1.  Academic Practice Seminar Series - Derby University Monday 25 February Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) attainment: interventions and next steps
Dr. Gurnam Singh, Principal Lecturer in Social Work and National Teaching Fellow, 2009

2. Background – Race, Ethnicity and HE
Phase 1 – Pre 1990 – ‘state of ignorance’ – colour blind – cultural deficit.
Phase 2 – 1990’s – Widening participation – disproportionate numbers of BME students HE, but largely in New Universities. Emphasis on removing barriers to entry.
Phase 3 – 2000 to present – Gradual uncovering and recognition of a ‘problem’ – evidence base gradually begins to build (Connors, et al (2003) and (2004); Law et al (2004); Tolley and Rundle, (2006); Broecke and Nicholls, (2007) HEA/ECU (2008), Fielding et al (2008) ECU (2010), NUS, (2011), Singh, (2011), HEA/ECU (2011).

3. Defining the problem
‘Relative to White students, those from every non-White ethnic group are less likely to obtain good degrees and less likely to obtain first class degrees…The odds of an Asian student being awarded a good degree were half of those of a White student being awarded a good degree, whereas the odds of a Black student being awarded a good degree were a third of those of a White student being awarded a good degree’ (Richardson, 2007: 10).

4. BME student under-attainment – why?
Traditional (‘commonsense’) view – They lack ability, their culture is detrimental, their lifestyle is relatively dysfunctional/chaotic, they have problems with authority, generally they have lower ability and tend to segregate themselves off from other students, they need to change.
Liberal view – BME students experience more disengagement, alienation, lack confidence and self-esteem, experience negative attitudes from some staff and student and they possess low levels of social and cultural capital. I am prepared to help them if required.
Radical view – Racism, , Eurocentric curriculum, low teacher expectations, treated more harshly than white students, ghettoisation/segregation/streaming of students along ethnicity, labelling/‘othering’, poorer material conditions, symbolic violence, their capabilities are not recognise. The pedagogy and institution needs to change.
All of the above in which case we need to develop a theory of cause and effect.
Reflective Question – Which one of these perspectives best reflects your:
Personal view
Institutional view

5. Equality in higher education: statistical report Part 2: Students
The the proportion of UK-domicile BME students has increased from 14.9% in 2003/04 to 18.1% in 2009/10

6. The picture confusing?
Problem with ethnic categorisation. Categories can not really tell us anything about individual experience.
We make distinction between ‘home’ and oversees students
Super-diversity (Vertovec, 2007)
Focussing on categories and student achievement/performance may actually take our attention away from ‘institutional structures and pedagogical practices’ (Ahmed, 2007)
Reduces the historical struggle of justice and equality (political and pedagogical) to an endless wild goose chase for the ‘absolute truth’.
We can get lost in the numbers game.

7. Pedagogical - What can we do to close the gap?
Disparities in Student Attainment (DiSA) – HEA Funded NTF project – Wolverhampton and Coventry 4 Key questions:
Conceptual - What do we mean by a BME student (real or statistical entity) ?
Evidential - What is the nature/scale of the attainment gap (institution, department, course and module level)?
Evidential - Why do BME students do less well than ‘white’ students i.e. how can we explain the gap in degree attainment (Folk versus evidence based explanations)?
Pedagogical - What can we do to close the gap?

