Dr Janet Ramdeo

Six Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) students currently on a Primary Graduate Teacher Training (GTP) training route were interviewed to examine their notions of 'difference'.  The modes identified by Brah (1996) to define 'difference' are used as the basis of the semi-structured interviews to produce narrative constructs.  The findings reveal a set of common themes which underpin the narratives and provide evidence for the need to address challenges face by, not only BME students on the training course, but pupils who experience a sense of 'difference' within schools. This pilot study focusses on ethnicity, although disability is also referred to.  

This paper investigated Chinese teachers' professional development in an experiential learning programme situated in a cross-cultural context and focused particularly on the role of teacher agency in the learning and localisation of foreign pedagogies. Analysis of interviews and classroom observations revealed the influence of experiential learning on deepening participants’ understanding of foreign experiences. It also highlighted the role of teachers as active agents in recontextualising overseas pedagogical practices in China, either by showing ambivalence towards changes or by developing transcultural pedagogies. The construction of their agency was related to their previous teaching experiences and learning of international perspectives on pedagogy.

Who is best placed to research the lived experiences of Black women educators? The intricacies of researchers being ‘matched’ racially and/or ethnically and by gender, and the precariousness of assumed insider/outsider positionality when approaching potential research participants from Black communities gave me cause for thought and self-reflexivity through my research journey as a racialised researcher.  In the epistemological, methodological and political decisions entwined in interracial research, the location of power and the role of knowledge holders and constructors requires delicate navigation through the researcher/researched relational quagmire. My initial oversimplified and misplaced perceptions of insiderness, as a female racially minoritised educator, created a presumed ease of access to Black women educators as research participants and resulted in me being asked, “Why are YOU researching US?”.  Self-reflexivity, involving both self-monitoring and self-knowledge, therefore played a central role in considering the impact of multiple statuses, or ‘status sets’, on the methodological processes, how Black women educators were represented and who created knowledge about them for public consumption. Examining my researcher identity through a self-reflexive mirror repositioned me in the research process, reconstructed my researcher self-knowledge and enhanced my commitment to produce research outcomes which act to challenge normative stereotyped perspectives of Black women.  

In 2020, Dr Addy Adeleine and nine other Black academics, researchers, community representatives and professionals involved in research wrote an open letter to UKRI to highlight the inequalities in the award of £4.3 million to explore Covid-19 and its disproportionate impact on Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic communities.  They noted that none of the funding was awarded to Black academic leads but that one member of the awards assessment panel was co-investigator on three of the six successfully awarded studies. They raised in their letter the apparent lack of critical reflection on the inherent systems, processes and power imbalances and questioned the balance of panelists who have specific specialism and training in race, ethnicity and inequality as an independent field of inquiry.  They further noted concerns presented by Black individuals, many of whom have repeatedly expressed a desire to challenge and study the impact of systemic and structural racism but are invisible when appropriate research funding is awarded.  In this situation, questions arise about who was gatekeeping the qualifications, backgrounds and particularly the positionality of the academic leads awarded this funding. Why did the awarding panel neglect to consider that “members of affected communities should be leaders in the response and not just be supportive voices within the research framework”?  What made the successfully awarded academic leads most suited to explore the experiences of racially minoritised communities when Black academic leads were bypassed?

Gatekeeping in social science research is often associated with access to participants, particularly vulnerable, marginalised or minoritised communities, for data collection purposes (Aaltonen and Kivijärvi, 2019; Emmel et al, 2007; Singh and Wassenaar, 2016).  However, this paper raises the question of whether there should also be gatekeepers from conception to dissemination that ensure that researchers consider and articulate the researcher/researched power dynamics and ‘who they are’ in the research process involving these communities, particularly when there is not a match between the researcher and researched.  The ethical approval process will generally require researchers to consider power imbalances and whilst some ethnographic researchers explicitly express their positionality in the dissemination of their research, this is not consistent and the depth of reflexivity varies.  More problematic is the broader issue of who is being afforded the opportunities to conducted funded research with minoritised communities without gatekeeping whether they are justifying ‘who they are’ and what makes them the most appropriate researchers to conduct this research, as highlighted by the open letter to UKRI. 

