Data snapshots of the access and participation of ‘women’ academics in UK universities: Questioning continued gendered, racialised and geopolitical inequalities

Dina Zoe Belluigi, Jason Arday, Joanne O'Keeffe
{"title":"Data snapshots of the access and participation of ‘women’ academics in UK universities: Questioning continued gendered, racialised and geopolitical inequalities","authors":"Dina Zoe Belluigi, Jason Arday, Joanne O'Keeffe","doi":"10.1002/berj.4047","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Replete with espoused discourses of equality, diversity and inclusion within public bodies, is the UK, wherein lauded initiatives reward its universities’ commitments to increasing the access and positioning of ‘women’ in higher education. This paper contributes a critical quantitative analysis of the state of representation and participation of academic staff within these universities generally, and the majority‐female discipline of education particularly. Education is important because it has a direct relation to social change and ethicality. It may maintain or reproduce the status quo; however, exercising its transformative potential is essential for the success of various international frameworks aiming to address global inequality, including most recently the Sustainable Development Goals. Sensitised by QuantCrit principles, a descriptive statistical exploration was undertaken of the staff composition and employment conditions captured within the administrative datasets reported on academic staff by all the public universities in the devolved nations of England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales from 2015 to 2020. The findings of this study confirmed: (i) the continuation of gendered inequalities across the academic hierarchy, particularly as the pyramid narrows to the assigned intellectual leadership position of ‘professor’; (ii) racialised, gendered inequalities in access to employment, and in positioning once employed; and (iii) more adverse conditions where gendered, racialised and geopolitical inequalities intersect, most extremely for Black African female academics. The study demonstrates that the centring of ‘race’ and consideration of nationality are required to challenge coloniality, and to bring to the fore the differential impacts of systems of discrimination within this globally influential sector.","PeriodicalId":501494,"journal":{"name":"British Educational Research Journal ","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Educational Research Journal ","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.4047","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Replete with espoused discourses of equality, diversity and inclusion within public bodies, is the UK, wherein lauded initiatives reward its universities’ commitments to increasing the access and positioning of ‘women’ in higher education. This paper contributes a critical quantitative analysis of the state of representation and participation of academic staff within these universities generally, and the majority‐female discipline of education particularly. Education is important because it has a direct relation to social change and ethicality. It may maintain or reproduce the status quo; however, exercising its transformative potential is essential for the success of various international frameworks aiming to address global inequality, including most recently the Sustainable Development Goals. Sensitised by QuantCrit principles, a descriptive statistical exploration was undertaken of the staff composition and employment conditions captured within the administrative datasets reported on academic staff by all the public universities in the devolved nations of England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales from 2015 to 2020. The findings of this study confirmed: (i) the continuation of gendered inequalities across the academic hierarchy, particularly as the pyramid narrows to the assigned intellectual leadership position of ‘professor’; (ii) racialised, gendered inequalities in access to employment, and in positioning once employed; and (iii) more adverse conditions where gendered, racialised and geopolitical inequalities intersect, most extremely for Black African female academics. The study demonstrates that the centring of ‘race’ and consideration of nationality are required to challenge coloniality, and to bring to the fore the differential impacts of systems of discrimination within this globally influential sector.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
英国大学中 "女性 "学者进入和参与情况的数据快照:质疑持续存在的性别、种族和地缘政治不平等现象
英国在公共机构中充斥着平等、多样性和包容性的论调,其大学致力于提高高等教育中 "女性 "的入学率和地位,这些举措备受赞誉。本文对这些大学,尤其是女性占多数的教育学科中学术人员的代表性和参与情况进行了批判性的定量分析。教育之所以重要,是因为它与社会变革和伦理道德直接相关。教育可能会维持或复制现状;然而,发挥其变革潜力对于旨在解决全球不平等问题的各种国际框架(包括最近的可持续发展目标)的成功至关重要。在 QuantCrit 原则的感召下,我们对英格兰、北爱尔兰、苏格兰和威尔士所有公立大学报告的 2015 年至 2020 年学术人员行政数据集中的人员构成和就业条件进行了描述性统计探索。这项研究的结果证实:(i) 在整个学术等级体系中,性别不平等继续存在,尤其是当金字塔缩小到 "教授 "这一指定的知识领导职位时;(ii) 在获得就业和就业后的定位方面存在种族化、性别化的不平等;(iii) 在性别、种族化和地缘政治不平等交织的地方,条件更为不利,这对黑非洲女学者来说最为严重。这项研究表明,需要以 "种族 "为中心并考虑国籍问题,以挑战殖民主义,并突出这一具有全球影响力的部门中歧视制度的不同影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Reshaping curriculum adaptation in the age of artificial intelligence: Mapping teachers' AI‐driven curriculum adaptation patterns Physical education in alternative provision schools: A case of spatial (in)justice? The ‘Friday effect’: School attendance over the weeki From challenge to innovation: A grassroots study of teachers’ classroom assessment innovations Math task experiences and motivation to learn more: How prior knowledge and interest interact with Task‐Interest & Task‐Difficulty perceptions and feed a desire to reengage
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1