I have been working as a HPL (Hourly Paid Lecturer) for LCF (London College of Fashion) for 5 years. During that time my role has changed considerably. However, in every role that I’ve had I have experienced a frustration around lack of information provided about students with regards to additional learning needs and other things that may effect their ability to study such as religious/ cultural holidays (Chinese New Year and Ramadan – periods of fasting along with other significant times within their calendar). This has led to challenges with regards to lesson planning and guess work around understanding if students have ISA’s and what barriers they may have to learning.
My proposed intervention is to create a form that the students will be requested to fill in regarding learning styles, needs and preferences, religion and/or philosophical beliefs and language. This would help to would help the students to feel seen and enhance their sense of belonging within the university. I would also use the data to make reasonable adjustments to lesson plans – I acknowledge that this would only really be possible for smaller cohorts and within reason (due to time limitations as a non-salaried staff member).
The form can be completed anonymously, and I believe (although would need to test) that if it was delivered through Moodle, that it could be transcribed into different languages, making it more accessible to students for whom English is not their first language.
Suggested questions (1st Iteration, note – please see my reflective report for feedback and adjustments to these after meeting with my peer feedback group – Link here):
Figure 1: Shows suggested questions positioned in an illustrated form to make it more welcoming. However, I acknowledge that it may not be possible to deliver this in such a way in reality – this is reflected upon in my reflective report.
During the Inclusive Practices unit, I critically examined how UAL collects and presents student data through its institutional dashboards. When considered alongside my own experiences as an Hourly Paid Lecturer (HPL), this exposed a key limitation: I often have little or no insight into students’ individual learning needs, disabilities or circumstances unless they choose to disclose them. This lack of information can make it challenging to anticipate and respond proactively to diverse learner needs. I am hoping that this will help me to foster a more inclusive environment within my classroom. It is building upon an initiative that I started when I was the first-year Footwear design tutor, and during the first ‘Intro 2’ unit I would ask my new cohort to take a learning style quiz, this was really interesting as I enabled me to understand their learning preference and adjust my teaching materials according (please see references for link to quiz).
Finally, I believe that even if only a small percentage of the students undertook the quiz any subsequent changes (big or small) that were made, would benefit others as well.
Transparent use of ai log: Chat GPT Prompt 1: for making the initial form questions more visual: hi chat GPT – I am working on a form in which my level 4 (1st year UAL university students) fill in to foster a sense of belonging and to enable me as a lecturer to understand and meet their needs better. Please could you formulate the following questions into an easy to digest graphic): Suggested questions (1st Iteration, note – please see my reflective report for feedback and adjistments to these after meeting with my peer feedback group – Link here): This form is an opportunity for you to communicate any needs and preferences that you may have in relation to your learning, with the aim of ensuring that all learning styles and additional needs are met. You may include your name, or you may also fill it in anonymously. If English isn’t your first language – you many fill this in in your primary language. Name (optional): Cultural heritage/ culture most identify with: Primary language: Are you (select box which fits you best): • A night owl (you like to work into the evening) • Something in the middle (you work best throughout the day) • An early bird (you like to work in the morning) Religion / philosophical beliefs (can be any recognised or unrecognised religion of philosophical belief): Additional needs relating to religion / philosophical beliefs (moments of fasting, times when you may not be able to be as present in the classroom): Additional educational needs (if known and willing to disclose): How I like to learn? (visual, doing, listening, reading): You are invited to undertake this learning style quiz, should you find it helpful to fully understand your needs [Insert link to learning style quiz] Any barriers to learning that you are aware of (mental/physical) (e.g my learning environment must be quiet) In a few words, please describe your perfect learning environment: Any other ways in which we can best support your learning journey on this course:
Prompt 2: hi chat GPT – please could this be made into an image based file/ chart etc: Include the emojis and stick to the wording:
Prompt 3: please help me to structure the following sentance better: After exploring the ways in which UAL collects data (UAL dashboards) during the Inclusive Practices unit and identifying the limitations around this along with my learned experience of working with students the lack of information about additional student needs that I am given as a HPL.
