level of award application – bronze pilot application form... · level of award application –...

of 73

Race equality charter mark application form

Level of award application – Bronze

of 73

Please note - Throughout the application the ethnic origin codes have been abbreviated as below:

Ethnic origin code HESA Abbreviation

Arab A

Asian/Asian British – Bangladeshi A/AB-B

Asian/Asian British Indian A/AB-I

Asian/Asian British - Pakistani A/AB-P

Black/Black British – African B/BB-A

Black/Black British - Caribbean B/BB-C

Chinese C

Gypsy/Traveller G/T

Mixed – White/Asian M-W/A

Mixed – White/Black African M-W/BA

Mixed – White/Black Caribbean M-W/BC

Other Asian background OAB

Other Black background OBB

Other ethnic background OEB

Other mixed background OMB

Other White background OWB

Total Black Minority Ethnic Tot BME

White W

Information refused or unknown IR/U

of 73

Section 1: Letter of endorsement from the Vice-chancellor

of 73

Section 2 - Details of the Self-Assessment Team and Process

2a: Self-Assessment Team

The Race Equality Charter Mark Group (RECMG), our Self-Assessment Team, is chaired by a member of the Executive (the Executive Director of Corporate Services) who has responsibility for reporting on the progress.

The RECMG comprised 12 people, ten staff and two students. In addition three academic members of staff acted as critical friends (Special Advisors) to the group. The Group included a range of grades of staff, academic, senior management and professional support, from all key areas of the Institution. Five of the group identified as BME (Black or Minority Ethnic). There was a good gender balance, with some working on a part-time basis or studying.

As an official University committee, time was allowed for participation in meetings, research for particular sections and to review documents. However, in practice most had to balance this with existing commitments and it was difficult to time meetings so everyone could attend.

There have been substantial changes to the RECMG since we first started the process in July 2014. Our lead on the attainment gap was seconded to a senior faculty post severely reducing time for involvement; the original contact for the Charter Mark left to take up a new role elsewhere and was replaced by another member of the equality team with experience of Athena SWAN. One of the main student representatives left towards the end of the process to take up a graduate training opportunity.

Table One overleaf, gives details of the Group, their roles within the process and reasons for taking part.

of 73

Table One: Membership of the RECMG

Member Role Role within the group Reason for involvement

Executive Director of Corporate Services, Executive

Chair Lead for Sections 1 & 7 Editor of Submission

Executive Equality Champion.

Equality and Diversity Manager, Human Resources and Organisational Development

Contact and Coordinator Lead for Sections 2,3 & 9 Support for Sections 4,6,7 & 8; Editor of Submission

Lead for equality, diversity and inclusion; member of HERAG; facilitator for Athena SWAN.

Lecturer, Faculty of Health Sciences Support for Section 8 Strong interest in race equality; links to voluntary and community sector; worked in race equality as part of previous roles.

Dean, Faculty of Arts and Creative Technologies

Lead for Section 8 Strong interest in tackling attainment gap and embedding good practice in inclusive pedagogy.

Head of School, Faculty of Computing, Engineering and Sciences

Support for Section 8 Nominated participant for faculty.

Lecturer, Faculty of Business, Education and Law

Support for Section 8 Nominated participant for faculty; currently school Disability Coordinator; strong interest in equality.

Head of Student Enabling Centre, Student Office

Support for Section 8 Chair of Inclusive Practice Sub Committee.

Business Partner, Human Resources and Organisational Development

Lead for Sections 4,5 &6 Lead Senior HR Business Partner with equality and diversity remit

Academic Skills Tutor, Information Services

Support for Section 8 Lead for Black History Month celebrations.

Head of International Recruitment, Student Recruitment and Admissions

Support for Section 7 Knowledge of international partnerships and Non-UK student experience.

Students’ Union Officer, Students’ Union (SU)

Support for Sections 3,7 &8 Involvement with project on work experience and networking for BME students; work on Black History Month

Chair of Multicultural Network, SU Support for Sections 3 & 7 Involvement with project on work experience and networking for BME students

Lecturer, Faculty of Business, Education and Law

Specialist Advisor Interests include diversity management, equality and Intersectionality.

Academic Group Leader, Faculty of Business, Education and Law

Specialist Advisor Interests include forced marriage, honor based violence, child and human trafficking.

Director of Academic Enhancement, Academic Development Unit

Specialist Advisor – was lead for Section 7; reduced role following secondment to faculty

Main lead on BME attainment gap research

of 73

2b: Self-Assessment Process

The Group met six times during the process as detailed in Table Two below. In addition there were many smaller section meetings and correspondence by email to progress the submission.

Table Two: Details of main SAT meetings

Date Attendees Outcomes

29 July 2014 8 (out of 12) Briefing by E&D Manager on key points of Charter Mark pilot. Work teams, leads identified and tasks allocated. Initial consideration of use of ECU (Equality Challenge Unit) consultancy days.

29 Sept 2014 12 (out of 12) Update on progress from each of the sub-group leads - initial data on staff profile collected; feedback from Faculties collected; emphasis has been on broad inclusive equality initiatives rather than race specific; clarification on data definitions to be used for student data; rough drafts of most sections completed.

9 Dec 2014 5 (out of 10) + 1 (new role holder)

Two members of the group leaving due to role changes. Collecting examples for Section 8. Results from survey presented and discussed. Staff data shared. Research on attainment gap presented. Investigate possibility of student focus groups via the SU.

