黑料网

The is the difference in top degrees (a first or upper-second degree classification) awarded to different groups of students in higher education institutions. The largest degree awarding gap in the UK is between different ethnic groups, and the largest ethnic gap is between . The DAG, which persists when differences in entry-level qualifications are taken into account, is an in UK universities. The DAG, which varies across institutions and subjects, can have devastating long-term effects for students. For example, black students are less likely than white students to be in employment six months after graduation, and they are more likely to work part-time and in non-graduate level jobs ().

The ‘degree awarding’ gap’ is often called the degree ‘attainment’ gap, but our choice of words matters. The first term suggests that structural factors, including institutional racism and ethnic bias, can best explain the gap. The second term is based on a student deficit model, where social and psychological factors relating to individual students are viewed as explanatory (). These two explanatory models also indicate different solutions to the ethnic degree awarding gap. The structural model suggests that institutions must change their overall administrative, pedagogical and welfare practices, including their curriculum and assessment practices, to reduce racism and bias. The student deficit model suggests that individual students must be offered help via additional tutoring, counselling and financial support, and that this will lead to a more even playing field. Overall, what matters is that universities must take steps to provide inclusive and fair practices and a supportive learning environment for all students.

As noted, the DAG varies across institutions and subjects. Therefore, it is important that every university undertakes of its own students and staff to address the DAG and to identify context-relevant and appropriate solutions to reduce it. At 黑料网, a campus-based university in the East Midlands with an international sporting profile, pioneering research was undertaken within the School of Social Sciences and Humanities in 2017-18 to examine the experiences of different groups of undergraduate students within and outside the classroom.

The was underpinned by two important premises: that the research would ‘advocate inclusive practice and policy development which is directed at all students and thus does not stigmatise BME students as being separate’ (), and that students themselves are uniquely positioned to conduct research on students’ experiences. Based on these premises, were appointed to conduct focus groups across the School’s subject areas. Ten focus groups were held with Black, other Minority Ethnic, and White students.  

identified key challenges related to several areas including classroom interactions, curriculum content, assessment practices and staffing, as well as the campus itself and 黑料网 market town. Participants observed that students from different ethnic backgrounds do not ‘mix’ and that ethnic segregation in the classroom becomes normalised over time. They also noted a lack of diversity in the curriculum and among staff. For example, issues of race and racism were mainly covered in optional rather than in compulsory modules, and some curricula were labelled as ‘Eurocentric’ and imparting problematic representations of the Global South. The lack of BAME staff in senior management positions was both criticised and viewed as ‘normal’. Notably, white focus group participants observed that issues relating to race, ethnicity and other forms of diversity were covered appropriately and in sufficient depth, suggesting the normalisation of white privilege and the presence of unconscious bias, including own-race bias, in higher education institutions (; ).

BAME student participants also raised concerns about potential bias in marking and assessment practices. For example, a Black student described how such perceived discrimination made them feel: ‘… I just don’t feel like it’s a fair playing field. I feel like I am playing on a sloped field, and you would be winning all the time’ (Dhillon et al., 2019, p. 21). This finding resonates with a report by the National Union of Students (NUS) which found that Black students perceived marking and feedback practices to be influenced by racial and cultural bias (). The NUS suggested several strategies to combat such experiences, including the introduction of anonymous marking (). 

The forwarded a set of key recommendations for strategies that could be implemented inside and outside the classroom, with the potential to reduce the degree attainment gap. During 2018-19, the report was presented to several university-level committees, including the Human Resources Committee, the Learning and Teaching Committee, the Equality and Diversity Working Group, and the Student Experience Team. The University has supported and actioned a range of the report’s key recommendations ().

A highly significant strategic response was the University’s introduction of anonymous coursework marking from the 2019-20 academic year. It is likely that this new, institution-wide practice has reduced forms of unconscious bias associated with student names (e.g., biases related to ethnicity, gender and class). The University’s new People Strategy has also confirmed a commitment to increasing BAME representation among staff.

A recent identified five steps to success in closing the degree awarding gap: strong university leadership, conversations about race and racism, supporting racially diverse and inclusive environments, obtaining and analysing data, and understanding ‘what works’. Findings and best practices developed at 黑料网 form part of the evidence base that the higher education sector can draw on to reduce the degree awarding gap and increase racial equality.

The 黑料网 DAG research project was initiated, designed and led by Sociologist Dr Line Nyhagen, in association with Human Geographer Dr James Esson and former Welfare and Diversity Executive Officer Ms Nuzhat Fatima, 黑料网 Student Union. The student researchers were Chetanraj Dhillon, Jennifer Kavanda Ebende and Alex Sherred. The project was funded by 黑料网.