2 results
18 - Strategy, planning and accountability
- Edited by Arun Verma
-
- Book:
- Anti-Racism in Higher Education
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 13 October 2022
- Print publication:
- 27 June 2022, pp 182-194
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Introduction
University equality and diversity policy and strategies are at high risk of becoming quickly obsolete and unactionable in their relevance, solutions and implementation (a theme noted in Bhopal & Pitkin, 2020). Commitments have been made since the implementation of the Equality Act 2010. This area of interrogation highlights actions that can be made to ensure that all equality and diversity strategies are embedded with intersectionality at the heart of their development.
Wilkinson and Picket’s book The Spirit Level (2009) showed evidence of the levels of inequality experienced in the US and triggered a debate in the UK where the Equality Act was passed in 2010. To comply with legal requirements regarding discriminatory practices, HEIs were obliged to produce policies on good practice in a range of areas including processes of recruitment and appointment (ECU, 2012). Universities commit themselves to EDI issues as a result of legislation. However, this leads to promoting ideas about achieving one’s potential, and presenting themselves as meritocratic (Crozier, 2018). Research has shown a different kind of story. The symbolic commitment to diversity is revealed in Sara Ahmed’s findings in her book, On Being Included (2012). It demonstrates how diversity has been institutionalised in universities, where Whiteness and privilege conceal how racism operates and resistance to change regarding equality is expressed as a ‘brick wall’. The injustice experienced in neoliberal societies is replicated in universities and is central in Danny Dorling’s Injustice (2021), June Sarpong’s Diversify (2017), Kalwant Bhopal’s White Privilege (2018), and Nicola Rollock’s, Staying Power (2019). Scientifically speaking, people of colour are told that there are minimal differences between races (Saini, 2021; Rutherford, 2020). However, Black, Asian and minority ethnic academic staff continue to experience discrimination and exclusion exemplified by the small number of Black, Asian and minority ethnic staff at professorial level (Bhopal & Jackson, 2013; Bhopal, 2014; 2015; Arday, 2015). In 2017– 18, Black, Asian and minority ethnic staff progression stood at 13 per cent and universities began to investigate the barriers through collaboration between leaders, staff and student unions (LFHE, 2017; SOAS, 2018).
12 - Pedagogies, professionalism and curricula enabling racism
- Edited by Arun Verma
-
- Book:
- Anti-Racism in Higher Education
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 13 October 2022
- Print publication:
- 27 June 2022, pp 117-125
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Introduction
In searching for research regarding racist pedagogy in HE, literature continuously deferred to the term antiracist1 pedagogy. Within relevant papers, racist pedagogy may have an introductory discussion, for example, regarding discriminatory, exclusory or Eurocentric curriculum and consequences see Wagner, 2005; Montgomery, 2013). A rapid scoping evaluation of research literature was carried out into the subject of whether pedagogy/ies in HE is/are perpetuating and/or supporting racism in the curriculum. This was extrapolated from literature related to antiracist pedagogy of curriculum design. EBSCO (Elton Brysons Stephens & Co), an online platform for research databases such as Academic Complete, ERIC (Education Resources Information Centre) and Education Research Complete, were searched for relevant research.
There are key learning needs, education and training of students within the curriculum and staff on culture as an institutional approach, specifically, exploring culture as a tool for learning and to adjust to cultures (Jabbar & Mirza, 2019), cultural awareness (Singh, 2019), culture as a core topic as a levelling technique, promoting equity by both explaining and solving problems (Jeyasingham & Morton, 2019) and staff understanding cultural norms and diversity. Included in these is immersion into issues of power and privilege, through the lens of social justice (Hill et al, 2018).
Disparate learning needs of Black, Asian and Minoritised Ethnic and White students being different regarding racism need to be appreciated and built into the curriculum (Jeyasingham & Morton, 2019; Singh, 2019), and reflected in literature resources and reading lists for courses as there is a tendency for them to be Eurocentric and White male-dominated, as in sciences (Crilly, Panesar & Suka-Bill, 2020; Schucan Bird & Pitman, 2020). Additionally, student feedback says that Black, Asian and Minoritised Ethnic and White students receive and perceive training about race and racism differently (Singh, 2019).
Solutions for change as part of an institutional approach include collaboration between staff and students to co-design and apply antiracist pedagogy to transform the curriculum , for example, diversifying the reading lists (Crilly, Panesar & Suka-Bill, 2020; Schucan Bird & Pitman, 2020); internationalising the curriculum content (Jeyasingham & Morton, 2019); applying a strength-based frame for curriculum that values diversity; and staff to reflect and review how teaching practices construct race, Whiteness [or ‘Eurocentricness’] and oppression, to improve the awarding gap (Jabbar & Mirza, 2019; Jeyasingham & Morton, 2019).