Appendix 2: Green Templeton Equality Action Agenda for Black Lives

Equal representation, progression and success for members of the GTC community.

v 0.3 18th November 2020

 

Approving authority:  GTC Governing Body

Responsible office:  TBD

Effective date:  1st January 2021

Next (annual) review:  November 2021

 

Contacts

• Neo Tapela, Chair, neo.tapela@bdi.ox.ac.uk
• Susan James Relly, Governing Body representative,  susan.jamesrelly@education.ox.ac.uk

I. Introduction

A foundational value at Green Templeton College (GTC) is “inclusion of all, regardless of gender, sexual identity, race, ethnicity or class.” Similarly, all institutions of higher education in the United Kingdom, as bastions of education and learning, are increasingly confronting the injustices that have and continue to affect Black people within their institutions and more widely. These injustices have been longstanding but laid bare this year, with the evident disparities in Covid-19 outcomes and the brutal murder of George Floyd on May 25th 2020. This  moment has  demanded  that  universities  and colleges  do  more  than  make  supportive statements about racial equality and instead take concrete actions to combat racism, particularly at the systemic level.

This Action Agenda outlines GTCs commitment to implement change over the next five years, with the overarching goal of minimizing disadvantages suffered by Black members of the GTC community, and achieving more equal representation, wellbeing, progression and success for them. The proposed actions will be embedded in GTC’s next Strategy, which is currently under development and anticipated to be finalized in 2021.

This Action Agenda was developed by the Black Lives Taskforce established in July 2020 (see Annex 2 for details). It was informed by review of available reports and policies, and consultations with members of the GTC community – including an open forum held on June 19th 2020. This Action Agenda is underpinned by the UK’s Equality Act of 2010, the University of Oxford’s code of practice on harassment, the University’s 2018

Race Equality Charter application, the University’s 2018-2023 Strategic Plan (which includes commitment to reduce unexplained gaps in attainment by gender, ethnic origin and socioeconomic background by 2030), and the College Equality Policy and Race Equality statement. The Action Agenda was developed recognizing, and with the intention of complementing, existing initiatives at the College and the University that more broadly promote Equality and Diversity.

II. Race and Ethnic Inequalities at Oxford

While data specific to the GTC community that are disaggregated by ethnicity are limited, there is evidence of racial disparities at the University of Oxford and that Black members of the community face greater disadvantage than other racial and ethnic minority groups (see below). As such the College seeks to take steps to better reflect inclusion and specifically address inequalities affecting Black students, staff and fellows.

The  2011 Census data showed that England and Wales’ population of 56.1 million people was comprised of the following ethnic groups: 86.0% White, 7.5% Asian, 3.3% Black, 2.2% Mixed and 1.0% Other. This ethnicity/racial group distribution is not proportionately reflected in figures describing employment, achievement of positive health outcomes, education attainment and other areas influencing life and wellbeing. With respect to higher education, only 6% of Black school leavers attended a Russell Group university, compared with 12% of Asian school leavers and 11% of White school leavers (Equality and human rights commission race report –  2016). The Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) revealed that out of the 535 staff employed as “managers, directors or senior officials” across British universities in 2018-19: 475 identified as White, 15 as Asian, 5 Mixed (1%) or 5 Other ethnicity, and none as Black (ethnicity was unknown for 35). Race disparities are apparent in national data and suggest that Black people are at a greater disadvantage in higher education than other minority ethnic groups.

Figures at the University of Oxford align with these national data. Some examples are provided below, derived from compiled analyses included in the University’s 2018 Race Equality Charter (REC) application (see Annex for relevant Tables and Figures), the University’s  Access and Participation Plan 2020/1 – 2024/5  and the University’s 2018/19 Race Equality Report.

The 2018/19 Race Equality Report states that 14% of Oxford staff during the reporting period belonged to Black, Asian of Minority ethnic (BAME) group. This reflected a 1% increase from the previous year, although the percentage of unknown ethnicity also rose from 11% to 13%. The rate of unknown ethnicity among academic and research staff was double the national average (comparison with unknown ethnicity proportion in HESA Staff Record 2018/19). Examples of inequalities identified that relate to staff are:

• BAME groups are underrepresented in academic and professional staff positions at Oxford, as well as in senior roles. UK in-post staff during the reporting period were 1% Black, 1% Chinese, 4% non-Chinese Asian, < 1% Arab, 2% Mixed. EU and international in-post staff were 2% Black, 9% Chinese, 9% non- Chinese Asian, 1% Arab, 3% Mixed. BAME make up 6% of professors and senior management position holders at Oxford, which is slightly lower than the Russell group average of 8% and the rest of UK higher education sector average of 9% (HESA Staff Record, 2018/19).
• There are inequalities along the staff recruitment process, most notably at shortlisting stage. While UK BAME made up 15% of individuals who applied for academic staff positions, they made up 8% of those who were shortlisted, and 7% who accepted the offer. These figures for UK Whites were 80% applied, 87% shortlisted, 87% shortlisted. These inequalities in recruitment by ethnic group, and notable drop off at shortlisting stage for BAME applicants were also evident (although less pronounced) for non-UK BAME applicants for academic staff positions, and for UK and non-UK applicants for research and professional staff positions.

