Mobilisation of Research Knowledge for Student

Success Workshop,7th November,2012

Sheffield Hallam University

Reducing disparities in BME student attainment – challenges

and possibilitiesDr Gurnam Singh, Coventry

University

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).

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).

3

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.

Reflective Question – Which one of these perspectives best reflects your:

1. Personal view

2. Institutional view

4

Equality in higher education: statistical report 2011 Part 2: Students

http://www.ecu.ac.uk/publications/files/equality-in-he-stats-11-part-2-students.doc/at_download/file

The the proportion of UK-domicile BME students has increased from 14.9% in 2003/04 to 18.1% in 2009/10

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.

6

Disparities in Student Attainment (DiSA) – HEA Funded NTF project – Wolverhampton and

Coventry www.wlv.ac.uk/disa 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?

7

DISA: Disparities in Student Attainment - HEA Funded NTF project www.wlv.ac.uk/disa

Research Stream 1: Institutional Data

Identifying modules with no disparity – why?

Research Stream 2: Student Data

What students say help or impede their achievement

Research Stream 4: Dissemination

Good Degree Guide, Vox Pops, Postcards, Framework, Methodology

Research Stream 3: Action Research with Staff

Evaluation of interventions identified by staff to eradicate the gap

Key factors behind success

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

LECTURERS PERCEPTION

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

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!

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).

Pedagogy of love – Humanising learning

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTghEXKNj7gTeacher 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

Pedagogy of love – Transformative Learning

HumilityCourageToleranceLovingness

Conclusion - Facilitating the ‘Good Degree Student’

Challenge stereotypical thinking

Re-engage the disengaged

Open up those who have been closed down

Raise aspirations

Be an interlocutor

Foster good relationship with all students

See students as individual

Show that you want to teach

Encourage interactive relationship

Be a good communicator

Nurture intellectuality

Minimise Pygmalion effect – e.g. blind marking

Develop Critical and post-race pedagogy

Avoid negative labelling

Ultimately our conception of humanity and worth will impact how we respond to the

issue of BME attainment.

16

"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)

Some questions

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.