Degrees of racismA qualitative investigation into ethnicity attainment gaps at SOAS

A report by SOAS Students' UnionSeptember 2016

ContentsBackground and rationale.................................................................................2

Methodology.................................................................................................... 3

Summary.......................................................................................................... 5Report structure.....................................................................................................6

Part 1: A racist teaching and learning environment...........................................7The “white curriculum”...........................................................................................8BME staff and Black student underrepresentation................................................9Exclusion from classroom discussions................................................................11Racism in the classroom.....................................................................................16Racism in assessment........................................................................................18

Part 2: Barriers to support and accountability..................................................23Barriers to accessing support from lecturers and tutors......................................24Barriers to accessing mental health support.......................................................28Barriers to accessing study skills support............................................................31Administrative barriers to support........................................................................32Barriers to making complaints.............................................................................33The “critical” mask...............................................................................................37Towards trust and accountability.........................................................................38

Recommendations..........................................................................................40

Appendix: Research participants.....................................................................46

Background and rationale

Every year since 2008-91 there has been a gap between the degree attainment of white undergraduates and that of Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) undergraduates at SOAS, with a greater proportion of white students attaining either a 2:1 or first class degree. The gap has been widest between white and Black students for all but one year in this period, and wider among international students than among UK students.2

Further analysis on the data to 2012-13 shows these gaps “cannot be explained by differences between students at entry to SOAS” (comparable analysis is currently underway for subsequent years),3 suggesting “that factors within SOAS … are important.”4 The gap is not attributable to a deficit in BME students: any intervention must target institutional factors and not BME students themselves.

Ethnicity is not the only factor influencing attainment outcomes at SOAS, but is the most statistically significant identified to date. Although slightly narrower in effect than the ethnicity attainment gap for the UK as a whole – where, “controlling for entry qualifications, black students are between five and 26 percentage points less likely than white students to get a higher classification degree, and Asian students … between five and 17 percentage points less likely”5 – it is nonetheless imperative to address gaps at SOAS. Whereas Birmingham,6 Kent7 and Kingston8 Universities among others have already begun to design and implement strategies to address their own gaps, action remains overdue at SOAS.

1 This is the first year for which data is publicly available.2 SOAS Annual Equality & Diversity Report 2013/2014 https://www.soas.ac.uk/equalitydiversity/reports/file104116.pdf andStudent Diversity Report 2012/13 https://www.soas.ac.uk/infocomp/foi/log/2015/file101751.pdf [Both accessed 13/09/16]3 The Widening Participation team has commissioned a full-scale analysis of SOAS entry, exams and study data, due to be published in autumn 2016.4 SOAS Equality & Diversity Committee, Student Diversity Report 2012/13 – Achievement/Attainment: https://www.soas.ac.uk/infocomp/foi/log/2015/file101751.pdf [Accessed 13/09/16]5 Higher Education Funding Council for England webpage on Study Characteristics – Ethnicity: http://www.hefce.ac.uk/analysis/HEinEngland/students/ [Accessed 13/09/16]6https://intranet.birmingham.ac.uk/collaboration/equality/documents/Supporting-BME- Students.pdf [Accessed 13/09/16]7 https://www.kent.ac.uk/studentsuccess/about.html [Accessed 13/09/16]8 http://www.kingston.ac.uk/news/article/1472/16-mar-2015-kingston-university-takes-steps-to-close-the-bme-attainment-gap/ [Accessed 13/09/16]

2

In recognition of this in early 2016 the School’s Widening Participation department and the Students’ Union commissioned research projects. The former analysed data on student entry, study characteristics and exams to identify (more comprehensively and in more detail than has been done to date) where gaps exist, and to quantify them.

The Students’ Union project, of which this report is the final output, investigated institutional factors contributing to the ethnicity attainment gap (as the largest persisting gap already known to exist), and ways to address these factors, based on students’ lived experiences. It was designed to complement the Widening Participation project, recognising that while quantitative data are invaluable for diagnosing the precise locations and sizes of gaps, alone they cannot reveal students’ experiences of practices, attitudes, behaviours and systems that create these gaps, or how such experiences are shaped by students’ histories and interests. There is a need also to consider how these issues are framed.

Together the two projects provide a baseline from which the School can design, plan and implement a strategy to address institutional factors affecting student outcomes.

Methodology

The project began with a review of:

existing data analysis by the Equality and Diversity Committee (on the demographics and attainment of the SOAS undergraduate student body);

research on the national picture of university attainment gaps; institution-specific studies, with particular attention paid to their

methodology, findings and piloted interventions.

Responses to National Student Satisfaction (NSS) surveys at SOAS were also analysed, in detail for the last three years, and broadly for the last ten.

Primary data collection involved 299 undergraduates whose collective demographics were broadly reflective of the undergraduate student population at SOAS (for figures, see the appendix).

A survey was conducted, closely following the design of the National Union of Students (NUS) Black Students Campaign survey on attainment gaps in 20119 but tailored to the SOAS context. Some questions were open to all undergraduates; others were visible only to specific sub-groups (such as

9 NUS Black Students’ Campaign 2011, Race for Equality: http://www.nus.org.uk/en/news/race-for-equality/

3

international, non-white- and/or non-male-identifying students). Questions explored:

factors influencing students’ decision to come to SOAS; knowledge and experience of accessing sources of academic and welfare

support, and how support could be improved; views and experiences of the teaching and learning environment; awareness and impact of equalities policies; knowledge, experience and trust of the complaints handling system; NSS survey findings; students’ own suggestions of factors that may affect their attainment.

Participation in the survey was anonymous by default, with the option to include a name and contact details for those interested in participating in the next stage of data collection.

Focus groups were then conducted to explore survey findings in more detail. These were open only to UK-based or international undergraduate students identifying within BME groups, and were facilitated by a trained and experienced facilitator who was a recent international graduate of another UK university and who identified as a woman of colour. Focus group questions explored:

reasons for coming to SOAS; hopes, fears and expectations of SOAS before arriving, and whether these

were met; how to get a good grade; factors affecting motivation and confidence; awareness and accessibility of sources of academic and welfare support; dynamics within the classroom, and what could have been done to

address negative or harmful dynamics; assessment and feedback; suggestions for change.

Patterns were identified in focus group and survey data, themes derived from the patterns, and the data coded by theme, using thematic framework analysis.

Recommendations were informed by participants’ own suggestions as well as by interventions that have worked, been piloted or been recommended as a result of research in other UK universities.

Clearly, BME students are not a homogenous group. While some experiences of being treated as ‘other’ were to some extent shared by non-white and migrant students of many ethnicities, some were clearly structured by more specific forms of racism, including Islamophobia and anti-Blackness; and these experiences intersected with other life experiences and aspects of identity including gender, class, age and disability. The language used in the report – including ‘BME’,

4

‘Black’ and ‘woman of colour’, for example – attempts to reflect these specificities where apparent from the data collected.

Summary

The research found that BME students’ confidence, motivation and engagement are often negatively affected by racial exclusion and discrimination in the learning and teaching environment at SOAS. Barriers to accessing academic and welfare support, and barriers to accountability both reduced the opportunity to regain confidence and motivation.

Racial exclusion operated through the centring of white perspectives in the curriculum and in class discussions, the overrepresentation of white people among staff and students on some courses, biased assessment practices, and racism by staff and students. As well as direct effects to BME student’s confidence and motivation, these conditions appeared to produce or reinforce teachers' lower expectations of their BME students. Barriers to support included having to ask proactively for help (which excluded students’ whose confidence had been undermined by racial exclusion and discrimination), the underrepresentation of BME staff relative to students, unclear roles and remits, staff being overstretched, some teachers’ lack of understanding of mental health issues, bureaucratic hurdles, stigma (arising from the outsourcing of core study skills to extra-curricular services), and lack of awareness of the forms of support available. Barriers to accountability included the repeat failure to respond to complaints effectively, transparently or systemically; failure of the institution and individuals to admit to racism and, among a significant minority of white students and staff, refusal to accept that attainment gaps are structural, preferring instead to blame BME students. It is perhaps because SOAS distinguishes itself from other UK universities as a place of critical learning and research that so far it has not confronted this institutional racism systemically. The ‘critical mask’ had worn thin for BME students whose reality at SOAS differed to the reputation and advertising that had attracted them. The effective failure to foster a learning and teaching environment conducive to the academic success of all students arguably amounts to institutional racism, defined by the Macpherson Report of the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry as  

“the collective failure of an organisation to provide an appropriate and professional service to people because of their colour, culture or ethnic

5

origin."10

  Given its colonial legacy and its research and teaching specialisms, the School arguably has even greater responsibility to address issues of racism, but also a wealth of relevant skills and expertise. It now needs to apply this expertise to the development of an institution-wide strategy to: 

1. acknowledge and address the School’s institutional racism and attainment gaps;

2. dismantle obstacles to accessing support, especially those disproportionately impacting on BME students;

3. develop robust systems of accountability across the School. As research at the University of East London has demonstrated, for such a strategy to succeed it must 

have a clear leadership steer; take a holistic, not a piecemeal, approach to transformation; meaningfully engage all parts of the School.11

 Report structure Part 1 reports on how BME students’ academic confidence, motivation and engagement are affected by the centring of white perspectives in the curriculum, BME underrepresentation among staff and students on some courses, exclusion from classroom discussions, and racism. Part 2 reports on barriers to accessing support from teaching staff, support with mental health difficulties, and study skills support, and barriers to accountability for racism.  Recommendations for action are incorporated throughout, and also collated into a standalone section at the end.

10 https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/277111/4262.pdf [Accessed 13/09/16]11 Winston Morgan, ‘Include BAME: Why the Higher Education sector must adopt an inclusive approach to learning and teaching’, presentation to the Higher Education Race Action Group Think Tank 2016, available at: http://www.ecu.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Session-1b-Include-BAMe-Presentation-inclusive-curriculum-for-HERAG-2016-1.pptx [Accessed 13/09/16]

6

Part 1: A racist teaching and learning environment

If SOAS by design predominantly studies people of colour in Asia and Africa, the question of who is doing the studying – which writers and thinkers, lecturers and students – becomes pivotal to shaping the relations of power. It was clear from the experiences shared by BME participants in the survey and focus groups that when one or more of these three (authors on reading lists, teachers, and students dominating class discussions) were predominantly white, it sent an implicit message as to whose perspectives mattered, and whom the course was for. In these cases these students had felt excluded by design. For some this was because the readiest object of identification was the racialised object of study – an experience their white peers did not share:

“At a place like SOAS, sometimes the content of the courses … reinforces the 'outsider trying to consider the insider' perspective. By this, I mean, that the courses are more or less designed for Europeans exploring foreign cultures.”