In research that specifically involves racially minoritised communities, locating the researcher in areas related to social and political contexts of the research and the researched group, including the impact of ‘race’ and ethnic differences or similarities, and researcher ontological and epistemological beliefs which influence their research are particularly pertinent.  Researcher positionality “reflects the position that the researcher has chosen to adopt within a given research study” (Savin-Baden and Major, 2013, p. 71), influencing how research is conducted, its outcomes and results.  Holmes (2020) notes that some aspects of positionality are considered fixed, such as social identities (gender, ‘race’/ethnicity, skin-colour, nationality) whilst other aspects are more fluid, subjective and contextual, such as political views and personal life experiences.  Fletcher (2010) notes that the researcher positionality, and specifically researcher biographies related to ‘race’ and/or ethnicity, problematises fieldwork and permeates all stages of the research – from “the questions they ask, to those that are ignored, from problem mutilation to analysis, representation and writing” (2010, p. 2).  Positionality is informed by reflexivity.  Reflexivity is the concept that researchers “should acknowledge and disclose their selves in research, seeking to understand their part in it, or influence on it” (Cohen et al, 2011).  Although much has been written about researcher positionality (Manohar et al, 2017; Milner, 2007, as examples), articulation of a researcher’s position relies on the researcher’s willingness to declare their ontological and epistemological standpoints in relation to the researched group, the importance researchers place on discussing this concept, the openness to be critiqued on researcher/researched differences and power structures which are presented or omitted in research outputs and who, if anyone, is asking them ‘who they are’ in relation to their researched community.  Although positionality statements are increasingly being included in outputs, not all researchers conducting studies with racially minoritised groups explicitly acknowledge their positionality.  Should this be a choice or an expected norm? Who could and should hold researchers accountable for acknowledging and disclosing their selves if the researcher themselves do not?

I am a racially minoritised Early Career Researcher (ECR) but I was not ‘race’ matched to the Black women participants in my own research project.  During the research process and in disseminating my work, I experienced multiple forms of checks and balances through gatekeepers who forced me to robustly articulate my positionality and who I am in the research process, making the researcher biography inescapable.  Was this to authenticate my suitability to carry out research with Black communities in a way that the example of the UKRI failed to do?  This paper presents an autoethnographic perspective of the experiences of being asked four specific questions by a range of stakeholders through the research activity and publication process, acting as gatekeepers about my positionality.  I then raise the question of whether the practice of gatekeeping researcher positionality should be embedded in the research process with racially minoritised participants, from conception to dissemination, and who or what processes could potentially act as these gatekeepers.

References:

Aaltonen, S. and Kivijärvi, A. (2019) Disrupting professional practices with research-driven intervention.  Researcher-gatekeeper negotiations in the context of targeted youth services, Qualitative Social Work, 18(4), pp. 621-637.  DOI: 10.1177/1473325018757080.

Cohan, L., Manion, L. and Morrison, K. R. B. (2011) Research Methods in Education, London: Routledge.

Emmel, N., Hughes, K. and Greenhalgh (2007) Accessing socially excluded people- Trust and the gatekeeper in the researcher-participant relationship, Sociological research online, 12(2) pp. 43-55.  DOI: 10.5253/sro.1512.

Fletcher, T. (2010) “Being inside and outside the field”. An exploration of identity, positionality and reflexivity in inter-racial research, Leisure Identities and Authenticity (LSA Publication), Vol. 107, pp. 1-20.

Holmes, A. G. D. (2020) Researcher Positionality – A Consideration of Its Influence and Place in Qualitative Research – A new Researcher Guide, International Journal of Education, 8(4), pp. 1-10.  DOI: 10.34293/education.v8i4.3232.