27 Jan 2015 10 (out of 12) Progress on draft and sections slowed due to Christmas break and start of term. Action plan discussed and new headings decided on, aligning with other equality action plans. Feedback received form RECM workshop held at De Montfort. Discussion on format of section 8. Report on new Inclusive Practice Sub Committee.

5 March 2015 AM - 4 PM – 3

ECU consultation day – useful discussions on race equality and pedagogy to inform application.

17 March 2015 7 (out of 12) Meeting to discuss feedback on the ECU consultation day and key areas of application completion.

A digital storage area was set up so that documents could be accessed and shared by all members of the team.

All members of the team joined the JISCMAIL circulation list set up by the ECU. Some members are also members of HERAG (Higher Education Race Action Group).

In addition, the recognised trades unions, UNISON and UCU, have been involved in the Survey and in consultation on the completed application.

of 73

2c: Involvement, Consultation and Communication

Survey

Our survey went out on the Qualtrics web-based platform but paper copies were also made available. A video made by two BME members of the group – one staff and one student – discussing why the Survey should be completed went up on the diversity website and linked to all communications. Communication about the Survey to staff was through:

• Briefing to senior managers encouraging participation • Email to staff from Executive • Articles on staff blogs • Advert on staff computer screens • Information on public plasma screens across all campuses.

And to students through:

• Information on SU website • Advert on student computer screens • Copies of survey in areas popular with international students i.e. chaplaincy, international

support • SU African-Caribbean Society and Multi-Cultural Society encouraging members to complete • Promotion via social media.

The Survey ran from 15th September to 17th October 2014. The results were collated and analysed by a working group which included SU representatives. The results were shared with the main Group at the December 2014 meeting.

Despite all the publicity only 62 individuals responded and of these only 14 (23%) were students, which was disappointing. The 48 staff respondents (77%) reflected different grades with responses from UK and International staff. Currently we have around 185 BME staff so this represents a response rate of around 26%. The students were mostly undergraduates but there were some responses from international and postgraduate students.

Whilst the responses and comments were mainly positive, they suggest more targeted work is needed on particular aspects. Responses have been used to inform later sections of the application.

Focus Groups Post Survey

We will be undertaking focus groups this summer (ACTION). These will be used to discuss the survey responses, actions identified, identify any missed, validate that these are appropriate and investigate how we can gain greater engagement in their delivery.

of 73

Further Consultation

We analyse our annual student viewfinder (aimed at first and second year undergraduates), the National Student Survey (NSS), the Postgraduate Taught Experience Survey and the International Student Barometer. Some feedback from the NSS is given in section 8. In the future we intend to interrogate student survey data more deeply, especially by ethnicity and domicile (ACTION).

The most recent Employee Engagement Survey was undertaken in November 2014. A board analysis of the diversity of respondents shows that around 5% were from BME backgrounds. As around 10% of our staff are from BME backgrounds (see Section 4), this would suggest that more work needs to be done to encourage BME staff to share their experiences (ACTION).

Internal Networks

There is currently no BME staff network, but we will be investigating whether one would be welcome, appropriate and serve a purpose for attendees. This will include investigating links with local colleges and councils, and utilising existing groups such as HERAG and Black British Academics to stimulate interest (ACTION).

As for students, the Multicultural Network acts as the main focus for BME involvement with the SU. The Network campaigns on behalf of minority groups, tackling social and economic exclusion and promoting community cohesion. They support and advise students from BME backgrounds to access services, volunteering opportunities and social activities.

Other groups, such as the African-Caribbean Society, Islamic Society and Chinese Society, vary in their engagement from year to year. The African-Caribbean Society aims to celebrate culture, history and music, creating a platform to develop talent and skill, improving university experience. The emphasis is on diverse events which bring different cultures together.

Many of the Officers and Presidents of the SU over the past few years have been from BME backgrounds, and have acted as role models. They champion Black History Month and have run an annual Diversity Fashion Show for many years. This is well supported by BME students both in organising and performing.

The current SU vice-president is an international student and comments:

‘I help international students to fully experience student life by encouraging them to get involved in events and activities throughout the academic year.’ (2015 International Student Welcome Guide)

We will investigate ways in which these groups can more formally identify and report issues regarding race and work in partnership to arrange events, activities and training (ACTION).

of 73

External Interest Groups

Locally there are no longer any race equality councils, as these have been absorbed by the local hate crime reporting agencies, with whom we have worked for many years. We also work with the local Citizens Advice Bureau (CAB). We will be reviewing our approach to reengage more proactively with local BME groups. This has been difficult in recent years as such activity is time and resource heavy and efforts have been focused internally (ACTION).

Communication

The work of the RECMG is highlighted in diversity updates and newsletters via the established internal communication systems, as well as through Executive and service/faculty management teams. The student representatives on the RECMG report back not only to the SU Officers and relevant networks and societies but also permanent SU staff who are strong champions of equality.

2d: Ongoing role of the Self-Assessment Team and transfer of responsibility for the work

The RECMG has worked well in these initial stages of completing the submission, and through this identifying our key priorities within the Action Plan.

