Decolonising and Ethnicity awarding gaps in UK HE

Firstly, I must clarify that my thoughts and writing here are based on my understanding of what the literature and behaviours of those who are postcolonial and decolonial thinkers and practitioners have shared. I could be wrong, but my husband will tell you I rarely ever am.

It is also important to note that while we operate within this current system of HE, we have to work toward decolonial fissures - something I have discussed previously in this blog. This at times means we have to work within a system to change it despite the system itself being colonial in its approach and outcomes. I am writing this blog not to discourage decolonial fissures, but to correct an errant course I have seen developing around comparisons between ethnicity awarding gaps and decolonial agendas in Universities.

Finally, these are two extremely complex and technical concepts (awarding gaps and decolonising), and I have attempted to approach them both with simplicity but not to the neglect of accuracy.

The awarding gap

Awarding gaps have come about through the use of data reporting on the degree outcomes for students in UK HE. Universities are expected to report on their awarding gaps to the Office for Students (aka the regulator) who also monitor institutions based on the conditions of registration - essentially, they can decide whether a university should continue being a university. An awarding gap is the distance between the degree outcomes for particular groups of students. So, in the case of the ethnicity awarding gap, there is a gap between white student outcomes and Black, Asian, traveller students in most universities and subjects. This gap usually, if not always, means that white students get better degree outcomes than any other ethnicity. Advance HE recent reports found that the ethnicity awarding gap is wider in institutions that were larger and had more black and brown students.

The outcomes a student gets in their degree is representative of a huge and complex system of Higher Education that has inter-connections for both individual universities and the wider sector. However, degree awards come down to the way students are taught and assessed in their learning journey.

Decolonising and Awarding gaps

I've also shared previously my confusion at the equivalency being drawn in our sector between decolonising, EDI, and anti-racism. While decoloniality may produce equitable outcomes, or opportunities within current systems, I firmly believe that the goal of decolonising differs greatly from what Equity/EDI has become in HE.

Decolonising is so much more complex than I can explain in this blog, but what I can say is that equality, equity, and anti-racism within current systems is not the goal of decoloniality in practice or in theory. Decoloniality is about evaluating the intentions of colonisation, studying the approaches taken to colonise successfully, and then looking at the results of that colonisation with the view to eradicate the oppression of colonised peoples, their descendants, and their lands. This could result in equity, and better outcomes for marginalised students, but shouldn’t we dig deeper if we are going to eradicate systemic oppression? The assumption we make by centering the voices of black and brown people in spaces like HE as the core of decolonial work, is that HE is a system that continues to perpetuate colonial oppression. So, how can equity within the system be the goal? As I said, it is important to work toward betterment of marginalised peoples, but in the name of decolonising we should not lose sight of the true intent.

HE as we know it today is a colonial legacy. It is the masters house.

The errant assumptions about who gets to create knowledge, the capitalist and classist approach to who gets to make decisions, the clear dividing line between academics and professional services, the limiting of students' power as people, the rampant racism and ableism, the disconnect between decision makers (usually white, middle/upper class, and significantly older) and the students themselves. It all screams "civilised" and "orderly"…If civilised and orderly appeal to you, decolonise your mind.

And so, while I understand the value that could be found in monitoring degree awarding gaps, I am also of the view that decolonising should not be used as a measure to reduce them. Decolonising is an approach rooted in the rebellion of the oppressed. If we look at the ways in which HE has been developed we will see colonial legacies from the academic conferment of titles to the nature of assessment. For example, why do we assess this way? why do we validate learning this way? Why do only some forms of learning get considered? ..the answer is the system. When we start talking about assessment changes, we have to consider QA which largely sits outside of the institution and has been accepted as a sector way of doing things. If we are using decolonising to reduce ethnicity awarding gaps, we are attempting to work within a colonial system, using colonial tools of measurement, validation of knowledge, and oppressive research methodologies in a decolonial approach. Can you see how that doesn’t work?

To change the degree outcomes, we have to change assessment (or completely change the way we validate, offer, monitor, and assess learning). To decolonise assessment would mean changing assessment completely which has implications for curriculum design within an institution to subject benchmarking and QA sector wide. It would take an entire sector overhaul to change how we assess...but then what would exist in its place?

Finally, understanding the colonial nature of the approaches to research, data, monitoring, reporting, and Higher Education at large, to assume decolonising, in this colonial system of education, is going to be a solution to the ethnicity awarding gap is flawed. My view is that if we are decolonising, ethnicity awarding gaps will not exist - I'm not saying there will be equality of outcome for everyone, I am saying we would not be monitoring student success in this way, I'm saying there would be a plurality of ways students can succeed and we wouldn’t have the same measure of success for everyone. The assumption that good quality teaching and learning results in the same results for everyone in this system of mass education is flawed. Any good teacher can agree to that at least.

Important to note

- This blog has not yet delved into the issue of what decolonising is, and how many universities who say they are decolonising, are not.

- This blog has also not delved into how many institutions APP plans and approaches to the ethnicity awarding gap often do not include students, anti-racism, or any other forms of anti-oppression when attempting to remedy the outcomes of students.

With all of the critical thinkers in UK HE, how many will stand against these punitive measures that argue for better outcomes for black and brown folx seeing clearly after 13 years of monitoring it does not work how they say it will?

"For the master's tools will never dismantle the master's house.They may allow us temporarily to beat him at his own game, but they will never enable us to bring about genuine change." Lorde, 2018.