Manohar, N., Liamputtong, P., Bhole, S. and Arora, A. (2017) Researcher Positionality in Cross-Cultural and Sensitive Research, Handbook of Research Methods in Health Social Sciences, pp. 1-15.  DOI: 10.1007/978-981-10-2779-6_35-1.

Milner, H. R. (2007) Race, Culture, and Researcher Positionality: Working Through Dangers Seen, Unseen, and Unforseen, Educational Researcher, 36(7), pp. 388-400, DOI: 10.3102/0013189X07309471.

Savin-Baden, M. and Major, C. H. (2013) Qualitative Research: The Essential Guide to Theory and Practice, London: Routledge.

Singh, S. and Wassenaar, D. R. (2016) Contextualising the role of the gatekeeper in social science research, South African Journal of Bioethics and Law, 9(1), pp. 42-46.  DOI: 10.7196/SAJBL.465.

Current research that specifically examines the racialised experiences of Black women school educators in England at different stages of their careers is scarce, creating a vacuum of understanding that can challenge barriers to their recruitment and retention.  This article focusses on how race and gender identities mutually and simultaneously hinder and harm Black women as education professionals and sustains their inferiority in the eyes of whiteness through intersectional invisibility.  Findings are drawn from personal stories of four Black women educators, shared through narrative inquiry methodology to illuminate ways in which androcentric and ethnocentric prototypical social group members maintain dominant power structures and reinforce the subordination of Black women educators as non-prototypical to manifest as experiences of invisibility and harm.  Individual stories illustrate experiences of the invisible/hyper-visible dichotomy impeding career progression, of undertaking invisible work, of assumptions about their legitimacy in school spaces and of wellbeing concerns.  From the standpoint of intersectionality’s ability to create critical citizenry, this article raises awareness of the need for action by senior leaders in English schools and beyond, to challenge and eliminate the intersectional invisibility experienced by their Black women staff.  Conclusions signpost to actions that can shape localised policy and practices to improve Black women educators’ experiences.  As Black women educators contribute to the success of underrepresented learner groups, there are significant institutional benefits to reducing Black women educator attrition, increasing representation at all levels and improving their wellbeing.

Educational research examining the lived experiences and the value of Black women teachers within the teaching workforce in England has remained under-explored.  Tereshchenko et al. (2020) acknowledges that “research has not attended to the impact of nuanced inequalities that matter in the professional lives of teachers from different ethnic subgroups” (2020, p. 22).  Further, Bradbury et al. (2022) state “there is a lack of research which examines the experiences of women of colour in teaching” (2022, p. 4).  The ways in which Black women teachers in England experience their school workplaces as racialised spaces tend to be embedded and essentialised within broader conversations about a much wider aggregated demographic of ‘minority teachers’ or ‘BAME (Black Asian and Minority Ethnic) teachers’ and is often highlighting their oppression.  Addressing the research vacuum specifically involving Black women teachers, beyond the leadership lens, this paper provides a platform for 10 participants at various stages of their careers to voice their racialised and gendered intersectional experiences of working in English schools.  Moreover, rather than contributing to existing discourses on oppression and subjugation, its focus turns to positive counter-narratives of Black women teachers and the benefits of their presence in school spaces.  It utilises the little used consciousness of Black feminist thought framework (Collins, 2000) to create counter-narratives of success, activism, and navigational capital (Yosso, 2005) to challenge dominant normative stereotyped views of Black women at work, which is rarely found in literature. This paper, therefore, adds to the discourse of Black feminist literature and provides an England-wide positive perspective of Black women teachers, which is scarce.  

