Indigenous and First Peoples’ knowledge systems have existed for millennia, shaped by deep philosophies determined by spiritual ancestors and through relational connection with the land and the natural and spiritual worlds. Carried through generations by a social archive of cultural practice, Indigenous knowledges have been foundational to the dynamic and adaptive abilities of Indigenous peoples to thrive [1]. Ancestral wisdom and Indigenous knowledge systems have held First Peoples in their sovereignty and survival against colonial forces. They also offer a means of addressing the world’s contemporary challenges, anchored in research across disciplines and with other knowledges [2]. The positioning of Indigenous knowledges as transformative praxis, however, is a topic of ongoing Indigenous intellectual activism, as its value remains ignored by the colonial project [3]. Māori intellectual Moana Jackson states that each Indigenous nation developed its own “acute and astute intellectual tradition” and asserts that there was no superior knowledge or legal or political system until the colonizers deemed their own knowledge universal [4]. The dismissal, displacement and appropriation of Indigenous knowledges by colonial institutions, including universities, through the privileging of Western epistemology, axiology and ontology, have constituted an enduring intellectual battleground [5,6,7,8].

As a consequence of the ongoing impacts of colonization, Indigenous PhD scholars are underrepresented in higher education institutions in Australia, Aotearoa New Zealand, Turtle Island Canada and the United States. This results from a history of exclusion from universities [9,10,11] and the ongoing prevalence of racism, negative stereotyping, a lack of social capital infrastructure, and inadequate financial and support systems [12,13,14]. While the number of Indigenous PhD scholars is on an upward trajectory across the four countries, it is still well below population parity. In Australia, as of 2021, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander PhD scholars made up 1% of total PhD doctoral enrolments (population parity would be 3.8%) [15]. In Aotearoa New Zealand, in 2021, Māori PhD scholars represented 13% of domestic doctoral degree scholars (population parity would be 17.8% of enrolments) [16]. In Turtle Island Canada, only the number of new entrants is recorded, rather than total enrolments, and in 2021, Indigenous doctoral scholars made up 3.4% of all new enrolments (population parity would be 4.9%) [17]. In the United States, data show that Native American and Alaska Native peoples made up 0.14% of doctoral graduations in 2024 (population parity would be 2.6%) [18]. There is increasing scholarship, however, on the factors that influence the success of Indigenous PhD scholars, including the crucial role of appropriate supervision in shaping the experiences and outcomes of Indigenous doctoral scholars [13,19,20,21,22,23,24,25]. Strengthening Indigenous doctoral supervision is essential not only for supporting Indigenous doctoral scholars but also for the ways in which Indigenous knowledge systems are valued, engaged and sustained in Western academic institutions. Importantly, the contribution of Indigenous research and its implementation and translation have practical implications for real-world solutions to enduring problems, particularly those relating to Indigenous peoples. Increasing the number of Indigenous PhD scholars and graduates not only ensures a future Indigenous academic and professional workforce but also contributes to the continuum of Indigenous knowledge.

Drawing on existing literature, this article describes the socio-political, historical and cultural contexts in which Indigenous doctoral study occurs. It identifies and examines the supervisory practices required for successful supervision of Indigenous doctoral scholars and discusses the requisites for supportive university environments. Reflexivity, relational accountability and cultural responsiveness are three core supervisory practices identified across the literature that support positive and successful candidature for Indigenous PhD scholars. They sit within a broader set of structural requirements in university settings that include recognizing and valuing the authority of Indigenous knowledges and the importance of ethical community engagement within research contexts. While this work is primarily directed toward non-Indigenous supervisors and university leaders and administrators, it is important to acknowledge that Indigenous supervisors also operate within institutional environments shaped by Western academic traditions. Although Indigenous academics may bring critical cultural knowledge and community connections to supervision, they also benefit from ongoing professional development and institutional support, particularly in navigating diverse Indigenous research contexts and institutional expectations [26]. While we are particularly concerned with the advancement and success of Indigenous PhD scholars and the central role Indigenous knowledges often play in their research, the supervisory practices that we outline offer a foundational, high-quality baseline for all supervisors. Further, if Indigenous PhD scholars are not conducting research with the community or utilizing Indigenous methodologies, the practices offered here provide the scaffolding necessary to ensure all Indigenous PhD scholars thrive within university environments.

Acknowledging the importance of positionality, reflexivity and ethical practices in research, as authors, we understand that our own histories and experiences have an impact on the work we produce. All authors are Australian, three of the four are Aboriginal Australian, and all are women. Shawana Andrews is a Pairrebeenne/Trawlwoolway woman of the Coastal Plains Nation in north-east Tasmania; Tahlia Eastman is Palawa/Pakana, also from Tasmania; Odette Mazel is a non-Indigenous woman; and Emily Munro-Harrison is a Wiradjuri woman with family connections to the Western Plains region of New South Wales.

We would also like to acknowledge that whilst there are shared experiences relating to the supervision of Indigenous PhD scholars across these four nations, the experiences of sovereign peoples in colonial states are many and varied. The value of bringing these countries together in this paper lies in the sharing of correlated Indigenous values-based practices that transcend colonial barriers to improve Indigenous doctoral experiences. We use the terms “Turtle Island Canada” and “Aotearoa New Zealand” to incorporate Indigenous names associated with these countries.