There has been an increased attention being been paid to the racial inequalities embedded in UK higher education. Reading the wide range of resources—from academic studies like Rhianna Garrett’s “Racism Shapes Careers”, to critiques of institutional diversity like the Telegraph’s video on Advance HE reveals the complex and insdieious ways in which racism continues to shape not only who enters academia, but who thrives within it. Viewed through an anti-racist lens, these resources point to a pressing need for structural transformation rather than surface-level inclusion. Namely what feels like a tick box exercise without confronting the actual issues on the ground.
Garrett’s research foregrounds the lived experiences of racialised minority PhD students in the UK, demonstrating that career progression is not simply a matter of merit, but is deeply affected by race, class, gender, and institutional culture. The “leaky pipeline” metaphor—where BAME students drop out of the academic career path at each stage , reveals that barriers are not accidental but systemic. Black students are less likely to access prestigious institutions that feed into doctoral study, and once in academia, they often face microaggressions, exclusion, and pressure to conform to white, middle-class norms of professionalism. I feel this also applies to those deemed minorities within the structures of academia. Alongside this those educators who also are based in industry face a double whammy trying to survive a system already systemic racist and underrepresented with an academic structure that doesn’t take into account the social economic needs of these individuals. The video of Channel 4. (2020) The School That Tried to End Racism really speak volumes of this stratus.
Through the lens of anti-racism, this isn’t just about individual unfairness—it’s about recognising whiteness as an institutional norm that dictates who belongs and who does not. Concepts like the “whitening of neurodiversity” show how even inclusion efforts can marginalise if they’re not intersectional. Anti-racism demands that we challenge these underlying structures of power and visibility, rather than merely increasing the number of racialised individuals in the room.
This is where resources like the Telegraph’s video become revealing. While framed as an exposé of Advance HE’s “woke agenda,” the piece fails to engage critically with the data or lived realities of marginalised students and staff. Instead, it reaffirms the authority of white, elite voices to define what counts as “excellence” and what is dismissed as ideological. From an anti-racist perspective, this is a reminder that resistance to diversity is often disguised as concern for standards. But equity is not the enemy of excellence—it is its precondition.
True anti-racism in higher education means moving beyond optical diversity and confronting the cultural, historical, and structural foundations that uphold racial inequality. It means listening to racialised students and staff not as a token gesture, but as co-creators of knowledge. It also means rethinking how we understand merit, success, and professionalism—terms often rooted in white, colonial legacies.
As educators, researchers, and students, we must ask: Who gets to imagine themselves in academia? Who is included in our syllabi, our classrooms, and our decision-making? And most importantly, what do we do when the answer reveals uncomfortable truths?
My role at UAL is that we are often involved in planning and teaching. At times there feels not enough time to explain these issues as an individual balancing these issues whether they are in the classroom or the office. The social economic consequences of being a person of colour in an industry where there is a glass ceiling and the day to day realities of life paying bills etc take precedent and at the same time knowing the inequalities present.
For some it may seem like I am doing well but when I look at the litmus test of my colleagues and the opportunities bestowed upon them its very had to ignore the system at play.
How do we also educated our students to try and overcome these hurdles if at all. When I started in the industry I was one of two people of colour in the field today there are more of us, when I look at the cohorts especially on the undergraduate side it feels more inclusive and I find myself playing the role of an “Uncle” or as they say “Unc” trying to guide these young people and opening up opportunities. Maybe it is here that Asia Sadiq’s approach can be the way forward . We can adapt teaching styles to look and helps those from diverse backgrounds. We can look at broader perspectives to include diverse voices and experiences.
Only by grappling with these questions honestly—and resisting the urge to retreat into defensiveness—can UK academia become a truly inclusive and anti-racist space.
Reflecting on Alice Bradbury’s article in “Race Ethnicity and Education” one of the key takeaways the effect of EAL speakers and the constructs in place that disadvantage these students especially on the criteria used. My personal teaching advocates spending time and listening, building confidence in my students to use their mother languages to express what they want to achieve and expressing my confidence in them rather than a system where they feel they are not valued. It is about taking the time and effort even against policies in place that don’t give the students confidence because the pressures placed on staff especially in regards to contact hours, the powers that be can point to language classes but realistically is that the only solution.