To answer the research question, ‘How do Black women teachers successfully navigate and operate in white-dominated educational workspaces?’, this paper presents the outcomes of interviews with 10 Black women teachers to understand how they challenge normative assumptions of stereotypes or controlling images (Collins, 2000) and oppression to form professional identities grounded in agency, resistance, and commitment to enhancing social justice within their school workplaces.  Counter-narratives were produced by examining their personal stories through the four lenses of consciousness of Black feminist thought (Collins, 2000), as a mechanism to challenge and reconstruct prevailing stereotypes placed on Black womanhood.  Through the four lenses of self-definition, self-valuation, self-reliance, and self-knowledge, thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2012) illuminated stories which revealed how Black women teachers engaged in activities of personal empowerment, despite facing racialised oppression and appropriated stereotyping within their schools. Inductively emerged themes illustrate examples of research participants championing their own skills, qualifications and abilities, their commitment to young people’s education and the teaching profession, utilising their agency for positive change, and resisting the practices of normative group members which maintain Black women teachers’ subordination.

Black feminist research recognises the importance of enabling participants to share their stories to create counter-narratives.  Hence, narrative inquiry methodology was utilised, which centralised the lived experiences of those who chose to participate in this research. Narrative inquiry allows storied lives, which frame lived experiences, to act as windows to comprehend individual’s social realities (O’Toole, 2018).  Recruited through mutually known contacts who acted as trusted gatekeepers, the participants met the criteria of defining as ‘Black or Black British’, ‘female’, ‘qualified as a teacher’ and ‘working in a predominantly white school staff demographic’.  Personal stories were collected through unstructured interviews to provide participants freedom to narrate their experiences how they wished to. Further, Osler (1997) notes, interviews enabling Black women to share their personal stories can be painful as they recall incidents of perceived oppression.  Therefore, participants’ vulnerabilities were considered in the university's ethical approval process to mitigate any emotional harm and possible adverse effects of researcher/researched power dynamics.  Each interview was audio recorded and transcribed creating a rich and powerful dataset.  To build trusting relationships, researcher positionality was also considered in depth, with assumed insider/outsider researcher positions interrogated, particularly as the researcher is not ‘race’ matched (Vass, 2017). 

As Black women teachers can contribute to the success of underrepresented learner groups, there are significant institutional implications and benefits to increasing their representation at all levels and recognising their value as staff members beyond stereotyped roles supporting behaviour and Black History Month (Haque and Elliot, 2017).  Recruitment and retention could potentially improve with narratives which demonstrate how Black women teachers can thrive and be agents of change for social justice.  Reverse mentoring schemes can develop school leaders’ racial literacy to drive for structural and cultural changes to create more inclusive workplaces which acknowledge the value of Black women teachers.  

References (required)

Bradbury, A., Tereshchenko, A., and Mills, M. (2022) Minoritised teachers’ experiences of multiple, intersectional racisms in the school system in England: ‘carrying the weight of racism’, Race, Ethnicity and Education. DOI: 10.1080/13613324.2022.2069734

Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2012) Thematic Analysis, in: Cooper H., Camic, P. Sher, K., Panter, A.T., Long, D and Rindskopf, D. (eds.) APA Handbook of Research Methods in Psychology. Vol. 2 Research Designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological.  Washington D.C.: American Psychological Association, pp. 57-71.

Collins, P.H. (2000) Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment. London: Routledge. 

Haque, Z. and Elliot, S. (2017) Visible and Invisible Barriers: The Impact of Racism on BME Teachers. Available from: https://neu.org.uk/media/2936/view [Accessed 6 October 2018].

Osler, A. (1997) The education and careers of black teachers: changing identities, changing lives. Buckingham: Open University Press.

O’Toole, J. (2018) Institutional storytelling and personal narratives: reflecting on the ‘value’ of narrative inquiry, Irish Educational Studies, 37(2), pp. 175–189.  DOI: 10.1080/03323315.2018.1465839.

Tereshchenko, A., Mills, M., and Bradbury, A. (2020) Making progress? Employment and retention of BAME teachers in England.  London: UCL Institute of Education

Vass, G. (2017) Getting inside the insider researcher: does race-symmetry help or hinder research? International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 40(2), pp. 137-153.  DOI: 10.1080/1743727X.2015.1063045.

Yosso, T. J. (2005) Whose culture has capital?  A critical race theory discussion of community cultural wealth, Race, Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), pp. 69-91.  DOI: 10.1080/1361332052000341006.