8. DISA: Disparities in Student Attainment - HEA Funded NTF project www
DISA: Disparities in Student Attainment - HEA Funded NTF project
Research Stream 1: Institutional Data
Identifying modules with no disparity – why?
Research Stream 2: Student Data
What students say help or impede their achievement
Collaborative project between the University of Wolverhampton and Coventry University and funded by the HEA
Looks at the attainment gap between white and BME students. It is also important to mention here that all our research has been based around the HESA categorisation of ethnicity, so we recognise that this isn’t ideal but we had to work with data the way it was collected institutionally and be consistent with our categorisation of further data.
Projects investigates
Institutional data
Student and lecture perception
Practical intervention
The project is exploring the issues from a number of perspectives
Practice –
Exploration of issues
Learning and Teaching/ Pedagogic interventions
Theoretical – Pygmalion Effect, categories vs beyond categories, self identified categorisation
Methodological – Consensus Oriented Research Approach & Related tools. 5.
Research Stream 3: Action Research with Staff
Evaluation of interventions identified by staff to eradicate the gap
Research Stream 4: Dissemination
Good Degree Guide, Vox Pops, Postcards, Framework, Methodology

10. Key factors behind success
LECTURERS PERCEPTION
STUDENT PERCEPTION
ESSENTIAL RELATIONSHIPS between :
- Staff and student
- Student and staff
- Students and University support services
RESPECT between - lecturers and Students
RECOGNITION of student effort
Previous skills/Life skills
Recognition of difficult social circumstances
USEFUL FEEDBACK
Access to Resources
Fair and clear Assessment
Academically challenging experience
POOR STUDENT MOTIVATION
- Students don’t work hard enough
They don’t ask for help
They don’t read assignment brief
LOW STUDENT SELF CONFIDENCE
Students are not willing to take risk – almost seems they are afraid to use their own ideas and thoughts
WEAK SOCIAL/CULTURAL CAPITAL BASE
Not enough reading knowledge of professional practice
Students focussed on practical aspects of their University experience
They wanted to succeed and become successful in their chosen career paths but they also wanted to enjoy their time at University and have “fun”.
They wanted to have engaging and passionate lecturers who knew the content and material of the courses they were delivering
They wanted to have access to resources which motivated them and supported their learning as academics but also wanted to draw on life experiences which were not necessarily directly related to professional skill sets – i.e. drawing on the life experiences and life skills of relevant and knowledgeable others across the University
They wanted to have approachable lecturers – awkward first encounters made them nervous
They wanted to have positive relationships
They wanted to feel safe and comfortable within the University, wanted to trust lecturers
They wanted their efforts to be acknowledged
They wanted to be able to improve
They did not want any “special treatment” but they wanted to have access to University resources