In approaching the reading and writing for this blog post, and during the supporting workshop relating to this subject matter, I felt enormously uncomfortable. Having read a little into race, inequality, white fragility etc, and being aware of my ‘white privilege’. I find it uncomfortable to sit in this space knowing that our world and our educational space is so unequal. In feeling this, I know that I need to do more inner work and challenge myself to learn more, so I can become more active in disrupting this.
Three of the supporting reading and video’s spoke to me are listed below in the bibliography (reference 1, 2 and 3) although all of the resources shared emoted feelings of sadness, discomfort and sometimes shock.
What has been most striking is how obvious it is that our systems are set up to dis-privilege people from ethnic-minority groups, with the implementation of policy to determine that children from these ‘bilingual’ groups, labelled a ‘difficult intake’ (Bradbury: 2020) are ‘inevitably low-attaining’. It was even more shocking to read that,’ if teachers in inner city schools score their ‘difficult intake’ above the national average, they are encouraged to alter results (Bradbury 2013). This signifies to me that by labelling children at the age of 5 to be expected to achieve ‘lower than national average’ grades, because of their cultural, ethnic and language backgrounds, we are setting them up to ‘fail’ or to achieve significantly less than white – British peers.
This feeling was further emphasised to me when I watched the video regarding the school children. The children had to step forward to backwards to a start position of a running race in answering questions relating to incidences in which they have experienced personal and family prejudices due to their heritage. This visually indicated the implicit bias within our societal systems. Thinking about one of the seven core principles higher education (A.Chickering and Z.Gamson; 1987), ‘Communicate high expectations’. This policy and evaluation of ethnic minority children seems to completely counter this, actively expecting them to achieve ‘below average’ results . These thoughts are further confirmed in reference 1, in which PHD students of different ethnic backgrounds and intersectional neurodiversity’s discuss their view points and lived experiences of being a student along with perceptions of career progression in academia.
[Image showing school children at the start point of their race after being questioned relating to lived experiences of setbacks caused by inequality and racism.]
As an academic, with white privilege, I believe it is important for me to be aware of this disparity between groups and how early it begins. To ensure that I make all my resources available for use beyond the classroom and that any resources I produce are made mindfully to support the intake of information of all students, regardless of colour, language, disabilities, gender etc. However, the most important thing of all is that I believe in all my students (chickering and Gamson 1987), give them equal opportunity to have voice in the room (Hooks: 1993) [add more reflection to this]
Reference 1: Garrett, 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. doi:10.1080/14767724.2024.2307886.
Reference 2: Bradbury, A. (2019). 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.1–20. doi:10.1080/13613324.2019.1599338.
Reference 3: The school that tried to end racism: www.youtube.com. (n.d.). – YouTube. [online] Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1i3wj7pjujg [Accessed 16 July 2026].
Reference 4: Chickering, A.W. and Gamson, Z.F. (1991). Appendix A: Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 1991(47), pp.63–69. doi:10.1002/tl.37219914708.
Reference 5: Hooks, B. (1994). Teaching to Transgress: Education as the Practice of Freedom. [online] Routledge & CRC Press. Available at: https://www.routledge.com/Teaching-to-Transgress-Education-as-the-Practice-of-Freedom/hooks/p/book/9780415908085 [Accessed 16 July 2026].
Reference 6: Drew, C. and PhD (2022). 19 Everyday Examples of White Privilege (2022). [online] helpfulprofessor.com. Available at: https://helpfulprofessor.com/white-privilege-examples/ [Accessed 16 July 2026].