“SOAS, as an institution, makes studying us its specialisation. It is not a pleasant experience to be dissected in every way, analysed, and told what we are. It would not be so bad if we were studied on our own terms, but we are not. For the most part, we are studied from an inherently European (or 'White') lens, many of the scholars we study are Western or Westernised, and those who are not are analysed from an inherently White perspective.”

Others conveyed a similar sense of exclusion-by-design in the perception that the teaching wasn’t aimed at them but at their white peers:

“The university has a focus on the "global South" and suggests that it has a non-Eurocentric approach however as a student I feel that the teaching for the most part is still massively geared towards white students – is it really so difficult to understand how to teach non-white students?” “The teaching is aimed at students with a dominant white perspective. It is not talking to those who have different life experiences even if it is talking about them.”

For many, the centring of white perspectives had negatively affected academic motivation and engagement:

“I am a Middle Eastern Studies student, and I am of Middle Eastern descent. Particularly with the cultural modules such as film and literature, I have found the content to be essentialised and reduced to a level in which my non-Middle Eastern counterparts can easily consume it. It becomes frustrating sitting in a class and seeing the primordialisation of identity through constant reinforcements of the alleged salience of affiliations such as religion and race in 'the Middle East' over anything else.”

7

The “white curriculum”

More BME participants highlighted the impact of the ‘whiteness’ of the curriculum than that of any other aspect of learning and teaching.12 The underrepresentation of people of colour (and to a lesser extent, women) in course reading lists was a prominent concern, and especially that of Black scholars, both of the African continent and diaspora. Some also highlighted the overrepresentation of male authors.

“I have not found the course content has been particularly inclusive: both the material taught and the literature assigned has been overwhelmingly from the male perspective and assigned literature is overwhelmingly by white scholars.”

“[The] curriculum/white academics doesn't value the contributions of black scholars enough.”

“The readings don't have people of colour as authors which I find disappointing even though I'm studying the Middle East, most of the views expressed are those of white people.”

“[The] course emphasises white/eurocentric perspectives on regions studied.”

“In the academic literature we are given to read, very little if any is from Africans in the diaspora or continent itself.”

The lack of diversity in reading lists felt “othering”, “alienating” and “erasing” for a number of students, and for some it was difficult to relate to the perspectives centred.

“The selection of reading material on the readings lists for module, particularly in history, is alienating towards BME students. Reading material that is selected is often from a white author, excluding indigenous sources. Hence alienating students like me who want to know about their history, just not from a white man!”

“[The] weight of sources are also not relatable viewpoints or writers.”

“It has been different education from home and culturally perspectives. I haven't been able to apply my own knowledge to a lot of what I am taught (e.g. South Asian religious background).”

This had led some students to expect that, were they to contribute non-eurocentric perspectives and experiences, these would be less valued:

“BME students may be more inclined to use theories/scholars from a BME background that goes away from the main reading list which some teaching staff deem as 'not academic enough'.”

12 This was followed closely by comments on the underrepresentation of people of colour and ethnic minorities among teaching staff, relative to the student body.

8

“The institution can … dismiss 'other' experiences and way of learnings. Different forms of knowledge is often looked down upon. Same white expectations … [of] people with different backgrounds and experiences.”

Some suggested this had reduced their motivation and their ability to engage with the course:

“The curricula of some our modules is completely Western and liberal dominated. These modules are very boring, repetitive, and reproduce the discourses that justify colonialism. These are hard for us to grasp the informations as we oppose and reject the very foundations of these knowledge producing scholarships, that completely erase our histories, experiences and ideologies.”

BME staff and Black student underrepresentation

This message was further reinforced for many by the underrepresentation of people of colour – most notably Black people, and Black women especially – among the teaching staff relative to the student body, or as one participant described it,

“white teachers teaching white students about black/brown people.”

Underrepresentation was a recurring theme throughout the research (see especially the sections on exclusion from class discussions, barriers to accessing support from lecturers and tutors, and barriers to accessing mental health support) and made many students feel isolated:

“I always feel alone especially when I don't see black female lecturers or more black female students.”

Students connected this to their mental health, their ability to engage with their studies, and their motivation to continue:

“Bumping into a visibly black person (student or teacher) is incredibly difficult! …this is very isolating and fuels a lot of my anxiety and depression. It is very difficult for me to engage with my studies, to the extent that most of the time I am not sure why I am still here."

"It [lack of black female staff] might seem like nothing to you but representation matters to us, it keeps us going."

Recommendation: Address the whiteness of the curriculum, including a full-scale audit of every course reading list to review and address the representation of people of colour, scholars outside Europe and North America, and genders besides cis-male.

9

Some had become frustrated and cynical towards the School because the demographics of staff visible to them on open days and in marketing had turned out not to be representative.

“They rolled them out on open day … and I felt, yes, finally, I’m somewhere where i’ll feel comfortable, but then I showed up and there are like two [BME lecturers]… [Otherwise] they’re consistently all white, predominantly male.”

“With a number of students having lived experience in those regions, it is embarrassing to have scholars giving a particular perspective based on their research, without any lived experience.”

“Many people of BME backgrounds in the UK face an identity crisis in their years at university, and not having a significant and well known enough person who can support these needs at SOAS to turn to is embarrassing considering its 'global perspective'.”

When students feel disillusioned with the School, they are disinclined to identify with it, which in turn is likely to affect engagement and motivation. This should be concerning for attainment, given that it is likely to be difficult, experientially, to remain engaged with a course while disengaged from the course provider.

To illustrate the difference in experience between being in a minority or majority as a Black student, one participant compared two of her classes:

“There was a class where the seminar became a space to share experiences. This was lovely at first but after a few lessons I was looked upon as the spokesperson for all black women. My opinion for everything was requested and accepted which I feel defeated the purpose of discussion and debate. I attended another class on an occasional basis … which I felt was amazing. A large predominately Black (Afro-Caribbean) class where we shared a lot of our perspectives. It is very hard to do this in a group where you are one of few BME students without the reaction I experienced above.”

Other BME participants echoed the experience of being singled out or treated as a spokesperson for a region on the basis of their race, ethnicity or religion:

“In one of my classes .. it was me and one other person who’s a POC [person of colour] and I had the lecturer basically looking at both of us whenever he would say certain things, and you kind of feel ... hyper aware of your identity. I don’t know if it was checking in to verify but it somehow felt like we were spokespeople for west Africa, and it was really uncomfortable."

Recommendation: Set a specific, measurable KPI target for the appointment of Black and other underrepresented BME staff to all sections of the School, including senior grades, teaching positions, counsellors and complaint-handling positions.

(See also the sections on barriers to accessing mental health support, and barriers to making complaints.)

10

“…being picked out for comments about race and religion, as the only PoC [person of colour] in the class.”

“Yes [I can bring my perspective to class discussions]. But, once again, it ends up being a sort of brownsplaining, or BMEsplaining to all of the white people in the class with no idea who just sit there all shocked that such an experience could happen to someone.”

Being in a minority within the classroom context often made it hard to challenge this behaviour: to do so a student would risk being unsupported, either being seen by their peers as odd, or their objection as a personal and petty gripe, as if she or he, the person raising the problem, were the problem.

“It’s really hard when you’re the one person who’s aware of it and you’re like, how do I engage? And if you’re the only person then you’re not sure if there’s gonna be support in that room so … what are the repercussions gonna be? Now that you’ve said this, are you gonna be marked out as a person that causes trouble?”

“It makes me feel like my opinion stands out as I don't share the experiences and culture of British people and what I feel or say is always at odds with what others think. I yearn for those who'd think like me and understand where I am coming from.”

“Yes [I can bring my perspective to class discussions] but I am made to feel bad cause my white peers don't understand so I always get looks saying ‘there she goes again with that.’”

Clearly, on the one hand, increasing the ethnic diversity of programmes and core courses that currently have the (proportionately) largest white majorities could help to reduce the advantage to white students of cultural commonality.

However, this needs to take place in conjunction with, not as a way to avoid, making white staff and students aware of how they perpetuate subtle and unsubtle forms of racist exclusion, and how they can prevent themselves doing so.

Exclusion from classroom discussions

A great many BME participants shared experiences of seminar discussions being dominated by white students, and of the effects on their confidence to participate

“Class discussions are dominated mainly by our white peers, which affects our confidence in enunciating our views on issues, and as a result our experiences and grades as well.”

Recommendation: Set a KPI target for the recruitment of students from underrepresented BME backgrounds to courses with large white-majorities.

11

BME female students often spoke of discussions being dominated or “shut down” by white, male students, which sometimes made them feel “uncomfortable”, “intimidated” or “threatened”. A few said that when they contributed their own perspectives to class discussion, their white, male peers “belittled” and “stigmatised” them for seeming “aggressive” or “annoying”, building on racist, sexist expectations of men-of-colour (and especially Black men) as aggressive, and women-of-colour as submissive. This caused “stress and anxiety” for some female, BME students, reducing their opportunity to participate, and their confidence and motivation.

“I think that tutorials can be quite intimidating, especially at the start of the year. Often white-male students are the most vocal from the beginning and thus female students are more likely to feel intimidated and not want to contribute. This means that they might be less likely to do as well in their assessment as they have not had the same opportunity to engage with the topic as their male counterparts.”

“It’s the way it continues throughout the year … You feel demotivated and lack confidence to change things … You carry on having other people speak, and you sit there and take your notes ... You don’t really want to turn up … You don’t feel you can say anything and if you do it’s discredited … by other classmates, not necessarily by lecturers themselves … but by other classmates.”

Teaching staff were sometimes seen to be complicit, either by not intervening (in some cases attributed to the tutors appearing to feel intimidated too), or by actively encouraging the voices of students already dominating the discussion, thereby perpetuating a feedback loop in which some students’ opportunities would grow at the expense of others’:

“It has always typically been white males that will talk dominating conversation and tutors actually allow that to happen … Sometimes they kind of get intimated themselves … rather than saying hey, this is a conversation that should be led by everyone.”

