In the wake of increased scrutiny over racial disparities within the higher education sector, a 2022 report revealed that UK universities are falling short in addressing institutional racism and systemic issues. The report, co-authored by experts and published as the Ethnic Representation Index, highlights a pressing need for universities to accelerate efforts in tackling inequality and promoting diversity.
The Ethnic Representation Index, a pioneering initiative introduced in 2022, aims to measure progress made by universities in England concerning ethnic representation at various levels, including academic staff, executives, and governors. In its 2023 iteration, the index provides a more detailed examination of the ethnic landscape within higher education.
One of the significant revelations from the latest report is the existence of a “leaky pipeline” effect, wherein the proportion of Black, Asian, and minority ethnic (BAME) students declines at each stage of academic progression. Despite constituting 32.9% of undergraduates, only 18.5% of academics, 14.3% of professors, and a mere 7.7% of executives are from BAME backgrounds. This glaring disparity underscores the challenges faced by BAME individuals in advancing through the ranks within the academic hierarchy.
The report also delves into the degree awarding gap, revealing that BAME students are 12.3% less likely to receive a 2.1 or above. The issue becomes more pronounced for Black students, who face an alarming 19.3% awarding gap. Shockingly, more than a tenth of universities in England report awarding gaps for Black students exceeding 30%, further emphasizing the urgent need for remedial action.
In response to these disparities, the report introduces a separate Black Index, highlighting the specific challenges faced by Black students and staff. While 9.5% of undergraduates in England are Black, only 1.1% of professors share this ethnicity. The Black Index sheds light on a 19.3% awarding gap for Black students, emphasizing the severity of the issue.
Furthermore, the report discloses an average pay gap of 5.2% between white and BAME staff, raising concerns about the financial inequities within academic institutions. Despite these alarming figures, the report does acknowledge positive initiatives within universities, with 58% having decolonisation initiatives, 35% implementing anti-racism strategies, and 78 universities committing to the Race Equality Charter (REC).
However, the report also highlights the limitations of such initiatives. While participation in programs like the REC may indicate institutional commitment, it does not guarantee a better experience for students and staff. Shockingly, a university awarded a “Silver” rating for its REC submission still exhibits a substantial 25.4% Black awarding gap.
In Scotland, while the ethnic composition of professors and academic staff mirrors the BAME student population, there remains a concerning awarding gap in half of the universities, exceeding 10%. This suggests that disparities persist, even in regions where positive trends are observed.
Despite the comprehensive nature of the index, it is marred by incomplete data, with some universities, including the author’s own, failing to publish relevant information. The reliance on Freedom of Information requests to gather data underscores the necessity for universities to proactively share information transparently, fostering confidence among BAME students and staff.
The report concludes with a call to action, stressing the urgency for collective efforts in addressing these inequalities. The time for change is now, and the responsibility lies with universities to ensure that progress is not merely an aspiration but a tangible reality. As universities strive for academic excellence, they must also prioritize inclusivity and diversity, providing an environment where every student and staff member, regardless of their background, can thrive.
