Students at UK universities are less likely to get a top degree – a first or 2:1 – if they are from an ethnic minority.
This is known as the race or ethnicity award gap. It is measured by comparing the proportion of white undergraduates who recieve a top degree with the proportion of students of colour who do so. In 2023, the gap stood at 12.3%.
However, this gap varies for UK students from different minority ethnic communities. In 2023 there was a 19.3% difference between the number of white and Black students receiving a first or 2:1.
Universities have been taking measures to address this gap. But my research shows that they have been looking at the problem in the wrong way.
Current university responses to the race award gap are driven by an assumption that the issue lies in the curriculum. The presumption is that because the knowledge students need to acquire at university is based on a largely white and Eurocentric body of literature or tradition of learning, this favours students from these backgrounds.
As a result, many universities have attempted to address this by decolonising their curricula: introducing literature and viewpoints from scholars of colour and involving their student body in developing how courses are taught.
Research on the impact of these curriculum-based initiatives has shown that they improve the general learning experiences of university students. But they have had little or no effect in reducing the race award gap.
In 2021, I undertook one of the first research projects specifically on race and assessment in higher education.
My new book on this research work shows that we have been looking in the wrong place for solutions. Instead, universities need to address the racial barriers that exist in how student knowledge and understanding is assessed in higher education.
Ideal students
I found that existing university assessment and the practice and policy around assessment is all framed around an imagined “ideal student”. This is a student who, for example, can attend all lectures and seminars and understands the jargon-heavy language used in guides to assessments. They feel safe and that they belong at university, and have family and friends who can support them with coursework.
When we look at which students are most likely to fit this profile, we find that they are usually white, middle class, able-bodied and neurotypical.
Students of colour are comparatively less likely to be able to afford to live on campus, meaning that they are more likely to be commuter students. They are also statistically more likely to need to find paid employment to support their studies and to have family or caring responsibilities. They are more likely to be the first in their family to go to university, and are more likely to be from poorer households.
The consequence for students who fall outside of the ideal student frame is that they usually have to work much harder for the same results.
Missing knowledge
My research found that students of colour are less likely to arrive at university with a clear understanding of when to start working on their assignments, what their assessments were asking them to do, what was expected in their assignments and how to do them, and finally, the differences between a stronger and weaker piece of work and why.
I also found that existing teaching on how to write an essay or carry out coursework, for instance, often failed to teach students of colour these hidden lessons for success. This leaves students to learn through a costly process of trial and error.
In response to these student needs and the gaps in existing in assessment practice, I developed the Racially Inclusive Practice in Assessment Guidance Intervention – a collection of teaching resources, training and workshops to help frontline lecturing staff provide this specific assessment support in their practice.
I trialled the resource on a sample of 175 students across three UK universities in 2022. The results show that this is the first intervention to date to directly and measurably reduce the race award gap across multiple higher education providers.
In 83% of the course modules where the lecturer had made use of the resource, the reported award gap was lower than the 8.8% national average that year, and also lower than the average award gap at the university where the module was taught. The gap was also lower than it had been for the same modules in the previous two years.
The resource also improved the assessment experiences of students from all backgrounds. It significantly reduced exam anxiety – a key contributor to mental ill health. The Racially Inclusive Practice in Assessment Guidance Intervention is now being used, and changing assessment practice, at Loughborough, Leeds Trinity, University of South Wales, Manchester Metropolitan, University of Manchester, University of Winchester, London School of Economics, Wolverhampton and Birmingham City University.
It would be wrong to think that this tool alone will eliminate the race award gap fully. It is also caused by factors that exist outside of assessment practice.
However, it is clear that changing assessment goes a significant way towards making university degree results more indicative of a student’s talent, skill and ambition, and not their racial background.