The overall responsibility for the Race Equality Charter Mark priorities will rest with the Executive Director of Corporate Services. However the delivery is spread between appropriate roles across the University, embedding race equality further within operations. The delivery against these priorities will be updated on a quarterly basis through the following formal committees/meetings:

• Executive • Senior Leadership Team • Quarterly Business Reviews • Board of Governors

In addition, a review of annual progress will be included in the University’s Annual Review. The Group will work closely with the groups working on attainment, inclusive practice and Athena SWAN so as not to duplicate effort.

of 73

The Chair of the RECMG will ensure that the Group meets regularly to update on progress and critically challenge delivery to ensure advancement of the Action Plan. Membership of the group will be reviewed regularly and any new members receive a full supporting induction.

Actions arising from section 2

• Conduct focus groups with BME staff and students to support Survey data and provide information on ‘lived experiences’ (ACTIONS 1 and 2).

• Improve analysis of student surveys by protected and other relevant characteristics (such as care leavers, parents, from FE and access backgrounds and low socio-economic groups) (ACTION 1).

• Improve response to Employee Engagement Survey from BME staff (ACTION 2).

• Review engagement with relevant SU groups (ACTION 3).

• Explore feasibility of a BME staff network (ACTION3).

• Review engagement with local BME and faith groups (ACTION 4).

of 73

Section 3 - Institution and Local Context

3a: Overview of Institution

We are a post-1992 institution based in the East Midlands and part of the Million+ group. There are currently two main campuses and a number of satellite campuses, two situated within local hospitals. The University also works with a number of UK and overseas partners and a range of local colleges. The University prides itself on its industry connections with practical courses designed to prepare students for employment in a global marketplace.

The University covers a wide range of subjects split into four Faculties. These cover arts, including sociology, journalism, art and design, film and other creative technologies (ACT); business, education and law (BEL); computing, engineering and sciences, including biological and geographical subjects (CES); health sciences, including nursing, psychology and sports science (HS).

Currently the University has 22,591 students. Of these, 2,220 (around 10%) are international students, with 30% from Europe. Of our home students, 17% are from BME backgrounds. This compares reasonably well to the national figure of 20% BME profile for students (Equality in HE: statistical report 2014, ECU).

We currently have around 17,800 undergraduates (UG) and 4,160 postgraduates (PG). Slightly more students studied full-time (FT), around 11,700, compared to part-time (PT), around 10,270. Our PT numbers are comparatively high for the sector and we have a high percentage of mature students - approximately 72% of our students are aged over 21. We have circa 4,470 students (mostly PT) studying awards at 28 UK partners, whilst a further 16,800 are studying with 22 partners overseas.

3b: Local context

Local Population Demographics

Our two main campuses operate in areas with differing demographics. Campus one is city based with a broad ethnic mix, particularly in terms of its Pakistani and African communities, while the second campus is on the outskirts of a rural market town and has a much less ethnically diverse population. The satellite campuses are in also in predominately white, rural areas. The population breakdown for the two main locations is shown in Table Three below.

of 73

Table Three: Demographics of local area in terms of ethnicity

Local demographics Ethnic group Campus one –

inner city % Campus two – rural market town %

White 86.4 92.6 White: Irish 0.3 0.6 White: Gypsy or Irish Traveller 0.1 0.1 White: Other White 1.9 1.7 Mixed/multiple ethnic group: White and Black Caribbean 0.8 0.6 Mixed/multiple ethnic group: White and Black African 0.2 0.1 Mixed/multiple ethnic group: White and Asian 0.5 0.3 Mixed/multiple ethnic group: Other Mixed 0.3 0.2 Asian/Asian British: Indian 0.9 1.0 Asian/Asian British: Pakistani 4.2 0.3 Asian/Asian British: Bangladeshi 0.4 0.1 Asian/Asian British: Chinese 0.5 0.4 Asian/Asian British: Other Asian 1.4 0.7 Black/African/Caribbean/Black British: African 1.0 0.3 Black/African/Caribbean/Black British: Caribbean 0.3 0.4 Black/African/Caribbean/Black British: Other Black 0.1 0.1 Other ethnic group: Arab 0.2 0.2 Other ethnic group: Any other ethnic group 0.5 0.2

(Source – National Census data, 2011)

The percentage of BME residents is about 14% in the city location and around 7% in the more rural area. This means the University greatly increases the cultural diversity of the local areas in which it operates.

Racial Tensions

The area immediately surrounding Campus one is one of the more ethnically diverse parts of the city, but there have been very few incidents of racial tension on campus. Any tensions in the immediate locale have their origins in the usual difficulties arising with transient students living near to local residents, rather than racially motivated.

The local police liaise closely with local hate crime organisations, and we have a permanent police liaison officer who actively works with the SU.

There have been issues in the past as the British National Party (BNP) held seats on the city council. These have since been lost and influence much reduced. There are normally good relations between different racial and faith groups in the local area, but concern lingers as comments from the Survey show (n=62):

of 73

‘The fact that the University is based in an area whose reputation is known in the UK in terms of lack of acceptance is also a concern.’

‘Racist behaviour has become covert and much more subtle.’

Engagement with Local BME Communities

We have engaged with specific BME groups at both main campuses over the years through projects such as:

• Local black history network - supporting and launching the group and a publication charting Black history in the local area

• Local African-Caribbean community – joint event to raise awareness about Black History • Diversity Award scheme for the local region, encouraging a range of small community groups

to apply for monetary awards– winning projects included supporting asylum seekers and refugees, ‘Parents against Racism’ and ‘Race into Schools’

• Event to encourage local Asian residents to consider a career in teaching.