These research-backed principles focus on optimizing the educational experience through the following areas:
1. Encourages Student-Faculty Contact
Building rapport and maintaining regular communication with professors increases student motivation and intellectual commitment. [1, 2]
Examples: Faculty holding office hours, being accessible via email or messaging, and acting as mentors. [1]
2. Develops Reciprocity and Cooperation Among Students
Learning is enhanced when it is collaborative and social, rather than competitive. [1, 2, 3]
Examples: Group projects, peer reviews, study groups, and collaborative problem-solving. [1, 2, 3]
3. Encourages Active Learning
Students learn best when they are mentally and physically engaged in the material, rather than just passively listening. [1, 2, 3]
Examples: Class discussions, hands-on labs, debates, and applying concepts to real-world scenarios. [1, 2]
4. Gives Prompt Feedback
Feedback is most effective when provided quickly after an assignment, allowing students to assess their performance and adjust their learning methods. [1, 2, 3]
Effective learning requires adequate time, focus, and realistic expectations regarding workload and pacing. [1, 2, 3]
Examples: Clear deadlines, time-management strategies, and structured, incremental milestones for large projects. [1, 2, 3]
6. Communicates High Expectations
Setting high but attainable expectations motivates students to push their boundaries and perform at their highest capabilities. [1, 2]
Examples: Providing detailed grading rubrics, recognizing exceptional work, and encouraging students to set ambitious personal goals. [1, 2]
7. Respects Diverse Talents and Ways of Learning
Instruction should accommodate different learning styles, backgrounds, and abilities to ensure all students have equal opportunities to succeed. [1, 2]
Examples: Using a variety of teaching methods (visual, auditory, tactile), offering alternative assignment formats, and using inclusive curriculum designs. [1, 2]
‘if teachers in inner city schools score their ‘difficult intake’ above
the national average, they are encouraged to alter results (Bradbury 2013). This system
244 A. BRADBURY
operates to systematically disadvantage children from minoritised and lower income
backgrounds, who are constituted as inevitably low-attaining.’
‘Policy can be co-opted by the unintended beneficiaries, to prove a point’.
The CRT principle of interest convergence (Bell 1992), which describes how progress
for minoritised groups only occurs when it is also in the interest of white elites,
provokes an analysis of policy based on a recognition that policy is always
a compromise between competing interests.’
‘In this work concepts and
presentational tools from CRT are used to explore how assessment operates as a selfreinforcing
mechanism for maintaining disparities in attainment at age five. This
research suggested that it is a public knowledge that ‘disadvantaged’ groups receive
lower results, and thus these lower results become the only intelligible results possible
for teachers to record; if teachers in inner city schools score their ‘difficult intake’ above
the national average, they are encouraged to alter results (Bradbury 2013).’
‘This system operates to systematically disadvantage children from minoritised and lower income backgrounds, who are constituted as inevitably low-attaining.’
‘Policy matters for those interested in inequalities because it ‘shapes who benefits,
for what purposes and who pays’ (Bell and Stevenson 2006, 9).’
Chat GPT Prompt (Question asked to help me to understand CRT): hi chat gpt please explain this exerpt from text,’A critical race theory framework for education policy analysis: the case of bilingual learners and assessment policy in England’…. The question of who is prioritised within policy can be framed as ‘How is white dominance prioritised?’; if we take on board the concept of interest convergence (Bell 1992), then we recognise that even legislation which appears to prioritise minoritised groups does so in a way which somehow benefits whites.
Of course. This excerpt is drawing on two key ideas from Critical Race Theory (CRT): white dominance and interest convergence.
Let’s unpack it sentence by sentence.
“The question of who is prioritised within policy can be framed as ‘How is white dominance prioritised?’”
The authors are suggesting that when we examine an education policy, we shouldn’t simply ask “Who benefits?” Instead, CRT encourages us to ask:
“How does this policy maintain or reinforce advantages for white people?”
This stems from the CRT view that racism is not just about individual prejudice, but is often embedded within social institutions and policies.
For example, a school assessment policy might appear neutral, but if it systematically disadvantages bilingual learners (who are often from minoritised ethnic groups), CRT would ask whether the policy is effectively preserving a system that works best for the white majority.
“if we take on board the concept of interest convergence (Bell 1992)…”
This refers to a famous CRT concept developed by legal scholar Derrick Bell.
Interest convergence argues that advances for racial minorities tend to occur only when they also serve the interests of the dominant white group.
In other words:
Progress for minoritised groups happens when it benefits those already in power.
Bell argued that racial justice reforms are often adopted not purely because they are morally right, but because they also produce advantages for the dominant group.