“[There is] a tendency for males to be encouraged to take up more space, be louder, so in doing so [receive] more opportunities, more help and this comes through in their work.”

“It is in the classrooms I notice it, during discussions, where girls are cut off but boys are encouraged to keep talking.”

“It is so noticeable that even though my degree is predominantly female it is male voices that dominate discussions. Teachers often do little to remedy this … [Some] strike up some sort of comradery with these guys paying them far more personal attention than other equally hard working members of the class.”

Having white students’ voices dominate was especially frustrating when the discussion was about the political or theoretical interventions of people of colour, or about racist violence.

12

“One time, in my Gender lecture, the week's topic was on Western feminism and its critiques by women of colour, such as Audre Lorde and Saba Mahmoud. However, the discussion was completely taken over by white women in our class, and no women of colour took part in the discussions. I've faced similar issues in other classes as well.”

Sometimes it was the way in which white students discussed these topics, for example trivialising their significance or presuming to be an expert, which excluded some BME students from participating.

“There was about six people from [non-white] ethnic backgrounds throughout the whole year so already sometimes I do feel kind of awkward. … There was a time when we were talking about … slavery and stuff like that and some people was like, oh that’s not really important … For me … that’s a significant part of my background and I found it quite rude and harsh … I think when they feel like they know it all it’s hard to wanna say something, especially if you think what you’re gonna say isn't gonna be seen as sophisticated or clever.”

The above quotation shows how race and class sometimes intersected, when some BME students felt silenced also by the pressure to communicate using academic language that – for reasons of structural racism – was closer to the everyday speech of middle-class, white students than to their own. One BME student reported having their accent “corrected”. Another said they had peers who expected to be perceived as less intelligent on the basis of racist, classist stereotypes, and some felt their choice was between adopting the language of their white, middle-class peers or not speaking at all:

“They may be insecure they don't speak 'posh' English and therefore they may be labelled as less smart. So to do well they have to act 'white' which is difficult.”

  “Personally I don’t really contribute much because I feel like if I say something … it just won't sound well."

“I have felt in tutorials that the better words you use / the 'deeper' your points are the more positive reception you get by classmates and the tutor.”

 Of those BME students who did feel able to contribute their perspectives to class discussions, many added the caveat that these would be dismissed or challenged by white students, which was frustrating and alienating:

“Sometimes [I can contribute my perspective based on my lived experience] but I feel like people challenge those experiences, people who have not lived my experiences which is extremely frustrating.”

“I am able to, but it doesn't make a difference. The conversation usually slips back into the same old white English perspective. It's difficult to make my view gain attention and not be dismissed as strange and non normative.”

13

Sometimes BME students’ experiences were dismissed and their tone policed by white students on the basis of racist tropes of white people as rational and Black people as hyper-emotional:

“NO [I can’t contribute my perspective based on lived experience], my opinion is exactly that! only viewed as an experience! whereas my white counterparts views and arguments in lectures are viewed objectively without connotations of emotional irrationality.”

“There are certain students who because they’re not affected by it [the topic], or they’re not really personally connected to topics, they want you to be 'a-emotional' when you’re talking about it … They’d want you to be so objective about everything when it’s actually impossible for certain topics to be objective because it’s … something very personal to me. And then they’re sitting there - and they have a different background to you - … discrediting what you’re saying because they think you’re being too passionate, [that] you're being irrational even. …You can sort of see in their face and their bodily expression to what you’re saying … The ‘mansplaining’ comes in … and you just feel like, ok, maybe I shouldn’t bring this up again, because I don’t want to be labelled as that person who doesn’t see things rationally, like this topic’s clouded their judgement."

Again, tutors were seen to play a critical role in shaping the dynamics of class discussions, as a function of both their responsibility as discussion facilitators and of their perceived authority in the classroom. Sometimes they passively enabled white students to dismiss others’ experiences by neglecting to intervene. Some participants attributed this to their tutors perhaps feeling obliged to maintain what might appear to be freedom of speech. Whether this was the reason or not, the consequence of not intervening was that BME students remained effectively censored.

“If the teacher is really passive in those situations, which happens quite a lot sometimes, then there can be a problem. It’s a lot to do with how well the teacher gives people the chance to speak or doesn’t want someone to be shut down by another person or [doesn’t want to] be rude to them …. I think generally most of my classes have been good but … there was one or two where there’d be classes with one or two people who would be really loud and really confrontational, and the tutor wouldn’t be in a position to… or wouldn’t want to take the position of … saying, you’ve spoken far too much and far too loudly and far too rudely.”

"A lot of the time the lecturers set the tone for what’s ok and what’s not ok in class. … I was one of two people who were POC [people of colour} in most of my lectures and the more [white] people were confident in lectures, the more there was a certain vibe… And it just meant that things just continued as they were and as things came up it wasn’t necessarily gonna be addressed and … often I didn’t have the energy to or was too worried about what the repercussions would be on my grades or on being in that space generally.”

14

These experiences show how being excluded from discussion can knock students’ confidence as well as restricting their access to the learning opportunities that come with participating in class discussion.

Another way in which some white tutors were seen to sustain the dominance of white students was by maintaining an apparently objective stance to topics to do with racist violence such as slavery and colonialism. The effect of acting out the privilege of being able to be objective as a white person was to alienate students whose families and communities (or who themselves) had been on the receiving end of the violence:

“…When discussing sensitive (triggering) issues … often time the teacher tries to be 'objective' and in doing this may perpetuate existing prejudices.”

“Having teachers who do not share the same experiences and who choose to be "neutral" or "objective" when it comes to discussing sensitive issues is challenging.”

In a similar vein, white teachers and students weren’t always thought to have recognised the emotional impact for some Black students of discussing racist and colonial violence in an abstract way, without also sufficiently emphasising its material reality.

“There were a lot of times when it seemed like we are talking about places in a purely theoretical way, like a very analytical way, but with no recognisance that actually for some of the people in the room, that personally affected them, like that it actually made a difference… It’s not that easy just to talk about theory when something has affected you, and I feel like that wasn’t really recognised coz we were in a room of mostly white people, like there’s a white man leading the discussion on something that actually makes you feel a certain type of way. I found it quite difficult to engage with those discussions."

These experiences suggest that not enough is done to facilitate a supportive class environment for Black students when discussing racism and colonialism. Participants connected this again to the underrepresentation of people of colour among teaching staff:

“The erasure hurts especially in courses like mine (development studies) where we discuss important and triggering issues like colonialism.”

“This issue of representation is [a] problem especially when discussing sensitive (triggering) issues because often time the teacher tries to be 'objective' and in doing this may perpetuate existing, prejudices in academia. The staff may not be as enthusiastic or passionate about the subject because they treat it as purely an academic matter because they often talking about an experience they have not encountered.”

It is important therefore to address the underrepresentation of BME teaching staff as well as strengthening the skills of all teaching staff – white staff especially – to facilitate class discussions in which all students are equally able to participate.

Recommendation: Introduce mandatory guidance or training for all teaching staff in how to facilitate class discussions inclusively, i.e. in ways that:

do not exclude marginalised voices;

do not enable some (often white) students' comfort at the expense of others' (often BME);

15

Racism in the classroom

A worrying number of students reported having experienced explicitly racist comments and behaviours in class, both from other students and from teachers. Racist comments took the form of generalisations made about races, religions (mostly comments that were Islamophobic or anti-Semitic) and regions, and comments that legitimised colonialism:

“As a black student … I have frequently come across racism from teachers who despite teaching about Africa, still view the continent as backwards, the people as less intelligent.”

“When I was revising I was looking at my course notes and some of the stuff that was written was just baffling – like …the African people were happier under colonialism...”[Another participant:] “Was it meant seriously? Was it to refute it, or…?”“No... it was as part of the module notes… She’d just written stuff, as if these are facts, …[ideas] like gay people were given rights [under colonialism]; women and children were liberated because they were able to leave the house.”

“Some European staff members expect students to only say positive things about European involvement in the world, we are supposed to pretend colonialism was a positive experience amongst other things.”

Some students had also perceived differences in the way teachers interacted with white and non-white students, and spoke of their “lecturer's preference for white students”, “lecturers who clearly treat East Asian students differently”, “being treated as second rate” or being excluded:

“My teacher ignored me and went round the class asking everyone in order questions, when she got to me she skipped past me and asked the person next to me instead (I was the only BME person in the class). She also never knew my name and just said "you" or pointed at me, whilst she knew everybody else's names.”

“…White lecturers [being] receptive to white students, whilst being dismissive to me when I dare to contribute.”

Racist behaviours and comments by teachers were cited in higher numbers than those by students, perhaps because they were thought to be more shocking given teachers’ relative position of power and influence in the classroom. Testament to this influence, one participant recounted seeing other students nodding and taking notes as her professor made racist comments. The impact was at times severe: one student said that their teachers’ problematic attitudes and behaviours had stopped their friend going to class, and several connected similar experiences to their own attainment:

Recommendation: Introduce mandatory guidance or training for all teaching staff in how to facilitate class discussions inclusively, i.e. in ways that:

do not exclude marginalised voices;

do not enable some (often white) students' comfort at the expense of others' (often BME);

16

“[I] feel like I have not achieved my full potential as a student, feel that my final grade will not represent my knowledge due to certain lecturers continuing the colonial mentality both in teaching and in respect to students of a BME background.”

The number of examples students gave of racism by academics suggests that academics may not always believe they are susceptible to being racist, as Les Back13 and Sara Ahmed14 have discussed (see also the recommendations of the section on racism in assessment). There were examples of racism also from a small minority of student participants during data collection, including a comment by a survey respondent who attributed “less student harmony” to an “influx of BME students over my … years here”; also comments about “international students in my country” (including “Stay in your own country”), and suggestions of so-called “reverse racism”.

There is a clear need to raise awareness of the forms that racism by both staff and students take on campus and in the classroom, and to give all staff and students the skills to intervene in problematic behaviour, and to react constructively to being ‘called out’.