The University is also involved in ongoing work with particular cultural groups:

• Jewish community – particularly the annual commemoration of Holocaust Memorial Day • Muslim community – hosting events such as the biannual Explore Islam Exhibition and a

conference for local Muslim young people; Campus two hosts Friday prayers. A local Imam is part of the chaplaincy team

• Local faith forums – acting as host for meetings and events • The University supports Black History Month and has organised a range of events over recent

years to raise awareness of BME issues, involving staff, students and local BME groups • Creative Communities –our arts faculty has a long-standing commitment to community

engagement including training and support for local BME community groups and leaders; there is an annual arts festival combining talent from the local area and the University.

We also have a number of academic staff researching in areas such as experiences of asylum seekers, education in prisons, BME perinatal care and forced marriage which often tap into the experiences of local community and cultural groups.

Our engagement with local communities happens at all levels across the institution from formal institutional events to work by individuals. We are currently reviewing which festivals and events can be used to enhance engagement with the local BME and faith groups (ACTION).

In some cases the problem is promotion and publicity reaching the right audiences. Respondents commented in the Survey (n=48):

of 73

‘The University could make more effort in their commitment to events like Black History Month both in terms of publicity and funding to get the message out that this is an inclusive institution.’

‘There is no mention of Diwali or any other Indian festivals.’

Actions arising from section3

• Review programme of promotion and celebration of events and festivals with a view to enhancing engagement with local BME groups (ACTION 4).

of 73

Section 4 - Staff Profile

The overall staffing profile of the University is show in Table Four below. Academic Staff are defined as those employed as Part-Time Lecturer, Lecturer, Senior Lecturer, Academic Group Leader, Associate Professor and Professor. Senior academics who have a broadly managerial role are included in the Professional Support Staff (PSS) and Management category.

Table Four: Overall staffing profile as at 31 July 2014

Staff Category H/C FTE

Academic staff 806 491.6

Professional Support Staff and Management 987 861.4

Total 1793 1,353

Academic staff comprise 45% of the overall profile (based on H/C), whilst PSS and management together comprise 55%.

A breakdown of the staffing profile by domicile is shown in Table Five below.

Table Five: Overall staffing profile by H/C for UK and non-UK staff as at 31.07.14

All Staff Total H/C

(unrounded)

% W/WB** % Other BME %

UK 1690 94.3 1580 93.5% 110 6.5%

Non-UK 103 6.7 29 28.2% 74 71.8%

Total 1793 100.0. 1609 89.7% 184 10.3%

* H/C unrounded; **WB = White British

• Of UK domiciled staff, 93.54% are White and 6.5% are from BME backgrounds. The national figures for 2012/13 are 92.2% and 7.8% respectively (Equality in HE: Statistical Report 2014, ECU). This is also low compared to the local population particularly for Campus one (see Section 3).

• Of those who are Non-UK, only 28% identify as White. Interestingly the national figures show the opposite with a majority White Non-UK staff population of 71% and only 28% BME (Equality in HE: Statistical Report 2014, ECU).

• BME staff overall comprise 10% of University staffing.

of 73

4a: Ethnic Profile of Academic Staff

The ethnicity profile of academic staff is illustrated below in Table Six.

Table Six: Academic staff ethnicity profile in Headcount and FTE (2012-2014)

31.07.12 31.7.13 31.7.14

H/C FTE H/C FTE H/C FTE % H/C

W/WB 597 415.3 632 421.6 699 428.8 86.7

BME 86 56.5 97 59.6 107 62.8 13.3

Total 683 471.8 729 481.2 806 491.6 100.0

• As at 31st July 2014, 87% of academic staff were White, with 13% identifying as BME. Slightly higher than the 10% for all BME staff, although domicile also needs to be taken into account.

• While the number of academic staff has increased over the last three years, the proportion from BME backgrounds has remained relatively consistent.

• It reflects well against national data of 7% academic staff from BME backgrounds (Equality in HE: Statistical Report 2014, ECU), but perhaps not against the percentage of students.

Academic staff by Faculty/Department

The ethnicity profile of academic staff by department is illustrated below in Table Seven.

Table Seven: Ethnicity of Academic staff by Faculty/Department by Headcount (2012-14)

Faculty/Department 31.07.12 31.7.13 31.7.14

WB BME WB BME WB BME

ACT 170* 20 190 25 220 30

BEL 130 20 125 20 130 20

CES 140 30 135 35 155 40

HS 155 15 180 20 190 15

Academic development 0 0 0 0 >5 0

Human resources 0 0 >5 0 >5 0

Partnerships >5 >5 0 0 0 0

Student recruitment/admissions 0 0 0 0 >5 0

Total (unrounded) 597 86 632 97 699 107

*H/C rounded to nearest 5

of 73

• CES has the highest density of BME staff at 37%, ACT at 28%, BEL at 20% and HS at 15%.

• Since 2012, CES and ACT have increased their percentage of BME academic staff whilst BEL and HS have decreased.

• Nationally in 2012/13, 62% of UK BME academic staff worked in SET (Science Engineering, Technology) subjects whilst 38% worked in Non-SET subject areas. Again nationally, BME UK academic staff comprise 9.5% of academic staff in SET subjects and 6.2% in Non-SET subjects (Equality in HE: Statistical Report 2014, ECU).

