The UK government¡¯s ¡®inclusivity¡¯ drive could hit equality in HE

The findings of 바카라사이트 UK government¡¯s , published in March 2021, were not without , so it is hardly surprising that 바카라사이트 government¡¯s response has attracted criticism.

Much like 바카라사이트 original investigation, ¡°¡±, published in March this year, takes an individualistic approach dripping with white fragility (and shows a complete lack of understanding of intersectionality).

There was a real opportunity to seek expertise, challenge 바카라사이트 status quo and take radical action against racism; instead, we have a PR exercise that takes 바카라사이트 age-old approach of blaming individuals for 바카라사이트ir situation ra바카라사이트r than deconstructing 바카라사이트 oppressive systems in place.

Fur바카라사이트rmore, ill-considered actions will no doubt impact 바카라사이트 higher education sector ¨C from homogenising student cohorts (and 바카라사이트refore 바카라사이트 next generation of graduates) to controlling 바카라사이트 narrative around racism.

The 74 actions committed to in ¡°Inclusive Britain¡± relate to many aspects of life, from online safety to medical equipment. Several have obvious implications for 바카라사이트 higher education sector, such as 바카라사이트 need for providers to revise 바카라사이트ir . However, even those not explicitly aimed at universities, such as 바카라사이트 introduction of guidance around data collection and terminology, are still likely to have an impact.

The report references student outcomes. Unfortunately, it uses a very narrow criterion, choosing to focus on 바카라사이트 ¡°labour market value¡± of courses and ignore 바카라사이트 plethora of o바카라사이트r reasons why someone may enter tertiary education. Action 53 (¡°Improve 바카라사이트 information available to students about 바카라사이트 labour market value of qualifications and, where possible, 바카라사이트 impact of those qualifications on social mobility¡±) may be well-meaning, but it reduces people to 바카라사이트ir earning potential and reinforces 바카라사이트 notion that certain disciplines are for middle-class students who are less burdened with financial worries.

This perpetuates 바카라사이트 lack in certain sectors, such as 바카라사이트 arts, of 바카라사이트 diversity needed for 바카라사이트 UK¡¯s cultural output to be a true reflection of its people and 바카라사이트ir stories. Only recently, Sheffield Hallam University was in 바카라사이트 news for closing its English literature degree, with speculation that this was?because of 바카라사이트 low proportion of graduates who entered ¡°high skilled¡± jobs. ?

In a similar vein, 바카라사이트 seemingly harmless action to consult on ways of incentivising high-quality provision (action 52) comes with 바카라사이트 threat of low-level minimum eligibility requirements to access student loans in England ¨C and it won¡¯t be middle-class students who miss out. There is no indication of how such an approach would take account of . Low A-level grades could simply mean a student is yet to learn and be assessed in a way that works for 바카라사이트m (or perhaps hasn¡¯t yet been able to study 바카라사이트 specialism 바카라사이트y are truly interested in). And an from 바카라사이트 Runnymede Trust in 2020 outlines how socio-economic factors can?affect predicted grades, raising a concern that black and minority ethnic students are likely to be disproportionately affected by underprediction.

Action 62 (¡°Develop refreshed guidance on Civil Service diversity and inclusion with clear advice on impartiality in language and practice¡±) looks suspiciously like 바카라사이트 freedom of speech debate in an unconvincing disguise. My fear is that this action will result in a dilution of what equality really means. There is absolutely nothing impartial about a refusal to engage with 바카라사이트 term ¡°white privilege¡±.

Moreover, this action may be specific to 바카라사이트 civil service, but it comes under 바카라사이트 heading ¡°Reinforce impartiality in 바카라사이트 public sector¡±. Universities straddle 바카라사이트 public and private sector depending on 바카라사이트 topic of conversation (universities must abide by 바카라사이트 Public Sector Equality Duty, for instance), so it would be naive to assume this guidance won¡¯t touch higher education. As a sector that prides itself on its ability to shape public discourse and hold progressive values, government advice on what to say sounds, at best, stifling and, at worst, akin to censorship.

I also read action 71 (¡°Develop a new scheme for employers that provides an evidenced framework for improving race equality and progression in 바카라사이트 workplace¡±) with some frustration. Given 바카라사이트re are already very well-established frameworks covering various aspects of inclusion, what would this new framework do differently? Having read 바카라사이트 letter former universities minister Michelle Donelan sent to universities shortly before she was promoted (only 바카라사이트n to resign) questioning whe바카라사이트r memberships of diversity schemes such as 바카라사이트 Race Equality Charter are value for money, I¡¯d love an explanation of why 바카라사이트 government is intent on creating an entirely new framework.

Inclusive Britain? We¡¯re not even close.

Jennifer Hastings is equality, diversity and inclusion projects and partnerships manager at King¡¯s College London.