No policy equals LIP SERVICE
Next steps for FACE involves targeted amendments to inadequate government educational policy as the awarding gap for minoritised students and especially Black students continues to widen. Report Caryn Franklin and Linda Mackie. Links to updates will posted here
Despite quite advanced efforts from the Race Relations Act 20 years ago, for universities to create EDI action plans, strategies, missions to deliver race equity, the awarding gap for minoritised students and especially Black students continues to widen.
“Race equity has been de-prioritised as a government policy.”
Incredulously there is no obligation for measures and accountability towards achievement of these actions and procedures. As noted by (Pilkington, 2018) ‘the specific duties, including the requirement to have in place an equality action plan and conduct equality impact assessments have been replaced by guidance to publish limited data and set one or more objectives.
Simultaneously, the red tape challenge and the significant cut in funding for the EHRC signal that racial equality is sliding down the government’s agenda. In other words race equity has been de-prioritised as a government policy.’
“From clear governance and duties to guidance (only).”
Thus we have gone from clear governance and duties to guidance. This was contested back in 2016 by the Office for Fair Access (OFFA). “It is noteworthy that less than half the access agreements, which universities are obliged to produce for formal approval ‘address the persistent gap in attainment rates for students from different ethnic minority groups’ despite that, this issue is supposedly central to ‘the national strategy for access and student success’ (OFFA, 2016, p. 3). The above report concludes, ‘It is difficult not to conclude that this episode exemplifies lip service being paid to racial equality and ethnic diversity.’
“Legal requirement for evaluation of statistical evidence would diminish the apathy and lack of accountability currently blocking progress.”
FACE notes that with charitable status, universities have to declare information publicly (linked to their funding etc.) and proposes that this declaration is tied to policy supporting a legal requirement for transparent equality impact assessments. Current protocol assesses topline figures, for a snap shot and generic statement without identifying and enforcing the action required to address awarding gaps. It is thought legal requirement for evaluation of statistical evidence targeting race equity strategy and the efficacy of institutional outcomes, would diminish the apathy and lack of accountability currently blocking progress.
Stay tuned.
Pilkington, A. (2018). The rise and fall in the salience of race equality in higher education. In J. Arday, & H. Mirza (Eds.), Dismantling race in higher education: Racism, Whiteness and Decolonising the Academy (1 ed., pp. 27-45). Palgrave Macmillan Ltd.. Advance online publication.