• This would mean that the drop in numbers of BME staff in BEL and HS does not fit well with national figures and should be tracked to check numbers do not drop further. We need to investigate what might be hindering the employment of BME academic staff in Non-SET subjects (ACTION).

• Faculties will also need to analyse data at school level as headline data may mask differences between subject areas. Members of staff comment in the Survey (n=48):

‘There are no non-white staff in the school of (x) and only a handful of on-white postgraduate students. This is the opposite of diversity.’

‘The lack of a sufficiently ethnically diverse staff base in my faculty makes this part of the survey difficult to evaluate.’

Academic Staff Ethnicity by Grade

The ethnicity profile of academic staff by grade is illustrated below in Table Eight.

Table Eight: Ethnicity of Academic staff by Grade (2012-14)

Grade 31.07.12 31.7.13 31.7.14

WB % BME % WB % BME% WB % BME %

Grade 6 (Part Time Lecturer)

(150*) 25.5 (30) 30.2 (175) 27.5 (35) 35.1 (235) 33.6 (40) 38.3

Grade 7 (Lecturer)

(80 ) 13.6 (15) 16.3 (85) 13.6 (20) 19.6 (100) 14.2 (20) 17.8

Grade 8 (Senior Lecturer)

(280) 46.4 (30) 30.2 (280) 44.6 (25) 24.7 (270) 38.3 (25) 24.3

Grade 9 (Academic Group Leader & Associate Prof)

(70) 11.2 (10) 10.5 (70) 10.6 (10) 10.3 (75) 10.7 (10) 9.3

Grade 10 (Professor)

(20) 3.4 (10) 12.8 (20) 3.5 (10) 10.3 (20) 3.1 (10) 10.3

Total (Unrounded) (597) 100.0 (86) 100.0 (632) 100.0 (97) 100.0 (699) 100.0 (107) 100.0

of 73

* H/C rounded to nearest 5

• While BME density is relatively steady (Table Six) the increase in the proportion of BME academic staff in Grade Six and decrease in Grade Eight, when compared with White British colleagues over the same time period, might point to a lack of promotional opportunities for BME academic staff (ACTION).

• The proportion of professors who come from BME backgrounds, including Black, is higher than from White backgrounds, but this may be related to domicile (ACTION).

• It does compare favourably with national data where 7.1% of professors are from BME backgrounds - 0.4% Black, 3.1% Asian and 1.6% Chinese (Equality in HE: Statistical Report 2014, ECU).

• There has been substantial work on the transparency and fairness for the processes around professorial appointments as a result of work around the Athena SWAN Charter.

Academic Staff Ethnicity by Contract Type

The ethnicity profile of academic staff by contractual status is illustrated in Table Nine below.

Table Nine: Ethnicity of Academic Staff by Contract Type (2012-2014)

* H/C rounded to nearest 5

• The recent shift to fixed-term contracts has been greater for those from BME backgrounds.

• Over the three years the proportion BME academic staff on permanent contracts has remained at around 12%, reflective of the 13% BME academic staff population. However the data will be tracked to check the proportion of BME academic staff on fixed-term contracts does not increase further (ACTION).

Academic Staff Ethnicity by Working Hours

The ethnicity profile of the academic staff by working hours is illustrated in Table Ten below.

31.07.12 31.7.13 31.7.14

WB % BME % WB % BME % WB % BME %

Permanent (430*) 71.9 (60) 66.3 (460) 73.3 (65) 67.0 (475) 68.0 (70) 63.6

Fixed-Term Contract (170) 28.1 (30) 33.7 (170) 26.7 (30) 33.0 (225) 32.1 (40) 36.5

Total (unrounded) (597) 100.0 (86) 100.0 (632) 100.0 (97) 100.0 (699) 100.0 (107) 100.0

of 73

Table Ten: Ethnicity of Academic Staff by Working Hours (2012-2014)

*H/C rounded

• The proportion of BME staff on FT contracts has reduced but is still above that for White staff.

• The percentage of BME employed FT has remained consistent at approximately 14% of all academic staff. This and the PT numbers reflect well in comparison with the overall 13% BME academic staff.

• Proportionally more White academic staff are employed on PT contracts.

Academic Staff Ethnicity - Turnover Rates

The turnover rate for academic staff is illustrated in Table Eleven below. This is calculated on the basis of leavers as a proportion of all academic staff each year.

Table Eleven: Ethnicity of Academic Staff by Turnover Rates 2012-2014)

*H/C rounded

• In 2012 there was a higher turnover in BME staff (15.7%) against the overall percentage of BME academic staff population (13%). In 2014, this has reduced considerably to 8.5% although still higher than that of White academic staff.

• The data will be tracked to check that the turnover of BME academic staff does not increase further. We will also need to investigate why BME academic staff leave especially when viewed alongside potential promotion issues and numbers on fixed-term contracts (ACTION).

31.07.12 31.7.13 31.7.14


Full Time (FT) (355*) 59.5 (50) 60.5 (350) 55.7 (55) 56.7 (360) 51.1 (60) 54.2

Part Time (PT) (240) 40.5 (35) 39.5 (280) 44.3 (40) 43.3 (340 ) 48.9 (50) 45.8

Total (unrounded) (597) 100.0 (86) 100.0 (632) 100.0 (97) 100.0 (699) 100.0 (107) 100.0

31.07.12 31.7.13 31.7.14


Turnover Rate* 70 15 115 20 45 10

% 10.8% 15.7% 15.2% 14.9% 5.6% 8.5%

of 73

4b: Ethnic Profile of Professional Support and Management Staff

Ethnicity profile of Professional Support Staff and Management (2012-2014)

The ethnicity profile of PSS and management is illustrated in Table Twelve below.