11. There were four main areas that our finding fell into:
Relationships,
Academe factors,
Psychological factors
Cultural and Social issues.
Relationships
Both lectures and students tell us that the quality of the relationship between students and lecturers is important in student attainment. Relationships might not be equal and can effect the disparity between student attainment However, when comparing staff and student perceptions, we found that there were vast differences between what student and lecturers believed.
Staff - One way relationship ‘I provide you with the where with all to get your degree’
Student – Two way relationship ‘We build a relationship and through this relationship we share information that will enable me to gain my degree’
Qualities of staff student relationships
Good relationships
Subject expertise
Good communication – approachable, helpful, supportive – not always out of the classroom
Bad relationships
lack of communication
Lack of organisation
Folk Pedagogies at UW
Asked for 5 reasons why students at UW don’t get firsts (first part of study)
Identified 4 areas
Staff factors
Learning factors
System factors
Student factors
The most interesting of these are:
Student factors as these are where the folk pedagogies are evident
Learning factors – which contain messages that lectures pass on to students – these are a double edged sword as although positive they are intrinsically limiting
Student Factors
Through the student factors identified by the lecturers we can access the folk pedagogies (Brunner, xxxx) that lecturers unconsciously work to. Folk pedagogies are unconscious beliefs that colour the way that people view and interact with other groups of people. The folk pedagogies identified in this data set fall into four areas: Beliefs about academic competency, beliefs about the psychology of University of Wolverhampton students, beliefs about the social norms that influence students and individual factors about students. The sets of folk pedagogies are listed below
 Academic: University of Wolverhampton students do not get first because:
they do not have good writing skills
do not have good language acquisition
have a narrow world view
are not capable of independent thought/study
lack ability/are not excellent students
lack motivation/are not motivated to get firsts
do not priorities learning
have outside responsibilities that interfere with learning
are not engaged to attend lecturers
have no, or little, confidence
do not expect do get good degrees or do well
they have no academic role models at home
they do not have families to push them to do well
held back by social and cultural norms towards education
are not fully prepared for higher education during their previous educational experiences
Being an interlocutor
One of the most powerful inputs lecturers can have in a students success is acting as an interlocutor. The interlocutor is a person that introduces people into a discourse, providing them with enough information they can act autonomously with that discourse once the interlocutor was moved away from it. Lecturers are interlocutors in many ways:
through what they say ‘you can get a good degree’,
through how they behave and provide subtle messages – ie how they teach and the language they use ‘when you are barristers or solicitors you will be…..’
Through who they are – being a role model ie Gurnam
Academic processes
Fit to submit/ CAW & Sigma – ensuring that students understand academic writing, the importance of spelling and grammar and the impact of these on the grades that they achieve.
Student Mentoring – embedding students within the academic culture, encouraging them to understand how to achieve
Assignment briefs – The quality of assignment briefs impact on attainment. Clear, logical, fit for purpose briefs with student centered language help attainment
Assignment types – students perform differently in different assessment types – data is muddy and needs further investigation
Dissertation marking – ensuring that students who do well in their dissertations are not marked down because of their past performance and the perception lecturers have of them – good marking practice (double marked, main marker not supervisor, viva)
Feedback – students require good, timely and useful feedback. This should include information on their academic writing, spelling, grammar and structure of their argument, if they have been marked down on these aspects.
Sign posting – lecturers should sign post students to academic support systems, if help is required
Spikey Degrees – BME students have a much more spikey degree profile than white students – ie a white 2:I students might score consistently in the 60 – 70%, where a BME student with 2:I might have gained scores ranging between 40 and 90% - why is this?
Blind Marking – encouraging blind marking in subjects and modules where it is difficult. – ie lab practicals, art and design, nursing practice examinations and dissertations
Encouraging responsibility and accountability – encouraging student to take responsibility for their monitoring their attendance. Re-engage the disengaged, encouraging attendance. Students must be visible for lecturers to know them, form a relationship with them
Cultural Capital and Social Capital
Understanding classification – ensuring students understand the difference between the different classifications, how a degree is calculated and the importance of getting a good degree.
University culture at home – do students have supportive home environment that is conducive to completing the work they need to do outside of the lecture theatre
Information for student (vox pops) – giving students information helps them understand what they need to do to achieve
Aspiration raising – encouraging students’ confidence, their belief in themselves as academics/good students/people capable of achieving. The process of becoming a student
Information for parents – ensuring that parents understand the environment that their child is working in, so that they know what they should be encouraging them towards and what is expected of them in order to achieve.
Role models – providing successful role models for those who do not have them within their family or friends – mentoring, lecturers as role models
Support – ensuring the university have systems to help students understand, adapt to and feel comfortable in the Higher Education Environment
Psychological Processes
Individualisation – seeing students as individuals encourages them to feel respected and for folk pedagogies to be challenged.
Being and becoming a student – there is a process by which students become certain kinds of student’s high, medium, low performers.
Internal vs External locus of control (perception) – differences in what students tell us and what lecturers perceive about them
Folk Pedagogies – beliefs about ability/motivations that apply to certain groups of students that can impede the relationships between lecturers and students and how those students are treated – impacts on the attainment bias
Pygmalion effect – linking a characteristic to attainment and then unconsciously teaching all those with that characteristic to that level of attainment. Can influence how students are taught and feed into the attainment bias
Psychological Contract – Student pedagogies + student relationship with the university suggests that the student may have a psychological, unspoken contract with the university. When aspects of the contract are violated, trust is broke and disengagement might occur.