“then we recognise that even legislation which appears to prioritise minoritised groups does so in a way which somehow benefits whites.”
This is the key claim.
The authors are saying that even policies that seem designed to help ethnic minority groups may still be structured in ways that ultimately serve white interests.
For example, a hypothetical policy supporting bilingual learners might:
Improve educational outcomes for those learners.
But also help the national economy by creating a more skilled workforce.
Or improve a school’s performance statistics.
Or reduce social tensions.
From an interest convergence perspective, the policy may have been adopted not solely because policymakers wanted to support bilingual learners, but because doing so also delivered benefits valued by the dominant majority.
A simpler translation
The passage is essentially saying:
When analysing education policy through Critical Race Theory, we should ask not only who appears to benefit, but how policies may continue to protect white interests. Even policies that seem to help ethnic minority groups may only gain support because they also provide advantages to the white majority.
Critical evaluation
One thing to note for your studies is that this is a theoretical interpretation, not an established fact. Critics of CRT argue that it can sometimes assume white interests are present even when policymakers are genuinely motivated by equality concerns. Supporters would respond that examining power and hidden interests helps reveal inequalities that more traditional policy analysis might miss.
So the passage is not saying:
“All policies helping minorities are secretly racist.”
Rather, it is saying:
“We should critically examine whether policies that appear progressive still operate in ways that preserve existing racial power structures or serve dominant-group interests.”
That distinction is important when reading CRT literature.
Response:
Idea for blog post
Could cross examine and answer the questions in table 1 of ‘RACE ETHNICITY AND EDUCATION’ Bradbury 2020) against the video in which the children learn about race inequality.
Performative ^^^?
Racism shapes careers: career trajectories and imagined futures of racialised minority PhDs in UK higher education
‘The report found that the number of white students progressing up to professor increased every year, but the number of BAME students and academics decreased every year.’
‘From an intersectional lens, Bhopal and Pitkin (2020) found that racialised minority women were disadvantaged in their academic experiences in comparison to their white counterparts, facing a ‘triple burden’ of ‘oppression resulting from their classed, gendered, and ethnic identities’ (p.709). The ‘triple burden’ can extend to other protected characteristics, represented through what Lewis and Arday (2023) describe as the ‘whitening of neurodiversity’, highlighting how Black scholars often must negotiate both race and neurotypical hegemonic practices of UK higher education.’
Chat GPT prompt: meritocracy and underachievement – meaning
Meritocracy is a social or political system where individuals advance, gain power, or earn rewards based strictly on their own abilities, talents, and effort, rather than wealth or family background. Underachievement refers to performing below the level of one’s tested potential or established expectations. [1, 2, 3, 4]
The Core Concepts
Meritocracy: Originates from the Latin mereō (to earn) and the Greek kratos (power). In a true meritocracy, everyone has equal opportunities, and hard work guarantees success. [1, 2, 3]
Underachievement: Typically used in educational and workplace contexts to describe individuals who do not meet academic, professional, or cognitive expectations despite possessing high native intelligence or capability. [1]
Intersection of the Two Terms
When these two ideas are discussed together, they form a highly debated topic in modern sociology and education:
1. The Myth of Meritocracy Sociologists frequently critique meritocracy as a “legitimating myth”. They argue that it functions to justify social inequalities by making individuals believe that if they “underachieve,” it is solely due to their own lack of ability or effort. [1, 2]
2. Unequal Starting Points In practice, meritocracy is often viewed as flawed because people do not start on equal footing. Factors like socioeconomic background, systemic disadvantages, and unequal access to quality education or resources profoundly shape a student’s or employee’s ability to demonstrate “merit”. [1, 2, 3, 4]
3. The Psychosocial Burden Because society pushes the ideology that success is entirely a matter of talent and effort, those who “underachieve” often internalize the failure, experiencing self-blame, psychological distress, and lowered self-esteem, while overlooking structural barriers. [1, 2]
‘Whiteness must be seen as more than an optical privilege in the workplace, but as an ecology of hostile structures and practices that shape what we consider to be daily norms.’