Table Twelve: Ethnicity profile of Professional Support and Management Staff in Headcount and FTE (2012-2014)

31.07.12 31.7.13 31.7.14

H/C FTE H/C FTE H/C FTE

White British 945 828.9 960 841.5 910 797.7

BME (8.4%) 87 69.9 (8.7%) 91 74.5 (7.8%) 77 63.7

Total 1032 898.8 1051 916 987 861.4

• As at 31st July 2014, 92% of PSS and management were White British, with 8% reporting as BME. Although this has remained relatively constant, the percentage of BME PSS and management has decreased slightly. This will need to be tracked to check it does not decrease further (ACTION)

• The BME profile is slightly lower in PSS and management staff at circa 8% compared to all staff presence at 10% and 13% of academic staff.

• Although this reflects well against the local population of Campus two at 7% BME, it does not when viewed against the local population for Campus one at 13% BME (ACTION).

• Nationally 8% of PSS are from BME backgrounds (Equality in HE: Statistical Report 2014, ECU).

Professional Support and Management Staff Ethnicity by Faculty/Department

The ethnicity profile of PSS and management staff by department is illustrated in Table Thirteen below.

of 73

Table Thirteen: Professional Support and Management Staff Ethnicity by Faculty/Department (2012-2014)

31.07.12 31.7.13 31.7.14

WB BME WB BME WB % BME %

Faculties:

ACT 65 5 70 5 (65) 7.1 (5) 9.0

BEL 55 >5 55 >5 (50) 5.7 (>5) 3.9

CES 90 10 90 10 (80) 8.8 (10) 10.4

HS 65 10 65 5 (60) 6.6 (5) 5.2

Services:

Academic development 25 10 20 5 (20) 2.0 (>5) 2.6

Enterprise/commercial development 50 0 55 0 (60) 6.3 (0) 0.0

Estates/commercial services 235 30 240 25 (210) 28.2 (25) 29.9

Executive 15 0 15 0 (10) 1.2 (0) 0.0

Finance 30 5 30 >5 (30) 3.2 (>5) 2.6

Human resources 25 0 25 >5 (25) 2.3 (>5) 1.3

Information services 130 10 130 15 (130) 14.0 (15) 16.8

Marketing/PR 30 >5 30 >5 (30 ) 3.0 (>5) 3.9

Partnerships 10 >5 15 >5 (15) 1.5 (>5) 3.9

Recruitment/admissions 50 >5 50 5 (50) 5.7 (>5) 2.6

Student office 75 >5 90 5 (85) 9.1 (5) 7.8

Total (unrounded) 945 87 960 91 (910) 100.0 (77) 100.0

• Overall there has been very little movement in the numbers of BME PSS and management over the last three years.

• Some departments have a greater density of BME staff than white staff and some less. Neither Executive or Enterprise and Commercial Development have any PSS or management from BME backgrounds. This will be tracked and reviewed but some small departments have a very low turnover which makes it difficult to effect change.

• One member of staff commented in the survey (n=48):

‘The lack of diversity is one factor within the department and faulty that has created an insular, inward facing environment.’

• However, as was mentioned in the last section, overall the numbers do not compare favourably with that of the local population. The recruitment processes for PSS should be

of 73

reviewed with a view to positively promoting vacancies to ethnic minority communities (ACTION).

Professional Support and Management Staff Ethnicity by Grade

The ethnicity profile of PSS and management by grade is illustrated in Table Fourteen below. These have been grouped into broad categories.

Table Fourteen: Ethnicity of Professional Support and Management staff by Grade (2012-2014)

31.07.12 31.7.13 31.7.14


Grades 1-3 (Manual and Clerical)

(285*) 30.3 (309) 33.3 (290) 30.3 (307) 29.7 (255) 28.0 (20) 28.5

Grades 4-5 (Administrative and Technical)

(310) 32.8 (15) 17.2 (325) 33.9 (208) 19.8 (315) 34.5 (15) 19.5

Grades 6-7 (Technical and Supervisor)

(240 ) 25.4 (35) 41.4 (225) 23.5 (35) 37.4 (220) 24.4 (30) 35.1

Grades 8-11 (Management)

(80) 8.4 (5) 5.7 (80) 8.1 (5) 5.5 (80) 9.0 (5) 6.5

Grades 11-14 (Senior Management)

(30) 3.2 (>5) 2.3 (40) 4.2 (10) 7.7 (40) 4.1 (10) 10.3

Total (unrounded)

(945) 100.0 (90) 100.0 (960) 100.0 (90) 100.0 (910) 100.0 (80) 100.0

*rounded H/C

• Taking an overall 8% density, BME PSS staff are found in a greater proportion in Grades One to Three (8%), Grades Six to Seven (11%) and Grades Eleven to Fourteen (18%). They are below the density level for the staff group in Grades Four to Five (4.6%) and Grades Eight to Ten (5.7%). However there has been a large increase in density in Grades Eleven to Fourteen – ranging from 6% BME representation in 2012 to 18% in 2014 when compared to the overall percentage of PSS and management staff from BME backgrounds.