Racism in assessment

If white students had more opportunity to participate in class discussions, so they had greater opportunity to practice skills and characteristics valued by the academy – such as engaging in academic debates and communicating ideas clearly – and to demonstrate these to the tutors who would mark their assignments. As one survey respondent put it, 

“preconceived notions of successful traits are ascribed to white students and forms a cycle of positive feedback/improvement that minorities are left out of.”

One participant suggested that students who had participated most in class discussions, having had the opportunity, were in turn more likely to be given the benefit of the doubt in essay-marking. 

“I can definitely see how if you set up a certain relationship within the classroom how that can reflect upon marking. … I can talk to my tutors and I

13 Back, L. (2004), ‘Ivory Towers? The Academy and Racism.'14 Ahmed, S. (2012), On Being Included: Racism and Diversity in Institutional Life.

Recommendation: Design a campaign and deliver to raise awareness of racism by both staff and students on campus and in the classroom. It should include:

how to recognise racism in speech and behaviour (with examples of the forms it may take);

a clear message that behaviours and comments are racist because of their impact, not their intention;

how to react constructively to being ‘called out’ for racism, by listening, being non-defensive, and being committed to learning and changing.

17

can establish rapport but if somebody hasn’t done that or doesn’t feel confident enough to do that, I can see how they [the tutor] would think, well, she didn’t talk very much in classes … [and think] that could possibly be a reason why this is not a very good essay … [whereas they] can give the benefit of the doubt to someone who is talking all the time - they can think, well ok, I can see what they went in this particular paragraph."

A number of BME students perceived that their teachers had lower expectations of them because of racist stereotypes of people of colour as less capable or lazy, and that these teachers therefore made less effort to help them. Some suggested this was perpetuated by having less opportunity to participate in class discussions, echoing findings of Steele & Aronson (1995) that negative stereotypes tend to be confirmed by non-inclusive learning and teaching environments.15

  “BME students are normally stereotyped as being less likely to work in class which means that teachers are less likely to help.” “BME students are expected to not do as well, therefore it justifies the "what's the point in trying to help them" attitude.”

“Tutors perceive nonwhite students to be less capable and as a result treat them differently.” 

This was confirmed by the experiences of a Graduate Teaching Assistant (GTA) who asked to be interviewed for this research project after second-marking students’ papers with a course convenor and witnessing the convenor’s clear bias against Black students. The GTA and convenor had each read the essays and independently noted a mark or range of marks they felt the essay deserved, and then compared these to agree on a final mark. For most it was straightforward: if they had awarded significantly different marks they would briefly state their case and agree on a final mark. Only in respect to the two Black students’ essays did the convenor go into detail about why their marks should be lower, making criticisms about grammar, sentence structure and content that the GTA felt were unjustified.

“With the other essays, as I said … [he’d say] well this is good, just like you said; I’d give it a couple of points lower - ok that’s fine. These [essays by Black students] he started out with one of them and said, well, her first sentence here is a bit weak ... and ... then on page 3 there’s this one paragraph ... and ... it’s not a very good paragraph. I thought it was a fine paragraph, I didn’t think it was a remarkably notable bad or good paragraph, it was just a fine paragraph. … So he went in with like grammar and the sentence structure which he did with no other paper … except for the other [Black] student's, who then he did a similar thing – [saying] yeah she has a sentence in here that’s kind of sloppily worded, she doesn't do that anywhere else."

15 Steele, C.M., & Aronson, J. (1995). ‘Stereotype Threat and the intellectual test-performance of African-Americans,’ Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 69 (5), pp 797-811.

18

The GTA felt that the convenor’s criticisms of the students’ grammar and language had been illegitimate both in that they were unwarranted and in that they were irrelevant to the marking criteria:

"It could just be based on the completely racist assumption that these [students] were not writing properly but there were no grammar issues that I picked up on … But also we’re not really meant to take grammar into account when we’re assessing these essays  - it actually says on the guidelines we’re not supposed to do that."

Not only with language but with content, the convenor’s criticisms were more detailed than for any other students’ essays and unjustified, according to the GTA. She gave explicit examples that have been omitted here to preserve the students’ anonymity. Even if the convenor didn’t know the students, the GTA said that they would have been identifiable to him in their essays by the topics they had written about, which were to do with racism in the African diaspora. Just as students quoted earlier (see the section on exclusion from class discussions) had been discredited by white students for being passionate about the topic, and their knowledge valued less than other kinds of knowledge, the GTA suggested that the same occurred in essay marking.

"So if you were talking about racism in … something relevant to the course and you bring these issues of racism and sexism and classism and you bring it into the essay and your passion shows through, you know, perhaps that could be undervalued than sort of a more dry [tone]."

This was apparent in the convenor’s criticisms of one of the essay paragraphs, in which the student had written about racist reactions to the labour of a Black person: the convenor had wanted the student to focus less on the racism and more on its medium, which was

"separate from the actual topic of her essay. In fact one of his criticisms was in a way wanting her to write a different paper."

In these instances the GTA had negotiated the marks successfully enough that the students’ overall grades (e.g. 1st, 2:1, etc) were not affected, but the convenor seemed not to have any idea that his behaviour was racist, suggesting again that academics may not always believe they are capable of being racially prejudiced (see also the section on racism in the classroom).

"When we negotiated the grades they still fell in that range [that I had initially suggested] - I made sure they still fell in that range … So it’s not that he was marking them down more than perhaps I would, but it was the way in which it was done … the way in which he didn’t do those with any of the other essays. And I just was sitting there completely flabbergasted because there was no recollection that what he’s doing could even be construed as problematic."

Furthermore, because of the difference in power, arising from her comparatively lower status in the professional hierarchy and the lower level of infrastructural

19

support for fractional staff, the GTA had not felt able to confront the course convenor directly about their unconscious bias.

"It’s a weird power dynamic being a GTA and then having to negotiate grades with the convenor. … I did not feel comfortable raising the question of why are you targeting these two students specifically in the way that you are."

The lack of a culture (and supporting infrastructure) in which staff at all levels, including fractional staff, are able to call out racism, and individuals’ lack of recognition of their own racism, perpetuates the problem, and indeed the GTA had heard of similar racism in marking by permanent staff in another department.

“In one of the departments I’ve taught in there’s someone [else] who has a reputation for just being really [unreasonable]… There’s actually been falling outs over staff who’ve had to double-mark with this person over what they perceived to be a clear bias against BME students … [in] how they mark and give feedback.”

For racism by staff to be prevented it is essential that no staff member considers herself or himself beyond the bounds of racism, that staff are trained and encouraged to respond self-reflexively and non-defensively to suggestions they may be acting on unconscious bias; and that all staff, including fractional staff, have sufficient job security and support that they feel able to confront discrimination without fear of negative consequence.

International students also raised the issue of exam and essay questions sometimes containing UK-centric cultural assumptions. Their examples have not been included here to preserve participants’ anonymity. The unintended impact was to “throw off students who are not culturally/contextually aware”, and prejudice students who “might have different ways of approaching [the] question due to [their] different background.” Some international students also spoke of prejudice against the English language of their home country: 

Recommendations: All academics must be prepared to acknowledge that, no matter their

research specialism, they are capable of racism, and should be prepared to discuss how.

For all staff to feel able to confront each other’s racism (which in turn would create a safer and more inclusive environment for BME students) without fear of negative repercussions, all staff need job security and to feel meaningfully supported and valued by the institution. Strengthen the job security and working conditions of fractional staff and cleaners in accordance with the demands of their campaigns.

(See also the recommendations of the section on racism in the classroom.)

20

“I have grown up with English but because I studied in America I have American English but I know some professors ... look down on it, say in class that they mark you down … I know there have been two professors who have been very unhappy when they see American English … and I’m thinking, I’m an international student, I’m here for [my course] and I’m leaving. I understand the need for British English but I can’t reorient myself in an essay or especially exam to “think British” and then forget about it after three hours so … The expectation is not warranted."

A few students gave examples of times they had felt that if they didn’t reproduce their teachers’ problematic views in their assignments then their marks would suffer:

“I did a module where people had issues with the lecturer and … marking, but because it was their final year in the module that was gonna cement their grade, they just write whatever the lecturer was saying just so they get the grade even though they completely were against it and I think with that lecturer … you get marked differently if you weren’t saying the direct same thing they were saying in the lecture. But there was stuff that was historically inaccurate, like ... saying that the Africans didn’t start the Atlantic slave trade because they couldn’t use boats… Some people [felt] well I wanna get my grades so I will write that stuff."

Any one or combination of these – low expectations of students based on racist stereotypes, UK-centric cultural assumptions in exam and essay questions, and discriminatory marking – may prejudice the attainment chances of BME students. Training in unconscious bias is needed to prevent them.

Recommendation: Introduce mandatory unconscious bias workshops for all assessors and staff on recruitment or promotion panels. Workshops for assessors should include (but not be limited to) training in:

unconscious bias in expectations of students’ potential to get a 2:1 or a first class degree;

how to become aware of, and avoid (or at least make explicit), cultural bias in question setting for exams and essays.

21

Part 2: Barriers to support and accountability

The discriminatory practices discussed in part 1 that exclusively or disproportionately undermine the confidence, motivation and attainment chances of BME students clearly each need addressing in their own right. In view of them, however, two additional conditions are necessary.

First, students must be able to access academic and welfare support as soon as problems of discrimination arise, to prevent possible longer-term or cumulative effects to their wellbeing, confidence and engagement. The research found barriers to accessing both kinds of support. Some barriers faced students of all ethnicities, but are likely to affect BME students disproportionately by compounding the effects of discrimination and exclusion the classroom (discussed in part 1); others appeared to be a result of that exclusion, when loss of confidence or motivation deterred students from seeking support. In either case the School has a responsibility to make support systems accessible to all students: the failure to do so amounts to indirect discrimination in the sense of the Equality Act.

Equality Act 2010 c.15: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/19

“19. Indirect discrimination

(1) A person (A) discriminates against another (B) if A applies to B a provision, criterion or practice which is discriminatory in relation to a relevant protected characteristic of B's.(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), a provision, criterion or practice is discriminatory in relation to a relevant protected characteristic of B's if—

(a) A applies, or would apply, it to persons with whom B does not share the characteristic,(b) it puts, or would put, persons with whom B shares the characteristic at a particular disadvantage when compared with persons with whom B does not share it,(c) it puts, or would put, B at that disadvantage, and(d) A cannot show it to be a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.

