“Talking about racial inequality is a difficult subject for many in the white-dominated field of education” (Leonardo, 2004 in Bradbury, 2020).
As a white lecturer, I agree with Leonardo. Discussing racism is difficult. How do we define discrimination without generalising and stereotyping heterogenous groups of human beings (for example categorising students as ‘Home B.A.M.E’ or ‘International’) and therefore to some extent echoing that discrimination? How do we even define race? “As Fanon (1952) articulates, race itself is an imagination of colonial minds to maintain Western authority” (Garret, 2024). Race is a social construct, and like society, it is not static. Even if the semantics of race are complex, it is important to recognise that structural racism exists in our society, it causes widespread inequality, and institutions like universities need to acknowledge it. As Bradbury (2024) states: “The use of race-neutral discourse is problematic […] this legislation exemplifies “colourblind’ ideology, in which ‘success (or more important, failure) is conceived as individual or cultural’ rather than structural.”
Although we should treat each student and as an individual, we must also look at the racial disparity in success at university. In 23/24, the awarding gap (students achieving a First/2:1) between Home White and Home B.A.M.E students was 12% at UAL. It is important to note that international students are absent from these statistics, even though they make up 50.7% of the UAL student body (UAL, 2025).
What might cause this awarding gap? Banerjee finds that it is influenced by a constellation of factors, including “unconscious bias, limited student engagement opportunities with academic staff, institutional racism, inadequate support systems, and scarcity of social and cultural capital” (2024). As we introduce policies and actions to mitigate the awarding gap, we need to analyse how effective they are, and make sure they do not solidify stereotypes. “We need to consider how policy is enacted in ways which encourage the use of stereotypes, dividing practices or labelling, which has been shown to disadvantage minorities students”(Bradbury, 2020). There is a danger of homogenising or establishing low expectations from a group of students (Ibid).
Asif Sadiq, a diversity and inclusion expert, recognises that although lots of money has been spent on diversity training, it has not been successful in bringing change to the workplace. He claims the training is often biased and full of stereotypes. To improve it, he recommends using several sources to bring a range of perspectives, with a view to recognising that diversity is about disagreeing but respecting our differences. He also suggest group learning as a means to tackle the fear of saying the wrong thing or offend.
Sadiq’s talk is from 2023, and in it he maintains that “Diversity, Equity and Inclusion is here to stay”. Yet just two years later, President Trump “issued a series of executive orders (EOs) targeting diversity, equity, and inclusion programs in the public and private sectors” (Smirniotopoulos, 2025). Clearly, we can not take DE&I initiatives for granted. This makes it even more important to get them right. We not only risk that our interventions are ineffective at tackling structural inequality – there is also a danger that they are used by opponents to undermine DE&I initiatives and brand them divisive or “woke” (exemplified in Orr, 2022). As Bradbury puts is, “policy can be co-opted by the unintended beneficiaries, to prove a point” (2024).
Though there are many considerations to take into account when discussing racial inequality and how to tackle it, bigotry is blooming across the Western world, and we must not let the fear of saying or doing something wrong lead to inaction.
References:
Banerjee, P. (2024). Connecting the dots: a systematic review of explanatory factors linking contextual indicators, institutional culture and degree awarding gaps. Higher Education and Development, Vol. 18 No. 1 pp 31-52
Bradbury, A. (2020). A critical race theory framework for education policy analysis: The case of bilingual learners and assessment policy in England. Race Ethnicity and Education, 23(2), pp 241-260
Garret, R. (2024). Racism shapes careers: career trajectories and imagined futures of racialised minority PhDs in UK higher education. Globalisation, Societies and Education, pp 1-15
Orr, J. (2022) Revealed: The charity turning UK universities woke. The Telegraph (Online). Youtube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRM6vOPTjuU (Accessed 11th July 2025)
Sadiq, A. (2023). Diversity, Equity and Inclusion. Learning how to get it right. TEDx (Online). Youtube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HR4wz1b54hw (Accessed 11th July 2025)
Smirniotopoulos, A (2025) Trump’s Executive Orders on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, Explained. Available at: https://civilrights.org/resource/anti-deia-eos/# (Accessed 11th July 2025)
UAL (2025). Attainment Profiles. Available at: dashboards.arts.ac.uk (Accessed: 23th May 2025)
UAL (2025). Student profiles: Characteristics. Available at: dashboards.arts.ac.uk (Accessed 11th July 2025)
This is such a courageous and critically engaged post. I really appreciate how you navigate the complexity of discussing race as a white educator without retreating into defensiveness or colour-blindness. I was particularly struck by your point about the risk of interventions reinforcing stereotypes if not handled with care, this tension feels so relevant in HE settings. Like you, I’ve seen how policies can be co-opted or diluted, and I agree that fear of ‘saying the wrong thing’ must not paralyse action. Your post is a timely reminder that discomfort is not only necessary but productive when paired with accountability and sustained dialogue.