The University’s Access and Participation Plan 2020/21 – 2024/25 reports that currently BAME students make up 18% of the student body at Oxford (18%). There has been steady growth in this figure over the past five years, and indication that Oxford’s intake of BAME students is aligned with the proportions of ethnic groups in the 18-25 year old UK population as a whole. Approximately 8% of the total student intake is Asian students, 2.6% Black students and 6% of Mixed ethnicity. At GTC, which is a post-graduate college with notable international recruitment, 45% of students belong to BAME groups (out of which 16% were non- Chinese Asian, 11% Chinese, 7.6% Black and 8% Mixed).* Equality data specific to GTC students are lacking (hence data development is among the recommended actions). Examples of inequalities that relate to students, identified based on analysis of pooled University data, are:

• Attainment inequalities are evident, with lower rates observed in students belonging to BAME groups. General student attainment at Oxford was very high in 2018/19: 94% of undergraduate students gained a first or upper second degree, and 99% of taught post-graduate students passed their degree). However, in the case of undergraduate as well as post-graduate (taught) students, BAME students were less likely to obtain a first-class award than their White contemporaries.

• Attainment gaps were higher for students who are Black compared to those belonging to other ethnic minority groups. In 2018, the undergraduate attainment gap was 12% for Black students (5 year average), which was smaller than that for the sector as a whole (24%). Similarly, the gap of 6% for Asian students was smaller than that for the sector as a whole (11%). The largest absolute gap applied to Black male students, and after controlling for structural factors (including prior attainment, school-type and performance, POLAR3, ACORN, and care leavers), there remained a significant unexplained gap.

*GTC Equality Report 2019

III. Guiding Principles

This action agenda embraces the following principles, adapted from the Race Equality Charter** overseen by

AdvanceHE, until GTC develops its own:

1. Racial inequalities are a significant issue within higher education. UK higher education cannot reach its full potential unless it can benefit from the talents of the whole population and until individuals from all ethnic backgrounds can benefit equally from the opportunities it afford
2. Solutions to racial inequalities should seek to achieve long-term institutional culture change, avoiding a deficit model where solutions are aimed at changing the individu Institutional change requires time and resources, and senior ownership within organisations.
3. Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) staff and students are not a homogenous group. People from different ethnic backgrounds have different experiences of, and outcomes within, higher educatio This heterogeneity and complexity needs to be considered when analysing data and developing actions.
4. All individuals have multiple identities, and the intersection of those different identities should be considered wherever possib
5. Black students and staff in higher education are disproportionately affected in several respects (as evidenced in section II), hence the focus of this action agenda is anti-Black racism and discrimination. That said, it is recognized that other ethnic minority groups face similar disadvantage and the intention of the actions being recommended to address anti-Black racism will serve as a platform to build on and advance racial equality more broadly.

** More information on the Race Equality Charter is available here.

IV. Recommended Actions

Table 1 lists the ten priority actions recommended. In identifying these actions, the taskforce considered:

• The need to confront racism at all levels which it operates (individual behaviour, cultural/collective behaviour, and institutional structures), with an emphasis on targeting institutional/structural racism to enable sustained, long-term change.
• Inclusion of inputs from Black members of the community in action agenda development. This was achieved through the membership of the taskforce, weighting of prioritisation inputs, and invitation of members of the community to participate in prioritisation through a brief anonymous online survey.
• Strategies that would facilitate successful implementation of the action agenda. These included inviting taskforce members who were representatives of key decision-making structures at GTC and who would serve as advocates for implementation (e.g. GCR and GB representatives). It also included building in actions to ensure high level ownership and identifying metrics that reflect meaningful outcomes, in addition to process measures (e.g. reflect lasting changes in structures, and observed increases in the number of Black students).

The recommended actions are listed in order of priority in Table 1, and detailed further below (details are organized along strategic objectives and include measures of success).

Table 1. Ten recommended actions to counter anti-Black racism and promote equality at GTC (ordered by priority level)