Research on Black women teachers is overwhelmingly negative, focussing on their oppressive experiences and how white gaze (Good, 2000, p. 105) appropriates a range of unhelpful and damaging stereotypes upon them.  There is a palpable vacuum of knowledge and discussion of alternative perceptions of these women in school spaces.  This talk provides counter-narratives to challenge the prevailing stereotypes of Black women teachers in England that enable us to re-imagine their place and value in education.  Through the lens of Crenshaw’s (1991) representational intersectionality (one of three dimensions of her intersectional analytical framework) and Collins’ (2000) consciousness of Black feminist thought, this talk presents the findings of research with ten Black women teachers to illuminate and share their experiences of resistance and courage that reframes the negative stereotyping grand narrative on Black women, specifically in schools. 

Whilst there are a number of studies that examine the experiences of Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic school leaders in England, less is known specifically about the gendered and racial intersectional experiences of Black female teachers as they navigate white-dominated educational workspaces. This study illuminates the experiences of ten Black female teachers at different stages of their careers through the lens of Crenshaw’s (1991) representational intersectionality (one of three dimensions of her intersectional analytical framework) to understand how “white gaze” (Good, 2000:105), where white perceptions persistently stereotype Black women through controlling images (Collins, 2000) to objectify and dehumanise them, positions Black female teachers in racialised school spaces. Using narrative inquiry, a semi-structured interview approach was used to elicit accounts from the participants about their experiences of the role of ‘race’ and racism and the impact of whiteness through white gaze in a range of state-funded schools across England.  Thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2012) was undertaken deductively to draw out gendered and racial intersectional experiences of stereotyping and negative representation of Black female teachers to accumulate knowledge from the richness of individual narratives. Findings show that seven out of the ten participants had experienced explicit stereotyping of their identities against four specific controlling images of ‘Mammy’, ‘Mule’, ‘Crazy Black Bitch’ (Reynolds-Dobbs et al., 2008:130) and ‘Jezebel’. All participants spoke of issues of under-representation in their school environments and intersectional stereotyping of their abilities, which acted as barriers to their career progression at all levels and resulted in being allocated specific roles and responsibilities, such as managing behaviour, that are not always valued when applying for promotional positions. Despite demonstrating resistance and resilience, these experiences also potentially take an emotion toll that affects their health and wellbeing. This study provides a rationale for school leaders to drive for inclusive cultural change. 

References:

Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2012) Thematic Analysis, in: Cooper H., Camic, P. Sher, K., Panter, A.T., Long, D and Rindskopf, D. (eds.) APA Handbook of Research Methods in Psychology. Vol. 2 Research Designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological. Washington D.C.: American Psychological Association, pp. 57-71.

Collins, P.H. (2000) Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment. London: Routledge. 

Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241–1299. https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039

Good, R. (2000) Chapter Six - The Blues: Breaking the Psychological Chains of Controlling Images, Counterpoints, Vol 73 (Dismantling White Privilege: Pedagogy, Politics and Whiteness), pp. 103-126.  Available from: https://www.jstor.org/stable/42976124.

Reynolds-Dobbs, W., Thomas, K. M. and Harrison, M. S. (2008) From Mammy to Superwoman: Images That Hinder Black Women’s Career Development, Journal of Career Development, 35(2), pp. 129-150. DOI: 10.1177/0894845308325645.

As societies continue to respond to the grand challenges of our time, so too must Higher Education. This book explores what innovation and change could look like within Higher Education, and what could be done to facilitate it. Inspire: Learning for Teaching in Higher Education considers the grand pedagogic challenges facing the Higher Education sector, captured through a series of detailed dialogues and debates between disciplinary colleagues. Reflecting on forward-looking frameworks and exploring how they may be facilitated, each co-authored chapter platforms insights from educational experts. The focus of this book is on action, seeking to inspire those teaching, facilitating, and leading in Higher Education to bring conceptual understanding to actuality.