(3) The relevant protected characteristics are—1. age; 2. disability; 3. gender reassignment; 4. marriage and civil partnership; 5. race; 6. religion or belief; 7. sex; 8. sexual orientation.”

22

Equally importantly, students must be able to hold the School and its members to account for racial discrimination and exclusion. The research found repeated failure by the School to deal with complaints effectively, transparently or systemically, and barriers to making them. SOAS’s reputation for being critical sometimes also appeared to act as a mask behind which the institution and individual members could avoid confronting their racism either personally or publicly. Together these undermined the potential for change.

On accessing support and accountability depends the rebuilding of trust and confidence, which in turn supports students to achieve their academic potential.

Barriers to accessing support from lecturers and tutors

Accessing academic and welfare support relies on students having confidence to proactively approach staff. As we have seen, there are a number of institutional factors that negatively affect BME students’ confidence and motivation – not least the rewarding of traits more often displayed by white students and the devaluing of perspectives of people-of-colour authors and students:

“Students tend to not be able to form relationships with teachers and tutors as they do not feel confident enough to ask questions, due to fear of being seen as less educated than there white counterparts.”

The number of BME students who raised this, and correspondingly the higher proportion of white participants in the survey who having sought support from their tutors, suggest that BME students are disproportionately excluded by the reliance on students having confidence and motivation to seek support.

“I’m not good at talking to people and this held me back – a lack of confidence to speak to lectures after class. So I never met my teachers personally. I felt it was too difficult to get to know the faculty, and noone reached out to me unless I was comfortable seeking support.” [Emphasis added]

Many BME participants suggested that the introduction of one or more mandatory appointments with personal tutors – at the beginning of the year, at regular intervals (such as monthly), or in groups – would break down this hurdle and make it easier to approach them again later at times of need.

“It would be more useful if those office hours were … if you had to meet at that time."

“Have a required 1st session with personal advisors as it can be petrifying to do so on your own.”

“Potentially monthly meetings.”

23

Some students reported having received generic emails from their faculties after showing signs of needing support – having missed lectures, not participated in class discussions, attained low marks for essays – without having had the confidence to approach their tutors. Being chased hadn’t given them the support they needed, nor increased their confidence to seek it; the problem had remained unsolved. They suggested that a personal, caring email from their tutor might have helped.

“[It would help if there were] a lot more personal approach to students. Staff reaching out to [individual] students who may have low attendance or poor results on a personal level as opposed to a generic email from the faculty.”

“[It would help if there were] contact by advisors regularly, not to pressure but to offer help.”

Non-white students were comparatively less likely than their peers to be able to access the advantages of cultural familiarity with their tutor. Some felt it unrealistic to expect their white tutors to be able to empathise with their problems, especially those who had experienced racial abuse in comparable settings in the past. For non-white students from working-class backgrounds, the gap in life experience was sometimes compounded.

“Both my tutors were white men - how can I feel comfortable talking to him? How can we relate with such different backgrounds? Should we be expected to break down these barriers - do we need a relationship? It’d be better to have someone who understands because of their background.”

“Both of my tutors are white men. How can I really … have a rapport and feel comfortable talking to a 60 year old white man…? How can I just come and chat to you? Actually how can we relate? Because our experiences of life are so different and you’re coming from completely different places. And how are we meant to break down these barriers? …having someone I actually feel in some way connected to I think would have helped."

"I find it hard to tell a white teacher my problems."

“Those kinds of relationships with academic teachers and academics prior to coming to university was very traumatic. …I went to a …predominantly white school in a very white area and it was very racist… so I suffered racial abuse by tutors. So I’m not really gonna go and trust a white lecturer who I don’t know - I don’t know who they are and they don’t seem to get why I’m here so it’s not a very welcoming or inviting especially when you’ve already been put off. So I feel like if there were someone from a BME background who could immediately make you feel safe and comfortable, then it would … be easier for me to build up a level of safeness.

Recommendation: Introduce regular group tutorials, and/or mandatory individual tutorials for all students at fixed times.

24

“Most teachers come from privileged backgrounds which [some] BME students can't relate to.”

While the School bears no direct responsibility for students’ experiences before arriving at SOAS, nor to allocate tutors of the same ethnicity as their students, more could be done to mitigate the effects. A handful of BME participants called emphatically for a network of mentors from BME backgrounds whom BME students could access in addition to their tutors, should they feel the need to talk to someone who may be more able to understand their experiences of racism. Again, this sometimes intersected with class:

“[It] would really benefit BME students who … it might be the first generation of students from their family… [to have] someone to mentor or someone to touch base with during their time at SOAS.”

“When I first started uni in several of my classes I was really taken aback by how many students had been more places, they were the same age as me but seemed to have been a lot more experienced than me and know a lot more than me. And if you had a mentor to say, it's fine, you will learn and that uni is the opportunity to learn, and to give you guidance on how to access other sources of opportunities and academic [inaudible], that would make you feel better because … I kind of thought this was a problem with me … my background wasn’t privileged enough… and all these other people seemed to have a head start and it made me feel bad. And in terms of confidence as well [inaudible]."[Facilitator:] “So who were the students that you felt – "[Participant:] “– they were white students”.

It may also help if all teachers were to acknowledge explicitly to their students that they may not be able to understand from experience what they are going through, but that they are there for them nonetheless.

Barriers to approaching personal tutors were sustained also by lack of clarity about tutors’ remits and the purpose of office hours.

“It’s so unclear about what their [a personal tutor’s] role is.”

“The roles of these [personal] advisers are not explained to me.”

Recommendations: Introduce formal BME mentoring schemes by and for BME students and for

staff. Mentors should work in schools too so that SOAS can understand where its BME learners are coming from and the experiences they have had before arriving at SOAS.

Tutors should be aim to be welcoming and approachable to all students. It may help to state clearly in lectures their open-door policy during office hours, and to acknowledge in the same breath that they may not understand what students are going through, but that they are here for their students nonetheless.

25

“Personally as an ethnic minority from overseas, I am aware of the office hour but I am not really sure what to discuss.”

Among participants who hadn’t been deterred by this lack of clarity, some recalled feeling “passed from pillar to post” after having had to be signposted to more appropriate sources of support; with this also came increased risk that responsibility may fall through the cracks. It also meant having to retell personal difficulties to multiple audiences which one student described as “demeaning” and said “often increase[d] anxiety around the issue at hand.”

Tutors reportedly hadn’t always been available in their advertised office hours, or hadn’t responded to their emails; both kinds of experience reduced students’ trust that they would be supported if they sought support again. Of those who had successfully made contact, a disproportionately high number of BME participants reported having been given the cold shoulder or treated “like a burden”. Most attributed this to staff’s heavy workload and were sympathetic; nonetheless it had deterred them from seeking support in future.

“We got an email in freshers’ that … [said] go and see your personal tutor ... so I took the initiative, I was really excited, I wanted to meet my personal tutor, and then she was shocked, … and then she was shocked, like, why are you here? She genuinely asked me why I was there, she was like, you’re a first year, this isn’t important. … It disheartened me and I didn’t really want to go again … It was like, this isn’t helpful, I feel like I have no personal connection with this person and if I needed someone this would be the last person I’d come to."

“While I respect that academics are extremely busy and are probably constantly harassed by emails all the time, for one such as me who emails only for important matters, being ignored or treated coldly is a significant put-off and signal that I am being a pest and unwanted. And where I am unwanted, I am loath to go.”

Recommendation: Clarify the remits – and boundaries to remits – of every form of academic and welfare support available to students, including but not limited to:

Personal tutors

Course tutors and convenors

Faculty offices

Staff in Student Advice and Wellbeing

Sabbatical and part-time officers in the Students’ Union.

Clearly communicate these remits and boundaries to all students, teaching staff, staff in signposting roles, and staff delivering support services to students.

(See also the sections on barriers to mental health support, barriers to study skills support, and administrative barriers to support.)

26

These experiences recounted suggest that some staff may be overwhelmed by the volume of their responsibilities and the pressures on their time. Clarifying to all students (and to tutors) the boundaries to tutors’ remits, as suggested above, may help, as well as allocating a realistic amount of time into staff timetables for supporting tutees, and ensuring training or guidance is available to develop active listening skills and to be aware of other services to which they can signpost students.

“You can kind of understand they’re pressed for time and money but at the same time if they had some sort of training [in] how to deal with students’ immediate situations that would be beneficial. … … They don’t know where to direct you if there’s welfare stuff they can’t support you with, and if they all knew these are the different services available at SOAS, these are the contact hours [so they could signpost]… it would be so much more clear for the students.”

“If you were going to speak to your tutor and said this is … [what] I am experiencing right now and then they turn you away and say I’m really sorry, I really can’t help you because I don’t know what to do, I’d say they’d be putting you in a worse situation than you started off in the first place.”

Barriers to accessing mental health support

The most frequently perceived area of training need for teaching staff was in understanding and catering to the learning needs of students with mental health problems. Although relevant to students of all backgrounds, some BME participants cited anxiety and depression linked to their experiences of racism and racial discrimination; these add to the mental health risk factors shared with white students.

“SOAS is good but very triggering. Most days I am filled with anxieties and just don't know how to deal with them.”

Lecturers and tutors didn’t always acknowledge the mental health issues students were facing, and some appeared unwilling to accommodate needs arising from them – even where these had been discussed in advance or specified in a learning agreement.

Recommendation: Design realistic, substantive time into academics’ timetables to fulfil the responsibilities of being a personal tutor in a way that is supportive to tutees. This should include time to proactively email students who rarely participate in class discussions, or have been absent from three or more classes or are attaining low marks, to offer support.

Recommendation: Ensure tutors and other staff in student advisory or support roles are equipped with the skills to fulfil the responsibilities within their remit, giving give training or guidance to fill gaps where necessary.

27

“As a student with mental health problems ... I also often find it difficult to attend lectures and seminars and complete work on time due to my illness, and have experienced varying levels of understanding from academic staff on these issues.”

“As a disabled student, I have been stopped from recording lectures despite having been given permission by the school.”

“With my learning agreement sometimes I’d go to lectures late because I’d had a difficult morning and I’d find even when that was put on my learning agreement and they were aware … on the one hand they’d say it was fine but you’d see there was irritation."

