UK Universities have committed to rooting out racism — but how do we measure their progress?
Professor David Mba
Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Research, Knowledge Exchange and Enterprise
In 2020, the murder of George Floyd, a Black man, at the hands of a white police officer in the United States, sent ripples of shock, fear and anger around the world. It forced us to confront racism here at home. In 2020, Universities UK commissioned a report that acknowledged British universities perpetuate “institutional racism”.
Higher education has committed to initiatives which address this. Almost three years on, it is right that we reflect on the progress made. Yet without a benchmark, via a consistent methodology or agreed metrics, to measure progress, it is impossible to know how far we have come. We must create a consensus around a more robust way of measuring progress, or progress will not be made.
That is why we have developed the ERI (Ethnic Representation Index), an annual appraisal of progress per institution measured across a number of indicators. Its purpose is to offer transparency and accountability. It is an innovation for sector-wide use and will be made open-access. It is by no means ‘complete’ and should be seen as an ongoing development index.
In particular, the ERI examines proportional representation of Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) staff within academic positions, leadership and governance, the student experience and sense of belonging, regional ethnic social mobility, and strategic initiatives launched by universities to root out racism and to promote inclusion.
Belonging is defined in numerous ways in academic literature. But it is widely agreed that a sense of belonging is critical to academic success and well-being. The ERI has a particular focus on belonging as it relates to ethnic representation at every level of the academic community.
Universities are assigned a RAG tag (red, amber or green) per indicator which visually presents the relativity based on ethnic composition and metric thresholds. For indicators on academic, professorial, executive and governor composition, the RAG flags are presented relative to student composition. There are two tables, representing BAME and Black students and staff for comparison.
The findings show that universities have not gone far enough in rooting out institutional racism. This is complicated by the fact the BAME population of universities is rising year on year. In England, BAME students represent 27.4% of the total, and by 2030 they will represent over 30%.
And while BAME student representation is rising, BAME representation among academic staff and senior leadership has not caught up. This is true even in universities with relatively high BAME populations. Aston University, for instance, has the highest proportion of BAME students (74%). However, only 15% of its professors are BAME.
This problem is even more acute among senior leadership. Of the 58 universities that declared ethnic composition of their executive boards, 59% of them had no BAME representation. This is the case even among universities with relatively high BAME populations. Disappointingly some universities declined to provide data, or only shared partial information.
The ERI is not only about representation. It is about student outcomes too. And the index shows the attainment gap for BAME students (likelihood to receive 2.1 or above) reached 15% or more at more than 25% of universities presented in the index, a problem even worse for Black students. The index reveals no university without an attainment gap, including universities with high BAME student numbers
Two years ago, many universities committed to anti-racism agendas, like decolonisation. These initiatives are to be welcomed. But the ERI shows that, among a number of institutions, their success has been mixed. Some universities have signed up to each anti-racism indicator included in this survey, yet their graduate attainment gap is in the bottom half of poor performance.
There are positive signs. For BAME students, the access gap, ethnic representation among students as a proportion of the local population, has narrowed (though the picture is more mixed for Black students).
Unfortunately, though, there were no universities not to receive a red tag across at least one indicator. No university is without its problems to correct. This may come as a disappointment for some. And it is true the findings are, indeed, a disappointment. Universities still have a long way to go to foster a true sense of belonging and inclusion.
But the purpose of the ERI is not to point fingers. If universities show transparency, including data on new metrics, like ethnic pay gap, we’ll not only make the sector more accountable, but create opportunities to learn from one another and make progress.
This report is a chance to build consensus around a methodology and to invite constructive input. Next year, the ERI will launch in full, with universities ranked by performance. We want to ensure when this happens, the metric is a sector-leading tool for change. We encourage others to join us, and welcome advice on how to improve it.
Racism is a problem woven deep into our society. We, as a society, have made great progress in recent decades. But these initial findings with higher education show we have not gone far enough. We risk letting down a generation of BAME students, whose experiences in higher education will shape their future career prospects and trust in our society. For their sake, we must make swift progress. The hard work must begin now, so that the annual ERI can serve not as a record of our common failure, but of our common endeavour.
Find out more about the Ethnic Representation Index