12. Theorising the data
Whilst some factors might have greater effect than others, disparity is likely to be a consequence of a variety of structural, situational, individual factors.
Solutions therefore need to be varied and targeted.
Although one may have a romantic view of the transformative power of education, in reality there are some factors that even the best teachers in the world cannot overcome.
For some disadvantaged students success might be about surviving!

13. Key structural factors
Class origins and reproduction of human/social capital – (Bourdieu, Putnam, Halpern)
Family and community norms and values – (Coleman)
Ethnicity, gender and social capital – (Modood, Connor et al)
Access to material resources and social class (Cole)
Ideology, Racialisation, Interpelation – (Lacan, Althusser, Hall).

14. Pedagogy of love – Humanising learning
Teacher expectation impacts student performance (observer-expectancy effect) 4 factors 1.Warmer Climate – verbal and non verbal 2.Input factor – teachers teach more. 3.Response opportunity – call on and encourage high performers 4. Feedback – more positive and differentiated feedback

15. Pedagogy of love – Transformative Learning
Humility
Courage
Tolerance
Lovingness
In his text Teachers as Cultural Workers: Letters to Those Who Dare to Teach, Freire (1998) provides several qualities he believes are indispensible for teachers. He suggests that humility, courage, tolerance and lovingness are virtues that help teachers dignify the educational process. Humility, Freire explains, involves “listening to all that come to us, regardless of their intellectual level” because it is a “human duty” that helps us identify “with democracy and not with elitism.” “Courage” is also a necessary quality because it helps us conquer the fears that limit and control us. “Tolerance” allows education to be progressive because it teaches us to live and work with those who are different. And “lovingness,” says Freire, gives our work meaning (pp ).
In her book ‘Reinventing Freire” Pedagogy of Love, Antonia Darder (2002) argues that, “teachers could find the strength, faith, and humility to establish solidarity and struggle together to transform the oppressive ideologies and practices of public education” (p. 91) if they commit to transforming their classroom practice into an act of “profound love” She goes onto asks the reader to consider alternatives to the traditionally held constructs regarding the act of teaching. She outlines several factors and beliefs teachers must examine if they are truly to exemplify a revolutionary pedagogy. These include:
Students as integral human beings,
dialogue as pedagogy,
the negotiation of power and authority, classroom culture, and the courage to teach in a manner outside the commonly accepted norms.

16. Conclusion - Facilitating the ‘Good Degree Student’
Avoid negative labelling
Minimise Pygmalion effect – e.g. blind marking
Raise aspirations
Challenge stereotypical thinking
Be an interlocutor
See students as individual
Be a good communicator
Re-engage the disengaged
Foster good relationship with all students
Nurture intellectuality
Open up those who have been closed down
Develop Critical and post-race pedagogy
Encourage interactive relationship
Show that you want to teach

17. Ultimately our conception of humanity and worth will impact how we respond to the issue of BME attainment.
"A farmer went out to sow his seed. As he was scattering the seed, some fell along the path, and the birds came and ate it up. Some fell on rocky places, where it did not have much soil. It sprang up quickly, because the soil was shallow. But when the sun came up, the plants were scorched, and they withered because they had no root. Other seed fell among thorns, which grew up and choked the plants. Still other seed fell on good soil, where it produced a crop - a hundred, sixty or thirty times what was sown. (Matthew 13:1-9)

18. Some questions for reflection
How do we respond to the demographic shifts that render the categories increasingly unstable (Super diversity)
We have been overwhelmed by the number of students, particularly those designated ‘black’ who find ethnic monitoring categories uncomfortable – what do we make of this?
How can we engage with differences without perpetuating stereotypes or giving undue significance to ‘raciological’ thinking and classifications?
Does this require an epistemological break?
Anti-racism to post-racism.
Cultural sensitivity to contextual sensitivity.
How can we break the perception that inclusivity or widening participation is associated lowering of standards?
How can we promote inclusivity as a professional and institutional virtu?