group-specific links were used. Question 10 from the pilot survey used broad program categories. Feedback from participants suggested the need for more specific distinctions to reflect the growing diversity of PNG-China education pathways.   While the structure seemed sufficient at first, feedback from the 20 participants who completed th...