‘highlight the damaging norms whiteness creates, such as defensiveness to quell new ideas, conflating open conflict with being impolite, desire for individual competitive credit, and believing that those in power have a right to emotional and psychological comfort.’
‘As a ‘Black’ researcher in areas of racial identity, she had a positive reception when speaking about race from her department, but when she was ‘bringing up issues of neurodiversity or ablism in academia’ she was told to ‘let other people talk about it’ from individuals in influential ‘decision making positions’. Her experience with being ‘Black’ and ‘neurodivergent’ meant she was seen as a ‘race expert’, but her intersectional identity was erased. This was also reflected in her experience getting reasonable adjustments in her PhD, arguing that if the university ‘can’t even follow my reasonable adjustments as a student, I doubt [they’d] be able to if I was a lecturer’. Ekam shared a similar sentiment who said their neurodivergence was ‘underplayed’ because they were seen as an ‘organised’ person and felt tensions with ‘the racialised part of [their] identity. when discussing neurodivergent matters. Ekam felt the university was not going to take their neurodivergence seriously as they were able to ‘mask’ or assimilate to their environment, but it ‘takes a lot for [them] to be this way’’
‘Other visibly marginalised participants such as Maya and Jasmine expressed how the university used them as a ‘poster child’ for diversity, taking their racial identity but not valuing them as researchers.’
‘As a PhD with very international experiences, she described UK academia as a ‘crumbling infrastructure’ and questioned ‘you motherfuckers conquered half the world how?’, questioning the colonial structures that have shaped the individualistic practices PhDs endure (Jones and Okun 2001).’
‘Jaden summarised how Blackness can be experienced in research when giving advice to future Black PhD researchers, as whiteness ‘needs 100 reasons to give you [an opportunity] but only one to take it away … you need to make sure you’re excellent’.’
‘didn’t realise how different having an Asian supervisor would be until I had one’. This also made her reflect that her‘other supervisors are really white’, showing how whiteness is only exposed when it is not normalised. Because of this, she had ‘never really thought that having an Asian supervisor would mean anything to me or make a difference, but I was like this is actually quite powerful’ to have what she described as ‘ethnic solidarity’.’
It was important for the participants to not only have a mentor, but a mentor who could understand their marginalised, racialised experiences.
Developing as a teacher: changing conceptions of teaching and the challenges of applying theory to practice Gwyneth Hughes, David Baume, Ayona Silva-Fletcher & Linda AmraneCooper
Framework mentioned in text —
Peter Kugel’s framework describes how university professors and college instructors develop as teachers over time, rather than classifying student degrees. First proposed in his seminal 1993 article, How Professors Develop as Teachers, this model outlines 5 stages of pedagogical growth. [1, 2, 3, 4]
Kugel’s 5 Stages of Teacher Development
Instructors typically move from focusing heavily on themselves to focusing entirely on student learning. [1]
Stage 1: Focus on Self
The teacher focuses on their role, classroom management, and presenting information accurately. [1]
Stage 2: Focus on Subject
The teacher masters the discipline and emphasizes their understanding of the material. [1]
Stage 3: Focus on Student as Receptive
The teacher shifts to considering how well students absorb the provided content.
Stage 4: Focus on Student as Active
The teacher creates methods to help students actively apply what they have learned.
Stage 5: Focus on Student as Independent
The teacher’s ultimate goal shifts to helping students learn and explore on their own. [1]
In this post about religion, I was particularly drawn to the Ted Talk by Kwame Anthony Appiah in which he discusses generalisations around religion and whether they are true, such as ‘Religion is bad’ or ‘religion is good’. He also discusses the ways in which religion is categorised, often through the idea that it involves belief in spiritual beings. The discussion explores the religions we commonly list: Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism and Christianity, and questions how this list was originally formed.
Appiah explains that European travellers, generally from Christian cultures, travelled around the world and arrived in places where Christianity did not exist. This led them to ask: what do these people have instead? They looked for rituals or practices similar to Christianity and declared these to be the religion of that country. From this video, I learnt that Christianity is a creedal religion, meaning that people believe it provides guidance on how to do the right things and, historically, when people were not following these ‘right’ things, this sometimes resulted in war and violence to ‘put this right’.
