Read on Twitter
A short thread. Many institutions adopt an imbalanced or ‘asymmetric’ approach to diversity & inclusion. They focus overwhelmingly, & increasingly, on race/ethnicity, which is often seen as the only relevant variable.
This is entirely understandable given historic injustices but it also comes with costs; we are overlooking other social problems in society. We need to broaden rather than narrow our view.
One of those is white working-class children from disadvantaged backgrounds who are already falling behind their peers at age 5 … less likely to get good GCSEs … and less likely than every other group to make it to university (evidence -> https://bit.ly/3o4INWz ).
This is especially problematic in a society that now really only defines ‘success’ as having a university degree and, whether under Labour or Conservative, has (unlike Germany, Austria, Switzerland, etc.) historically underinvested in vocational and technical routes
Even if these kids do make it to university then around 70% of them go, as I did, to a ‘low-tariff’ university. This is incredibly valuable. But, in a society, where half of kids are going to university it is right to ask how much of an advantage it is ( https://amzn.to/3o3UoVO )
This problem is especially problematic in top-tier or ‘selective’ institutions; while 13% of white Brit boys on free school meals go to higher education (behind only gypsy/Roma), just 2% of white low-income boys go to top universities (data for girls is nearly just as depressing)
One study finds that more than half of England’s universities had fewer than 5% of poor white students in their intakes & said there has been a “perfect storm of inaction”. https://bbc.in/3o2AsTi
Furthermore, only around one in five universities have targets for disadvantaged white students. NEON, a research body, suggests this has fallen in recent years.
Only one in five. If this were true for any other group it would be a national scandal.
Only one in five. If this were true for any other group it would be a national scandal.
So, why is this? Why are our universities not working harder to do more given that we have also never heard more about diversity and inclusion? These are sensitive questions but they are also incredibly important, not least be we are talking about one of the largest groups
It is, obviously, complex. But I do think -my opinion, suggestion, argument- is that it probably has quite a bit to do with the very insular networks within our universities.
And especially our more selective ones
And especially our more selective ones
I suspect this is less of a priority bc many academics come from secure backgrounds, engage in 'assortative mating' (marry ppl like them), 'academic inbreeding' (promote ppl like them) & have at least 1 parent in high ed/public sector
Not all do, of course, but many do.
Not all do, of course, but many do.
These things most likely contribute to the already strong left-wing slant of higher education ( https://bit.ly/37jbIQr ) and general lack of action on this issue. I've not seen many hashtags for these kids. Nor have I seen much lobbying.
It has been said that universities are ‘both pathways & gateways’; they can open doors but also work to make sure that only the right sort of people are pushed forward (good pts on this -> https://bit.ly/3k8ehZi ). Right now, it is my view that we need to open up some more doors.
This is not an attack on academics. It is just to suggest that many networks in higher education -especially top-tier- are incredibly insular if not exclusionary. Social norms work against people talking about this. But should be making a lot more noise about this issue. /end