• We do have a Key Performance Indicator (KPI) around the percentage of BME staff at Grades Nine and above, so it is pleasing to see the rise in the proportion of BME staff in higher grades.

• This compares favourably with national data where 3.6% of senior managers are from BME backgrounds (Equality in HE: Statistical Report 2014, ECU).

of 73

Professional Support and Management staff Ethnicity by Contract Type

The ethnicity profile of PSS and management by contract type is illustrated In Table Fifteen below.

Table Fifteen: Ethnicity of Professional Support and Management staff by Contract Type (2012-2014)

31.07.12 31.7.13 31.7.14


Permanent (905) 95.6 (70) 81.6 (900) 94.0 (80) 87.9 (860) 94.4 (75) 94.8

Fixed Term Contract (40 4.3 (15) 18.4 (60) 6.0 (10) 12.1 (50) 5.6 (5) 5.2

Total (unrounded) (945) 100.0 (87) 100.0 (960) 100.0 (91) 100.0 (910) 100.0 (77) 100.0

• Over the past three years the percentage of PSS and management staff on permanent contracts has remained broadly constant. This is in contrast to the greater use of fixed-term contracts for academic staff.

• It is pleasing to see that the proportion of BME PSS on fixed-term contracts has greatly decreased over the last three years.

Professional Support and Management staff ethnicity by Working Hours

The ethnicity profile of PSS and management by working hours is illustrated in Table Sixteen below.

Table Sixteen: Ethnicity of Professional Support and Management Staff by Working Hours (2012-2014)

31.07.12 31.7.13 31.7.14


Full Time (645) 68.1 (50) 59.7 (655) 68.3 (60) 64.8 (630) 69.1 (50) 64.9

Part Time (300) 31.9 (35) 40.2 (305) 31.7 (30) 35.2 (280) 30.9 (30) 35.1

Total (945) 100.0 (85) 100.0 (960) 100.0 (90) 100.0 (910) 100.0 (80) 100.0

• The percentage of BME staff on FT contracts has varied from 7.5% in 2012, 8.3% in 2013 and 7.4% in 2014. This is broadly reflective of the BME density within PSS and management, circa 8%.

of 73

• Generally more BME PSS and management are on PT contracts than those from White backgrounds. Although PT contracts indicate flexibility, this would bear investigation given that research shows PT contracts are often found in lower grades (ACTION).

Professional Support and Management Staff Ethnicity - Turnover Rates

The ethnicity profile of PSS and management turnover rate is illustrated below. This is calculated on the basis of leavers as a proportion of PSS and management staff each year.

Table Seventeen: Ethnicity of professional support and management staff by Turnover Rates (2012-2014)

31.07.12 31.7.13 31.7.14


Turnover Rate 94 13 79 9 97 16

% 9.04% 13% 7.60% 9% 9.63% 17.20%

• In each year, the turnover of BME staff was greater than the overall 8% density for PSS and management, particularly in 2012 and 2014. This will need to be tracked and the possibility of exit interviews reviewed to gather data on why the turnover is higher than that of those from White backgrounds, for PSS, management and academic staff (ACTION).

• From the survey (n=48):

‘Certain races are more equal than others (at the University), that’s why I’m leaving.’

4c: Ethnic Profile of any Grievances/Disciplinaries at Institutional Level

Since 2013 we have collated data on individuals who pursued a grievance in accordance with formal grievance procedures, and those who were formally disciplined in accordance with the disciplinary procedure. The data is shown in Table Eighteen below.

Table Eighteen: Usage of the Grievance and Disciplinary Procedure 01.11.2013- 31.01.2015

White British BME Total

H/C % H/C %

Grievance 10 100 0 0 10

Disciplinary 15 95 >5 5 15

of 73

• All grievances were raised by White British members of staff and 94% of disciplinaries were undertaken against White British staff. None of the investigations concerned race related matters.

• Comments from the survey however suggest that some adverse behaviour is not confronted (n=48):

‘I complained to my manager about racist jokes that were being sent via email. Nothing was ever said to that member of staff. I am in a different area now and those members of staff have retired, but the fact that this was allowed to happen appalled me.’

‘I had problems with a manager who had recently been employed by the University. The experience was awful. The University did not help me; instead all managers got together to help the manager accused of racist comments and as a result (they) managed to get away with (their) racist comments.’

‘Racist comments would not be tolerated in my current role, however this has not always been the case during my time at the University and in other faculties.’

Race Equality Survey

Results from staff completing the Survey on the work environment are shown in Table Nineteen below.

Table Nineteen: Responses to general questions in Race Equality Survey, October 2014

Survey Question (n=62) Disagree Neutral Agree

The University is committed to creating an inclusive environment for all staff and students irrespective of the race/ethnicity

13% 10% 77%

The University values diversity and recognised the benefits of having an ethnically diverse staff and students profiles

15% 10% 76%

Individuals at the University are treated on their merits irrespective of their ethnicity/race

13% 16% 70%

I am treated equally by my manager/lecturer/supervisor irrespective of my ethnicity/race

11% 11% 77%

I am treated equally by my colleagues/fellow students irrespective of my ethnicity/race

8% 6% 85%

If I reported a race-related incident I believe appropriate action would be taken

16% 16% 68%

of 73

• The results suggest although a good percentage have positive experiences, a significant number are not confident about treated equally and fairly. One commented (n=62):

‘The proportion of ethnic minority staff is low in my department; there have been multiple issues that have occurred over the last five years that I have wondered about the basis for these events.’