The terminology of “Decolonising the curriculum” has come to the fore in Higher Education over the last decade. Crests of enthusiasm and dissent waves (Abu Moghli & Kadiwal 2021; Moosavi 2023; Táíwò 2022) have exposed faults in our understanding of what and how we learn.  Movements such as #RhodesMustFall in South Africa and #WhyIsMyProfessorWhite in the UK platformed the conversation for the need for decolonial practices to drive higher education diversification.  Woldegiorgis (2021) considers how Ethiopia, where political colonisation did not define geographical boundaries, could ‘Decolonise a higher education system which has never been colonised’, possibly resonating with the UK context. Other scholars (McKay 2018; Arday, Belluigi & Thomas 2021; Shay 2016) discuss how colonial practices permeated political spaces and examine how HE could support a richer and humanised experience for students and staff. The complexity of what has been colonised and how detangling epistemological and psychosocial colonial structures can be valuable is still contested.  In which case, what does decolonisation really mean for UK higher education? 

Whilst many universities have made (valiant) attempts to ‘decolonise’ their practices, do we need a clear and unified understanding of what this is or should be for the UK context? What value will a unified definition have (hermeneutic, analytical, ethical, tactical, communicative language)? Can we have one of the above without the others? (e.g., can it still be a useful “rallying flag” for disparate anti-colonial/anti-imperialist groups, even if it lacks analytical clarity?). 

Furthermore, we can interrogate the extent to which context matters as we have varying opinions from Hong Kong on the one hand to Canada/Australia and the Caribbean or African countries. Whose voices are we drawing upon to build our decolonial actions and to what extent could they or should they replicate the actions of those systems that faced colonial interference in society, including education? 

Is decolonisation even possible in a colonial society? Are there any examples of decolonisation effectively taking place, given the continual morphing of its use, with extensions to include wider groups with protected characteristics? Will its roots, and therefore its original necessity, become invisible? 

We need to ask ourselves some deep questions that are uncomfortable to avoid decolonising higher education being a superficial and performative strategy that gets sidelined and buried in broader EDI conversations and initiatives. Discomfort creates the momentum to disrupt and develop space for change. The killing of George Floyd in 2020 provides evidence for this.  Being uncomfortable is necessary in building understanding and change in the shadow of whiteness that pervades UK higher education. 

Drawing on all three themes of this conference, we aim to critique the past musings on decolonisation in the UK, to consider if we have even got the definition correct.  We then present provocations related to the context today to challenge our thinking and understanding of decolonization in higher education in the UK. Finally, we invite you to consider what decolonisation means for your own contexts in the light of the discussions raised by this session. 

Abu Moghli, M. & Kadiwal, L., 2021. Decolonising the curriculum beyond the surge: Conceptualisation, positionality and conduct. London Review of Education, 19(1), pp.1-16.

Arday, J., Zoe Belluigi, D. & Thomas, D., 2021. Attempting to break the chain: Reimaging inclusive pedagogy and decolonising the curriculum within the academy. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 53(3), pp.298-313.

Hoadley, U. & Galant, J., 2019. What counts and who belongs? Current debates in decolonising the curriculum. Decolonisation in universities. The politics of knowledge, pp.100-114.

Shifting the Lenses: Multilanguaging, Decolonisation and Education in the Global South, edited by Leketi Makalela. International Journal of Educational Development in Africa, 4, pp.5-pages.

Moosavi, L. (2023). Turning the Decolonial Gaze towards Ourselves: Decolonising the Curriculum and 'Decolonial Reflexivity' in Sociology and Social Theory. Sociology-The Journal of The British Sociological Association, 57(1), 137-156. doi:10.1177/00380385221096037.

Shay, S., 2016. Decolonising the curriculum: It’s time for a strategy. The Conversation, 13.

Táíwò, O., 2022. Against decolonisation: Taking African agency seriously. Hurst Publishers.

Woldegiorgis, E.T. (2021) Decolonising a higher education system which has never been colonised, Educational Philosophy and Theory, 53(9), 894-906.