This had led some students to believe their lecturers didn’t care. Whether or not this was the case, the perception was real and contributed to the isolation of some of those most in need of support. Some pointed to institutional factors such as the lack of a mandatory requirement for learning agreements to be adhered to, and that lecturers may not access the necessary training or guidance in how to take account of learning needs when marking work.

“I have had 2 episodes of severe issues this year and have felt very isolated from the university. Only one lecturer replied to my email about my leave of absence. I found this really upsetting as it appeared that my lecturers just didn't care about my well being. I make this conclusion as I am aware that the same people replied to my fellow students emails sent on the same day. It appears that either they don't care, or are not given enough training in how to deal with this.”

“The learning agreements I’ve found a bit disheartening … because I was told about it and encouraged to do one, but I was also told it’s not binding and they don’t have to [follow] it. … So you could submit this and you could talk avidly about your problems and it’ll be sent to all your tutors, but they might just not … stick to the learning agreement. … [If I knew whether they were taking it into account] I could modify, I could kind of react to it … [but] I didn’t know if they were marking me based on that."

“Making sure the lecturers are up to date with training [is important]… I have dyspraxia and …we have written a learning agreement prior to starting my modules, and I remember a lecturer saying to me he didn’t know how to mark my work ‘cause dyslexia was easy to recognise in an essay but dyspraxia you couldn’t quite work it out. … I don’t think he’d done any looking up for himself to try and understand it. … [In another class] I was a mark away from a 2:1 and the lecturer said she didn’t know how to recognise the dyspraxia in my work.”

28

For some students, mental health difficulties made it too difficult to jump the bureaucratic hurdles necessary to access learning agreements and other forms of support in the first place.

“The process of getting support is alienating and confusing, someone with anxiety, manic tendencies, panic disorder, so many more, the kinds of people seeking support, don't deal well with the mechanisms which you have to put yourself into to get support.”

Every layer of bureaucracy could be a potential barrier, from joining waiting lists, to having to fill in forms to continue to access support already begun. Almost every student who cited such hurdles attributed them to under-resourcing.

“This is kind of a motivation issue but … I was involved with Student Wellbeing last year and then at the beginning of this year I assumed that the support would continue on … but then I found that they actually wanted me to sign up afresh and do all new confidentiality forms, resign loads of stuff and go in for initial meetings and stuff like that, which actually at that point I wasn’t really well enough to do. …When I’d already had to come to a low point to ask for help in the first place I then found I had to start all over again. And I found that incredibly difficult to do so I just didn’t do it. 

“When I tried to get a regular appointment I had to wait for 4 weeks and then when I didn't respond to the email in one day they revoked their offer. For someone who is experiencing mental health issues, the added pressure of waiting for help and the fact that this can't be guaranteed is totally detrimental. I know this is not an easy to implement strategy, but I honestly feel as though SAW [Student Advice and Wellbeing] just needs more funding.”

“The welfare support (specifically I'm thinking of the counselling service) is fantastic but SEVERELY underfunded, and dangerously so, there need to be more appointments available.”

“I feel that the student welfare services are underfunded and overstretched. Waiting times are far too long and the level of service provided is often not enough, particularly for students with mental health difficulties.”

Recommendations: Ensure all teaching staff are trained to recognise, understand and

accommodate the needs of students with mental health difficulties or learning difficulties, and disabled students, including how to mark in ways that take account of specific learning needs, and how to facilitate equal participation.

Make learning agreements binding.

29

When it came to accessing counsellors, a number of BME students expressed how much more confident they would have felt if they had been able to get an appointment with a counsellor who was a person of colour. Sometimes this was because of the perceived likelihood of feeling understood:

“[We need more] BME counsellors … [who are] trained to deal with issues that are to do with race, or ethnicity, that kind of stuff. If you’re discussing something to do with race, I don’t feel very comfortable with somebody who’s white."

“There should be a dedicated councillor who understands issues that affect BME people in London specifically; many a times I have found myself and some friends to be in situations of dire need and not had a relevant enough person to turn to at SOAS. The issues which … face the BME community at SOAS are … incomparable to those that face our white counterparts. Be it racial, cultural, or linguistic marginalisation, stigmatisation etc.”

Sometimes it was to do with the way narratives of victimhood are racialised:

“Counselling doesn't work for me, I am always expected to be strong, play into the "strong independent black woman" trope.”

This speaks again to the need to recruit more BME staff to reflect the ethnic diversity of the student body (see the section and recommendations on BME staff and student underrepresentation).

Barriers to accessing study skills support

There was some evidence of stigma and shame surrounding seeking support with study skills, which deterred students from attending.

“I would say that as a mature student that sometimes I do know that I’ve not wanted to seek support, and I think it’s also cultural because you think you’re weak by seeking support … and it ends up being you either go in without seeking support or you do seek support but it’s kind of last minute."

“We do have writing courses … essay help … I don’t know what the turnout’s like but I know from personal experience I don’t wanna go if they’re not mandatory. As someone who has anxiety as well, you just don’t wanna … reach out to those sort of things. You think, maybe I’m freaking out too much, maybe that’s why I’m not getting the marks; … you think, I’m at university, I should know this stuff." 

A number of participants said they hadn’t personally needed extra support but that it was unrealistic to expect those who did need it to attend workshops outside the

Recommendation: Increase resources to Student Advice and Wellbeing, to remove all dispensable bureaucratic hurdles to accessing welfare support and to reduce waiting times.

30

course lecture schedule. If skills needed to gain a first-class degree – in reading, critical analysis, writing and time management, for example – are not taught in the core curriculum, it assumes a level of knowledge and confidence on entry that students with UK, middle-class backgrounds are more likely to have. By peripheralising these skills into extra-curricular workshops, the failure of the School to design learning and teaching practices appropriate to their student intake gets masked as a deficiency in students. In that context, attending workshops feels like an admission of inadequacy.

‘Older’ BME and international students – students in higher years or recent graduates of the same course – tended to be seen as more approachable than staff and better able to understand the specific (academic English and other) challenges they were facing and to explain how to do well. Existing departmental arrangements for students to meet or gain advice from recent students and graduates – such as ‘meet and greet’ drop-ins, graduates coming to speak in class, and the anthropology library – were praised. Some participants suggested that the lesson of these successes, namely that students often gain a great deal of support from each other, could be applied to the design of study support provision more widely.

Administrative barriers to support

The survey also found gaps in awareness of the forms of extra-curricular support available. Almost 2-in-3 white students said they knew who they could turn to for both academic and welfare support, compared to 1-in-3 BME students; 1-in-6 and 1-in-3 respectively said they didn’t know who to turn to for either kind.

If students have faced institutional racism (through the forms of exclusion and discrimination discussed in part 1), with consequences for their motivation and engagement, they may be less motivated to look proactively for information about support available from the institution that has so far failed to include them. A single, comprehensive guide to all forms of support available may break down this additional hurdle to accessing support for those whose motivation to look for it has been diminished by exclusion. It would also remove a barrier for students whose mental health difficulties – whether or not related to experiences of racism – make it harder to find information easily from lots of different parts of the School’s website.

Recommendation: Learn from the success of existing informal peer support networks and increase the formal opportunities for students to support each other academically, within and across related courses and year groups. Increase contact between current students and recent course graduates.

Recommendation: Ensure that learning and teaching practices match the entry profile of students, and that the ‘value-added’ skills necessary to achieve a first – such as in reading, note-taking, writing, and time management – are taught within the programme schedule.

31

Although not accounting for the gap in awareness, focus group participants said that emails containing important information were sometimes lost amid the daily volume, and that relying on email may not be a realistic means to ensure students were aware of support on offer. Echoing the finding that some students feel more comfortable seeking academic support from each other than from staff (see the section on barriers to accessing study skills support), a number of students suggested that student-word-of-mouth – through societies or student representatives for each course – may be the most successful way to publicise support services.

“Maybe also having … a society to talk about… the availability of these programmes ‘cause once you’re in a society sometimes you make friends … a lot of things are done by word of mouth so if the society … maybe once a term they talk about these other services that could help.”

“The student reps as well, they could be a good source, ‘cause they know what’s happening and have access to email all the students."

Identifying which communication channels students are most receptive to (social media, intranet, notice boards, student society bulletins, student representatives, and so on) may help to improve awareness among all students of support on offer. Although of potential benefit to all, this would most help those who are in greatest need of support – among them, BME students experiencing the forms of exclusion and discrimination discussed in part 1 of this report.

Barriers to making complaints

There were also gaps in awareness of how to make complaints. 4-in-10 white and 1-in-4 BME survey respondents reported that they knew how; 6-in-10 white and 3-in-4 BME respondents said they did not. There were a number of factors evident from the research that were likely to deter BME students from looking into how to complain. One was that the School wasn’t always felt to be a safe environment in which to raise issues. Some students expected that they would be blamed for the racism they had experienced from white people:

“I don’t know who I would talk to about that because it kind of feels like I’d be the issue… I just don’t want to cause drama.”[Another participant:] “And then it seems like it’s personal, not structural.”

Recommendation: Produce a single, comprehensive guide to every form of academic, welfare and administrative support available to students. This might take the form of an interactive flow-chart online. Ensure all students, tutors and other staff in student-signposting, advice and support roles know where to access this guide, using the channels identified in recommendation 31 to publicise.

Recommendation: Research which communication channels and platforms students pay most attention to. This could be through a campaign featuring an advertisement on every platform available that asks students to email the location in which they saw the advertisement, to claim a free incentive (such as a voucher for a hot drink).

32

Students also feared repercussions, having been threatened or victimised in the past for speaking out, or having heard of friends who had been as a result of complaining:

“When people on my course complained, the head of department threatened them in my seminar, said that he knew exactly who had complained and what they had said. This wasted seminar time just before an assessment. It was designed to intimidate people away from making any further complaints.”

“My experience here has made me reticent to say things because I feel so unsafe here.”