However, during the 19th Century, science began to establish itself more firmly and people started finding ways to intertwine scientific thinking with Christian beliefs. Before this period, many natural events would have been attributed directly to religion or God. From the 19th Century onwards, ways of thinking were no longer singularly linked to religion and people began to think philosophically as well.
Appiah then discusses spiritual practices within the village he comes from in Ghana and how these were interpreted as religion by European observers. He also describes how these practices still exist in modern life, for example pouring part of a drink onto the floor to ‘share with the ancestors’. He explains that these are not people ‘stuck in the past’, but modern individuals working in banking, technology and other professions, who still strongly believe in spirits and actively participate in these practices.
This made me think about the way we ask people to tick a box to ‘describe their religion’ and the huge limitations within this process. It feels impossible when there are thousands of spiritual practices and belief systems around the world. This connects closely to the article A ‘Life Style Choice’ or a Philosophical Belief?: The Argument for Veganism and Vegetarianism to be a Protected Philosophical Belief and the Position in England and Wales by Paul McKeown and Rachel Ann Dunn. The authors state that: “Ethical and environmental vegans ‘make their choices in line with their core values. They want to live in alignment with their beliefs.’”
Image shows ‘Religion’ data sets in the EDI report from across UAL: Accessed 21/05/26: chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.arts.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0023/561434/EDI-Report-2025.pdf:
Following this video and reading the article, it seems impossible to fully categorise religion. Religious framing itself appears to be a construct heavily shaped by Christian values and belief systems. Philosophical and spiritual practices may be infinite, and by enforcing a box-ticking exercise we risk alienating students and staff whose beliefs do not fit neatly within predefined categories. A more inclusive approach may be to provide an open response box (if a box is needed at all) allowing individuals to describe their own religion, philosophical belief or spiritual practice in their own terms.
Reference 2: McKeown, P., & Dunn, R. A. (2021). A ‘Life-Style Choice’ or a Philosophical Belief?: The Argument for Veganism and Vegetarianism to be a Protected Philosophical Belief and the Position in England and Wales. Liverpool Law Review, 42(2). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10991-020-09273-w
Reference 3: UAL. (2022, March 8). Equality objectives and reports. UAL. https://www.arts.ac.uk/about-ual/public-information/equality-objectives-and-reports
A reminder UAL states: We note that this language is contested and different terminology is used in different contexts and places. However as the Higher Education sector, HESA and Census data uses the terminology B.A.M.E. we will continue to use this language at UAL. Please note that we will be considering our language and terminology on an ongoing basis. We will continue to reflect on sector language and best practice.
Thoughts on Definitiobs of race slides: it feels like rules and regulations, laws and definitions are made by people that are not directly interlinked with these cultures or peoples – perhaps made by a privileged class that may have learnt these complexities in theory, but haven’t lived them… Maybe this is a reason why they are overly simplified?
photographic film and printing processes were for decades, designed primarily for light skin tones, and this “structural” instrumental racism and this kind of discrimination remains if we think of AI and facial recognition systems which have shown significant racial bias especially against black and Asian faces compared to white faces (algorithmic bias)
“Connecting the Dots: A Systematic Review of Explanatory Factors Linking Contextual Indicators, Institutional Culture and Degree Awarding Gaps” by Pallavi Banerjee (2024)
This article explores why degree awarding gaps continue to exist in UK higher education, particularly affecting students from Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) backgrounds and lower socio-economic groups. The study systematically reviews existing research to understand how institutional culture and student background factors (contextual indicators) combine to influence academic outcomes.
The paper argues that degree awarding gaps are not caused by student ability alone, but by structural, cultural, and institutional inequalities embedded within higher education systems. Universities therefore have a responsibility to create more equitable learning environments.
Key Details and Main Points
1. What is the Degree Awarding Gap?
The degree awarding gap refers to differences in the likelihood of students receiving high degree classifications (such as a first or upper second-class degree) depending on factors like:
Ethnicity
Socio-economic background
Disability
Gender
Prior educational attainment
Being first-generation university students
The article highlights:
Black students are statistically less likely than White students to receive top degree classifications.
