Repairing the Curriculum

Page content

Repairing the Curriculum: Anti-Racism and Pedagogical Change

Updated 22 July 2021

How do we build concrete institutional change and embed anti-racism into Learning and Teaching at Central?

Accordion

  • Rationale

    Since Dear White Central and the Halpin Review, institutional progress has been made in two main areas: creation of an Equality Diversity & Inclusivity (EDI) framework with targets (Inclusion Committee, Diversity and Inclusion Committee, Access and Participation Plan) and an infrastructure for EDI training. These areas represent positive changes. The EDI framework, targets, and monitoring gather together all the important inclusion activities taking place across the institution. The training infrastructure importantly embeds our values for all staff.

    However, there are three limitations to the current approach:

    • Committees, monitoring, and training, structurally, operate on a principle of harm and risk reduction (see Ahmed 2012) — this must be accompanied by a pro-active approach;
    • The acronym “EDI” risks flattening the very real problems Central faces with systemic, institutional, and overt racism (see Gopal 2019);
    • The current context of COVID-19 exacerbates existing inequalities. Without further shift in action, the minimal progress that APP represents (see below) will be further halted.

    A recent Office for Students webinar on Supporting Black, Asian, and Minority Ethnic (BAME) Scholars during Coronavirus shows the limitations of only using the quantitative/monitoring approach to create change. Sarah Howls, Head of Access and Participation at the OfS, stated that an analysis of all Access and Participation plans for all Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) across the UK found that if 100% of the targets are achieved, there will be only a 50% reduction in the BAME Attainment Gap. While this was presented as success, this mere 50% reduction of what is actually quantitative evidence of sector-wide institutional racism shows the lack of substantive, transformational change in this approach.

    Instead, the quantitative approach must be matched by a qualitative approach aimed at changing perspectives and values on Learning and Teaching. As Mojisola Adebayo argued during a London Theatre Seminar panel on whiteness and theatre, dance and performance studies in the UK in April 2019, what if instead of thinking about it as a BAME “attainment” gap, we were to think about the quantitative discrepancy as a white privilege gap. Such a qualitative shift prompts an attendant consideration of how racism operates in our curriculum — not only in terms of content (simply adding more writers of colour to reading lists is not sufficient without further transformational change) but in terms of approaches to education and training. Where training regimes necessarily rely on uni-directional power structures, how can we ensure that we embed practices of active listening and feedback that ensure our practices are robust, fair and responsive? How do our learning outcomes, expected professional competencies, exercises, techniques, assessments, course materials, production choices, and yes, reading lists, perpetuate racism on an overt level? In other words, because Central admits its complicity in systemic racism, we must change our systems of Learning and Teaching.

  • Principles

    This project operates from the following principles:

    • Reparation: the current crisis demands proactive change to repair historical wrongs;
    • Dialogism: transformational change is only possible through dialogue — like all pedagogical change, direct engagement with students must drive the project;
    • Communication: the commitment to transformative change must be public, announced both internally and externally. Although we be clear this is always an ongoing process, a timescale should be announced (see below).
    • Oversight: the project will have a steering committee formed of industry professionals, academics, and alumni of colour both in the UK sector and globally who will be remunerated for their contribution;
    • Complementary: qualitative understanding of problems and recommendations for transformational change to Learning and Teaching should be complementary to existing strategies of monitoring and training. Furthermore, pedagogical reflection and transformation should not supersede ongoing processes of student support, training, and complaints and investigation.
  • Work Plan

    N.B. The following is a proposal and will be subject to review and development in consultation with the independent steering committee, staff, and students.

    Phase One: Data Analysis - Complete

    Objective: Produce a clear map of the distribution of Central’s institutional racism on a pedagogical level, supported by historical and newly gathered data.

    Tasks:

    • Review of pedagogic issues raised in current social media complaints and via direct response through Central inbox;
    • Review of historical complaints;
    • Review of course meetings with Dean of School/Head of Student
    • Experience/Director of Learning and Teaching identifying areas of problems;
    • Data input and analysis.

    Timescale: 11 June 2020 - 15 July 2020

    Phase Two: Review of Courses

    Objective: Evaluate course content to determine how structural (i.e. learning
    outcomes/competencies, assessment forms) features and content (reading lists, play choices) of courses encourage overt racism. 

    Tasks:

    • Qualitative (thematic) analysis of course specifications, literature, advertising, offer letters;
    • Quantitative analysis of course reading lists, production choices and casting during the 2019-20 academic year;
    • Focus groups with current Black and minority ethnic students on courses (subject to ethics approval);
    • Focus groups with teaching staff.

    Timescale: 16 July 2020 - 30 November 2020

    Phase Three: Report and Recommendations to the Community

    Objective: Produce a full report of review of courses, including recommendations for course redesign. Discussion of recommendations with course teams and agreement of course changes.

    Tasks:

    • Analysis of all data in Phase Two and production of written reports;
    • Discussion of reports and recommendations with independent steering committee;
    • Discussion of reports with students and staff.

    Timescale: 1 December 2020 - 31 January 2021

    Phase Four: Transformative Change

    Objective: Courses are modified, rewritten, or revalidated if necessary.

    Tasks:

    • Course teams, with Learning and Teaching management team, agree upon changes and submit in draft form for further comment;
    • Changes are agreed by LTSE/External Examiners and submitted to Academic Board for Approval.

    Timescale: 1 February 2021 – Term 3 Academic Board 2021

    Review

    The written reports and modifications to courses taken will be published on Central’s website as a public commitment to ongoing change.
    Modifications to courses will be subject to ongoing review via course committee engagement with students and annual monitoring.

    Oversight and Accountability

    The project lead is Dr Broderick D.V. Chow, Deputy Director of Learning and Teaching;
    Progress will be monitored by the School Inclusion Committee and Board of Governors Diversity and Inclusion Committee; 
    The Independent Steering Committee will feed into all phases of the project and will report delays or problems to the committees above.

  • Contact

    Questions and comments can be sent to:

    Dr Broderick D.V. Chow, Deputy Director of Learning and Teaching

    broderick.chow@cssd.ac.uk