A worrying number of students of all ethnicities also reported that complaints about sexual harassment and discrimination had been ignored or seemingly blocked. These severely impacted on their trust in the School. The following quotation comes from a student who, because of the School’s failure to take meaningful action against her harasser, no longer felt motivated to participate in academic life. The experience had undermined her sense of self-worth and reduced her relationship with the university to an economic transaction:

“Both the Union and the School, they just push it under the carpet, anything that comes [up] about gender. Obviously it’s intersectional so it’s usually intersected with race and class, it’s not simple but … with harassment cases - and they’re very complex because SOAS is small, usually people are friends so it’s not just a stranger anyway that attacked you or did some things, it's someone from a circle that’s popular or from authority like some teacher … - they just do nothing. I had a personal experience but the school said 'Oh it’s not physical so we don’t care'… and that just changed my whole relationship with university coz I just don’t feel that I matter. [Now] I just pay to come, get ‘the formula’ [the necessary motions to get a good degree result] and get out. I don’t wanna engage, I don’t wanna speak."

Hearing of friends’ experiences of complaints about harassment being ignored or blocked affected other students’ likelihood of complaining too. While it is possible that some may have been referring to the same one or few incidents, the impact on trust was to each of them.

“I have heard many stories from women who have reported sexual harassment to SOAS who have been let down. I have no faith in SOAS to support me through a complaints procedure.”

“When I think of complaints, to main one that springs to mind would be sexual assault. I'm fairly confident I'd be able to report it to the Student Union and it be treated with the necessary seriousness and awareness, but I couldn't say the same of SOAS administration, as they've famously swept sexual assault charges under the rug.”

“Not at all [do I trust the complaints system]. My friend made a complaint on her being harassed, nothing was done.”

33

Some BME students felt their complaints about racial discrimination had been dismissed on the basis of racist stereotypes “of BME student concerns as naive and reactionary,” or as another student put it,

“If we do challenge something we get accused of playing the race card.”

The same kind of dismissal had been perceived in the institutional reactions to calls from Black students for a mentoring scheme:

“There were… [Black students] who are pushing a mentorship programme specific for Black student wanting mentors who are similar to them, and it has been heavily resisted by, ironically, the white professors, again on this ‘Why should we identify these racial identity politics?’”

Other reasons to doubt that complaining would be worthwhile included experiences of other administrative process not having been dealt with promptly or effectively; perception that campaigns had not been heard and that complaints therefore may not be either; belief that the necessary solutions were unrealistic because they were structural, for example allocating more staffing and resources to particular departments; and perception that senior staff had impunity because of their position of power:

“There were things that professors would say that were verging on racism, and I did attempt a class were the professor outwardly said racist things about Africans, in other words that we were backwards, but when you’re a professor of authority speaking to young impressionable people then that is questionable and even the way the guy said it, he said, I’ve been at SOAS I forget how many years, so it felt like you couldn’t challenge him because he was the professor, he was also the tutor, he was a high person in the department so you're like ok, so, even if I were to complain this guy isn’t gonna be held to account … So ok, this is SOAS, it might be critical but this person of authority is fully racist."

Other students reported a lack of transparency about whether and what action had been taken as a result of complaining:

“I felt like I was not able to follow up the complaint and was told I wouldn't be notified of what actions were taken after my complain but I feel I had the right to know this information.”

“One of my friends recently experienced harassment in the library and after lodging a complaint was told she would not be kept informed of the investigation process. How is this meant to help the students who have suffered? Surely they have a right to know what happens so that they can make sure they feel as though they have been brought to some sort of justice.”

When action was known to have been taken, it hadn’t necessarily influenced change to standard practice or procedure.

34

"As I made the complaint, they opted to deal with my complaint individually. ... There needs to be a structural change for my complaint to mean anything for anyone else."

Common to all these experiences – victim-blaming and intimidation; complaints being ignored, blocked or dismissed, sometimes on racist grounds; lack of transparency and apparent staff impunity; and dealing with complaints individually rather than structurally – were the resulting cynicism and distrust felt by students towards the School. In light of these experiences is perhaps unsurprising that a number of participants raised doubts that the research on attainment gaps would catalyse institution-wide changes.

"I feel that attempts by SOAS to address this is great but I fear what we may end up with is a policy of tokenism and the illusion of inclusion and advancement."

Dealing with complaints and calls for change proactively and non-defensively – including changing systems where necessary so that the issue that gave rise to the complaint need not recur – are necessary for building trust. Building trust is important for confidence, and building confidence important for attainment.

However, although an effective complaints system is necessary it is not sufficient. A transparent response to a complaint about racism means little if students can see that their curriculum continues to centre the perspectives of white men; that senior, decision-making posts remain disproportionately occupied by white staff, and that the sections of the School’s workforce with highest numbers of migrant workers continue to be outsourced and to have less favourable working conditions. Earning students’ trust depends on admitting problems of racism, resistance to change and SOAS’s colonial legacy, and building wider systems of accountability in their place.

35

The “critical” mask

There is a risk that SOAS’s reputation for being an especially critical and progressive university may encourage complacency, masking the ways in which it perpetuates the same race, class and gender divisions of any other university. But as one participant said, the teaching and learning environment

“reflects the wider society, so makes me feel that SOAS is not doing anything out of the norm, not trying to break any boundaries, or challenge the status quo.”

A large number of BME students spoke of the gap between their expectations of SOAS based on marketing and open days, and the reality they encountered on arrival, and their disappointment that the university hadn’t lived up to its name.

“I was expecting … it would be a little bit more different than being taught in other schools … [but it] it hasn’t been very different and ‘SOAS’ as it was marketed. … [It has been] very reflective of the normative stuff that is out there so it’s kind of contradictory."

Recommendations: Undertake a full audit of SOAS’s complaints procedures, with particular

attention to the handling of complaints relating to racial and gender harassment and discrimination. Address any biases or practices that may undermine accountability.

Ensure that actions taken as a result of complaining are made transparent to the person submitting the complaint within a reasonable time frame.

Analyse complaints data at least annually, and in case of patterns, review standard procedures to address the cause and prevent the same kind of complaint continuing to recur.

Develop a system of accountability for race equality across the School. This is often discussed in a top-down way – academics being accountable to senior managers – but leaders also need to be accountable, for example through pay criteria related to performance on race equality; white students and staff must be accountable for the ways they knowingly and unknowingly perpetuate racism; and the School needs to be accountable to the countries and regions from which it has profited for a century, and continues to profit.

Research and publish research findings on how SOAS’s colonial legacy has shaped the present, including but not limited to: the colonial gaze of research, taught programmes and courses; how the modeling of the white curriculum on Enlightenment thinking has devalued – and in the classroom still devalues – indigeneous approaches to thinking and knowledge; and the ways in which the School’s reputation is built on the exploitation of people of colour.

36

[Facilitator:] “So when you say you expected it to be different, what do you mean?"[Participant:] “More critical. … Coz most of the knowledge and stuff you can get that from most schools, so for me [I expected it to be] more critical … where you have to teach that as well, not just brand yourself as a school.”

“For what SOAS preach, the content is not as critical as they claim, or as diverse."

“SOAS seems to advertise that it is alternative and radical, but the reality is … the university is just becoming a white institution with a novelty reputation.”

“I was also very disappointed, and to see over and over how the School doesn’t care about the African part of the name. The African department is very underfunded. There is a structural issue that noone really cares about."16

The last quotation above alludes also to the likelihood that SOAS’s regional specialisms and critical reputation deflect attention from its own problematic politics. This was suggested for example by the apparently unconscious racism by some white academic staff (see the sections on racism in the classroom and racism in assessment): being an expert in global or regional racism and colonialism may mask academics’ awareness of their own capability to be racist, particularly if there is a lack of institutional culture and/or effective mechanisms to hold them accountable.

Complacency was also suggested by the scepticism of some staff and students that the ethnicity attainment gap was real. Their motives for looking for statistical explanations to refute its existence (undertaken without success) arguably warrant self-examination. There were also some who were mistrustful of structural explanations, preferring to attribute gaps to deficits in BME students themselves (with comments such as “[they] don’t work hard enough”).17 Worryingly, there was evidence also of BME students having internalised this misattributed blame:

“Maybe we need to improve as people instead of asking everyone around us to be better.”

Towards trust and accountability

It is important therefore that SOAS raises awareness of its attainment gaps, but that in doing so it explicitly acknowledges institutional responsibility rather than allowing BME students to be assumed to be at fault. For the same reason, these issues need to be explicitly connected to critical race theory and stories of BME excellence. Until all sections of the School are aware of the institutional factors producing the gap, the permeation of the deficit model itself may continue to attainment gaps by fuelling racist assumptions that BME students are somehow less capable.

16 Recall also the frustration of participants who had been attracted to study at SOAS at least in part by meeting staff of BME backgrounds on open days, but whose teachers had mostly been white: see the section on BME staff and student underrepresentation.17 See also the section on racism in assessment, in part 1, which explores how racist stereotypes sometimes shape tutors’ expectations of BME students.

37

More than this, the School needs to publicly acknowledge and address its institutional racism holistically and substantively if it is to earn the trust and confidence of all its BME students. A tick-box exercise that reinforces the School’s “critical mask” but fails to deliver accountability for BME students is likely only to deepen alienation, demotivation and loss of confidence, as the impact of problematic complaints-handling (discussed in part 2) showed. There is a need to address the underlying issues, as this student made clear:

“I did not fully enjoy my 4 years at SOAS, it was very isolating. There seem to be a underlying … race issue that I can't pinpoint, this feeling that you'll never belong here.”

Without addressing structural issues of institutional racism and colonialism (as well as classism and sexism), no amount of superficial change will bring equal opportunity to engage in the educational environment; and without an equal sense of belonging and engagement, there will continue to be less opportunity for BME students to attain the grades of which all learners, given equal conditions, are capable.

As part of addressing racism, the School needs to develop a culture in which all students and staff can trust they will be supported if they ‘call out’ prejudice and discrimination;18 in which all are taught to react non-defensively to being ‘called out’, and to be willing to listen and learn; in which all can trust that if a complaint does need to be raised further, it will be handled effectively, transparently and with system-wide consequences.

Attainment gaps therefore cannot be treated as a standalone issue. Addressing them will require an institution-wide strategy for racial equality and accountability that engages leaders, academics, service staff and students, and that sits within the larger context of a transformative process for decolonising the School.

18 Recall the BME students who were a minority in the classroom and felt unable to challenge racism from their white peers and the GTA who felt unable to challenge the racism of a course convenor (see the sections on racism in the classroom and racism in assessment).