Students from deprived backgrounds also experience significant attainment disadvantages.
2. Why the Issue Matters
The review explains that addressing awarding gaps is important because it:
Promotes social justice and equality
Improves social mobility
Benefits the UK economy
Protects the reputation of UK universities
Helps institutions meet legal duties under the Equality Act 2010
3. Main Factors Contributing to Degree Awarding Gaps
A. Unconscious Bias
The paper identifies unconscious bias as a major factor influencing student outcomes. Examples include:
Staff making assumptions about students’ abilities
Harsher marking or feedback for certain groups
Stereotyping based on race, disability, or socio-economic background
The article also critiques the idea that bias is always “unconscious,” arguing that institutional racism and “white supremacy” are often embedded within university structures and practices.
Key point:
Bias can shape:
Assessment practices
Student confidence
Staff expectations
Student support opportunities
B. Limited Engagement with Academic Staff
Students from underrepresented backgrounds may have fewer opportunities to build relationships with lecturers or tutors due to:
Large class sizes
Lack of mentoring
Limited personalised support
Feeling excluded from university culture
Research reviewed in the paper found that:
Students who feel a sense of belonging are more likely to succeed academically.
Positive staff-student relationships improve retention and attainment.
C. Students’ Views of Their Future Selves
The review found that students’ beliefs about their future strongly affect attainment.
Minority ethnic students may:
Have lower expectations for future success
Experience reduced confidence due to discrimination or lack of representation
Struggle to envision themselves succeeding within higher education
The paper emphasises the importance of:
Goal-setting
Self-regulated learning
Positive academic self-concept
Encouraging students to see themselves as capable graduates
D. Institutional Racism
Institutional racism refers to systems and practices within universities that disadvantage racial minorities.
Examples discussed include:
Underrepresentation in curricula
Discriminatory policies or assumptions
Bias within academic and disciplinary systems
Lack of diversity among staff
The paper argues that these experiences:
Reduce belonging
Lower motivation
Negatively affect academic performance
The review highlights that increasing racial diversity and creating inclusive academic environments can improve student retention and success.
E. Inadequate Support Systems
The article stresses that students need:
Academic support
Emotional support
Clear learning structures
Autonomy and encouragement
Studies reviewed showed that students engage more successfully when universities provide:
Well-structured learning environments
Clear guidance
Meaningful support systems
F. Lack of Social and Cultural Capital
A major theme is the role of social and cultural capital.
Social capital includes:
Family support
Networks
Mentors
Knowledge about university systems
Cultural capital includes:
Familiarity with academic culture
Confidence navigating higher education
Exposure to “middle-class” norms and expectations
The review found that working-class and first-generation students often experience:
Isolation
“Cultural mismatch”
Lack of belonging
Difficulty navigating university expectations
4. Theoretical Frameworks Used
The article draws on several theories to explain awarding gaps:
Systems Theory – universities are shaped by wider social and economic structures
Institutional Theory – university cultures influence student outcomes
Social Reproduction Theory – inequalities are reproduced through education
Intersectionality Theory – overlapping identities (race, class, gender) shape experiences
Critical Race Theory – racism is embedded within institutions and systems
5. Recommendations Made by the Author
The article concludes that universities must take a proactive and systemic approach.
Key recommendations include:
Diversifying curricula
Increasing staff diversity
Providing unconscious bias training
Creating inclusive learning environments
Strengthening pastoral and academic support
Reforming assessment practices
Encouraging peer mentoring and belonging initiatives
Supporting first-generation and underrepresented students more effectively
Overall Conclusion
The review concludes that degree awarding gaps are caused by a complex interaction between:
Student background factors
Institutional culture
Structural inequalities within higher education
The paper argues that universities must move beyond viewing awarding gaps as individual student deficits and instead address the systemic and cultural barriers embedded within institutions. Creating inclusive, supportive, and equitable university environments is essential to reducing these disparities.