38

Recommendations

The recommendations are grouped as follows:

A. Establish leadership and strategy for eliminating the ethnicity attainment gap. B. Acknowledge and address institutional racism. C. Address BME underrepresentation within the staff and student body. D. Create and repair systems that support a culture of accountability. E. Create an inclusive learning and teaching environment. F. Clarify and communicate existing support available. G. Dismantle barriers to accessing support.

A. Establish leadership and strategy for eliminating the ethnicity attainment gap.

1. The Board of Governors should set a specific, measurable, interim Key Performance Indicator (KPI) target to reduce the ethnicity attainment gap, and another to eliminate the gap altogether.

2. Appoint an institutional lead responsible for ensuring both KPIs are achieved, and a working group, both reporting to the Director’s office.

The working group should include senior managers, academic staff, professional services staff and students;

It should collaborate closely with the Decolonising SOAS working group addressing the School’s continuing colonial legacy and institutional racism;

It should learn from similar work at other UK universities.

3. Resource and support need to be given to this initiative.

4. The working group should design and monitor the delivery of a strategy to achieve the KPIs on attainment gaps (see recommendations 1 and 2). This strategy should:

be holistic, working through all stages of planning, from concept to review;

include an implementation plan and timeline;

be published on the School’s website;

facilitate change as opposed to being a tick-box exercise.

B. Acknowledge and address institutional racism.

5. The Director should make a public commitment to eliminating the ethnicity attainment gap, including a commitment to:

39

addressing institutional racism and other factors known to cause or sustain the gap;

dismantling barriers to accessing support that disproportionately impact on BME students;

developing a culture of accountability and mechanisms to support it.

6. Improve understanding across the staff and student body that racialised attainment gaps exist. Explicitly connect these to critical race theory, and to stories of excellence by BME students and academics.

7. Publicly acknowledging and commit to addressing its institutional racism first means identifying it to all white staff and students. The School should therefore design a campaign and deliver to raise awareness of racism by both staff and students on campus and in the classroom. It should include:

how to recognise racism in speech and behaviour (with examples of the forms it may take);

a clear message that behaviours and comments are racist because of their impact, not their intention;

how to react constructively to being ‘called out’ for racism, by listening, being non-defensive, and being committed to learning and changing.

8. All academics must be prepared to acknowledge that, no matter their research specialism, they are capable of racism, and should be prepared to discuss how.

9. Introduce mandatory unconscious bias workshops for all assessors and staff on recruitment or promotion panels. Workshops for assessors should include (but not be limited to) training in:

unconscious bias in expectations of students’ potential to get a 2:1 or a first class degree;

how to become aware of, and avoid (or at least make explicit), cultural bias in question setting for exams and essays.

10.Research and publish research findings on how SOAS’s colonial legacy has shaped the present, including but not limited to: the colonial gaze of research, taught programmes and courses; how the modeling of the white curriculum on Enlightenment thinking has devalued – and in the classroom still devalues – indigeneous approaches to thinking and knowledge; and the ways in which the School’s reputation is built on the exploitation of people of colour

11. Implement collaborative partnerships with institutions in the regions in which SOAS specialises, to carry out comparative research on race equality in education and to share successful practice.

12.Research how white students, teaching staff and managers at SOAS construct issues of attainment and race, to inform interventions to address racism.

40

C. Address BME underrepresentation within the staff and student body.

13.Set a specific, measurable KPI target for the appointment of Black and other underrepresented BME staff to all sections of the School, including senior grades, teaching positions, counsellors and complaint-handling positions. It is especially important to reduce imbalances among decision-making positions, to ensure that BME staff can influence the School – not just contribute to its statistics – and that the university can better represent the community it serves.

14. Increase transparency in staff recruitment and progression. Publish this data and explain recruitment and promotion procedures clearly.

15.Set a KPI target for the recruitment of students from underrepresented BME backgrounds to courses with large white-majorities.

16. Introduce formal BME mentoring schemes by and for BME students and for staff. Mentors should work in schools too so that SOAS can understand where its BME learners are coming from and the experiences they have had before arriving at SOAS.

17.Monitor and review student and staff profiles on regular basis to identify under- and over-representation of people at all levels, positions and types of contract.

D. Create and repair systems that support a culture of accountability.

18.Develop a system of accountability for race equality across the School. This is often discussed in a top-down way – academics being accountable to senior managers – but leaders also need to be accountable, for example through pay criteria related to performance on race equality; white students and staff must be accountable for the ways they knowingly and unknowingly perpetuate racism; and the School needs to be accountable to the countries and regions from which it has profited for a century, and continues to profit.

19.For all staff to feel able to confront each other’s racism (which in turn would create a safer and more inclusive environment for BME students) without fear of negative repercussions, all staff need job security and to feel meaningfully supported and valued by the institution. Strengthen the job security and working conditions of fractional staff and cleaners in accordance with the demands of their campaigns.

20.Undertake a full audit of SOAS’s complaints procedures, with particular attention to the handling of complaints relating to racial and gender harassment and discrimination. Address any biases or practices that may undermine accountability.

21.Ensure that actions taken as a result of complaining are made transparent to the person submitting the complaint within a reasonable time frame.

22.Analyse complaints data at least annually, and in case of patterns, review

41

standard procedures to address the cause and prevent the same kind of complaint continuing to recur.

23.Publish ‘value-added’ data on and detailed data on attainment gaps annually on the SOAS website, beginning with the comprehensive quantitative analysis of attainment gaps commissioned by the Widening Participation team in 2016. Data transparency is crucial for BME students to believe the gaps are being dealt with and to trust the School’s systems – and trust is crucial for confidence, and confidence crucial to attain well. This could also enable collaboration with other HEIs doing similar work, such as the University of Kent.

E. Create an inclusive learning and teaching environment.

24.Address the whiteness of the curriculum, including a full-scale audit of every course reading list to review and address the representation of people of colour, scholars outside Europe and North America, and genders besides cis-male.

25.Define what is meant by an ‘inclusive learning and teaching environment’ in the SOAS context specifically, drawing on best practice elsewhere (such as Kingston University’s Inclusive Curriculum Framework), and on research in higher education research institutions such as the UCL Institute of Education, but also on the internal learning being guided by the Decolonise SOAS campaign and working group.

26.Ensure that learning and teaching practices match the entry profile of students, and that the ‘value-added’ skills necessary to achieve a first – such as in reading, note-taking, writing, and time management – are taught within the programme schedule.

27. Introduce mandatory guidance or training for all teaching staff in how to facilitate class discussions inclusively, i.e. in ways that:

do not exclude marginalised voices;

do not enable some (often white) students' comfort at the expense of others' (often BME);

do not treat BME students as spokespeople for regions;

intervene in problematic dynamics among students (such as racism and the dominance of some voices over others);

are sensitive to and supportive of the needs of students of all backgrounds when discussing racist violence such as slavery and colonialism.

28.Ensure all teaching staff are trained to recognise, understand and accommodate the needs of students with mental health difficulties or learning difficulties, and disabled students, including how to mark in ways that take account of specific learning needs, and how to facilitate equal participation.

29.Make learning agreements binding.

42

30.Make creative, effective use of data. Use the findings of the School’s recent quantitative analysis of attainment gaps not just as a diagnostic tool but to identify areas of learning, teaching and assessment practices for adaptation. Design adaptations based on what has worked. Evaluate adaptations through an annual feedback mechanism.

F. Clarify and communicate existing support available.

31.Research which communication channels and platforms students pay most attention to. This could be through a campaign featuring an advertisement on every platform available that asks students to email the location in which they saw the advertisement, to claim a free incentive (such as a voucher for a hot drink).

32.Clarify the remits – and boundaries to remits – of every form of academic and welfare support available to students, including but not limited to:

Personal tutors

Course tutors and convenors

Faculty offices

Staff in Student Advice and Wellbeing

Sabbatical and part-time officers in the Students’ Union.

Clearly communicate these remits and boundaries to all students, teaching staff, staff in signposting roles, and staff delivering support services to students.

33.Ensure tutors and other staff in student advisory or support roles are equipped with the skills to fulfil the responsibilities within their remit, giving give training or guidance to fill gaps where necessary.

34.Produce a single, comprehensive guide to every form of academic, welfare and administrative support available to students. This might take the form of an interactive flow-chart online. Ensure all students, tutors and other staff in student-signposting, advice and support roles know where to access this guide, using the channels identified in recommendation 31 to publicise.

G. Dismantle barriers to accessing support.

35.Tutors should be aim to be welcoming and approachable to all students. It may help to state clearly in lectures their open-door policy during office hours, and to acknowledge in the same breath that they may not understand what students are going through, but that they are here for their students nonetheless.

43

36. Introduce regular group tutorials, and/or mandatory individual tutorials for all students at fixed times.

37.Design realistic, substantive time into academics’ timetables to fulfil the responsibilities of being a personal tutor in a way that is supportive to tutees. This should include time to proactively email students who rarely participate in class discussions, or have been absent from three or more classes or are attaining low marks, to offer support.

38.Learn from the success of existing informal peer support networks and increase the formal opportunities for students to support each other academically, within and across related courses and year groups. Increase contact between current students and recent course graduates.

39. Increase resources to Student Advice and Wellbeing, to remove all dispensable bureaucratic hurdles to accessing welfare support and to reduce waiting times.

44

Appendix: Research participants

Ethnicity19 Number Percentage of total participants

Arab 15 5%Asian/Asian British 52 17%Black/Black British 24 8%Chinese 14 5%Gypsy/Traveller 1 0%Mixed 35 12%Other 11 4%White 147 49%Total 299 100%

Gender Number Percentage of total participants

Faculty Number Percentage of total participants

Male 107 36% Arts-Humanities

78 26%

Female 189 63% Languages & Cultures

71 24%

Other 3 1% Law & Social Sciences

145 48%

Fee status Number Percentage of total participants

Year of study Number Percentage of total participants

UK 186 62% First year 92 31%EU 57 19% Middle year(s) 111 37%Non-EU 56 19% Final year 96 32%

Age Number Percentage of total participants

Young 241 81%Mature 58 19%

19 To enable comparison with SOAS’ entry and exams data, categories for ethnicity, gender, age group and fee status were the same as those used by the School (which in turn are prescribed by the Higher Education Statistics Agency).

45

SOAS Students' UnionThornhaugh Street

LondonWC1H 0XG

020 7898 4992

Registered Charity: 1150717