The results from Survey questions relating directly to employment are shown in Table Twenty below.

Table Twenty: Responses to questions on employment, Race Equality Survey

Survey question Disagree Neutral Agree

Able to be self at work 16 3 71

Manager values experience and encourages 23 10 67 Equal chance of promotion 19 16 64

Fair and transparent pay system 19 19 62

Know how to access support to maintain personal wellbeing 32 6 61

Would recommend University to prospective employee 26 13 59

Understand promotions process 26 19 55

Manager encourages to apply for promotion 19 39 42 Clear career progression pathways 53 10 37

Personal well-being and health support is good 22 42 36

• We know that there are issues with staff engagement generally but there were particularly strong negative responses in the Survey around wellbeing, promotion and career progression. (ACTION).

• Processes around formal recruitment and selection are viewed much more positively with over 70% agreeing that they are fair and transparent and they are able to apply if they wish.

There were very positive responses to other survey questions. Here work allocation, work-related social events, being inclusive and support from colleagues were all well over 80%. One commented (n=62):

‘Nothing to raise and nothing to complain about.’

4d: Ethnic Profile of Decision Making Boards and Committees

The ethnic composition of the key decision-making groups is shown in Table Twenty-one below. An analysis of the diversity of committee members is part of our annual publication of data and available on our website.

of 73

Table Twenty-one: Composition of Decision Making Groups within the University (2014/15)

Total White British BME

% %

Board of Governors 20 90.0 10.0

Executive 11 100.0 0.0

Academic Board 28 96.4 3.6

Faculty Management Teams (FMT) 32 84.0 16.0

Service Management Teams (SMT) 49 98.0 2.0

Research and Advanced Scholarship 16 75.0 25.0

Learning Teaching and Assessment Committee 20 95.0 5.0

Quality Committee 15 100.0 0.0

Total (taking account of overlap) 113 90.3 9.7

• The higher proportional representation of BME staff in higher grades is reflected in some committees but not others.

• The FMTs show a higher percentage, at 16%, than that of the average density for BME academic staff at 13%. Whilst the service management teams show an even lower participation than the average for PSS, 8%.

• BME representation is also low on Academic Board, the Teaching, Learning and Assessment Committee, and on Executive – all crucial decision making bodies. In many cases of course there is considerable overlap as the same roles are required on several main bodies. This makes it more urgent to improve the pipeline to senior roles, especially for PSS (ACTION).

• The diversity of the Board of Governors is one of our KPIs. With such small numbers it is difficult to demonstrate improvement but in 2012/13 the percentage of members from BME backgrounds was 5%; this year it is 10%. This will continue to be tracked and a diversity of people to serve on the Board of Governors actively sought (ACTION).

• In previous years we have had BME representation at executive level and also chancellorship.

• Comments from the survey include:

‘There are very few ethnic minorities in senior managerial roles or in Executive.’

‘Our executive and senior management team is not only too white and male dominated. It is also too British.’

of 73

4e: Equal Pay Audits

The University conducts Equal Pay Audits biennially addressing the following areas:

• any significant pay inequalities i.e. those of more than 5% • any pay inequalities between 3% and 5%

As well as identifying any inequities arising because of protected characteristics, the audit also considers any inequities as result of being PT, hourly paid/fixed-term or starting salaries.

The overall pay comparison between White British and BME employees is shown in Table Twenty-two below.

Table Twenty-two: Excerpt from Equal Pay Audit - Ethnicity Profile Pay Gaps (2014)

White British BME

Count Avg Basic Pay* £

Count Avg Basic Pay £

Difference (£)

Pay Gap (%)

GRADE 1 90 14,316 5 14,197 118 0.83

GRADE 2 309 15,141 0 - - -

GRADE 3 140 17,814 >5 18,016 -201 -1.13

GRADE 4 165 21,070 5 20,304 766 3.64

GRADE 5 150 24,805 10 24,411 393 1.59

GRADE 6 130 29,920 15 30,193 -273 -0.91

GRADE 7 180 35,112 10 35,220 -108 -0.31

GRADE 8 320 43,979 15 44,198 -218 -0.5

GRADE 9 95 50,985 5 50,481 504 0.99

GRADE 10 45 58,111 10 58,105 7 0.01

GRADE 11 5 63,859 >5 62,306 1553 2.43

GRADE 12 20 68,884 1 68,067 817 1.19

GRADE 13 >5 72,203 0 - - -

GRADE 14 10 82,957 0 - - -

Total (unrounded)

1382 33,123 72 35,955 -2831 -8.55

*‘total pay’ includes honoraria payments, market supplements and salary protection payments

• There is no significant pay gap within each grade as shown in the far right column.

• In addition, the data shows an overall pay gap of 8.5% in favour of those from a BME background, due to the clustering of BME staff in the middle grades.

of 73

The Survey contained two questions regarding equal pay. The responses to these are shown in Table Twenty-three below.

Table Twenty-three: Race Equality Survey Responses on Equal Pay (2014)

Question Strongly disagree

Disagree Slightly disagree

Neither agree nor disagree

Slightly agree

Agree Strongly agree

The University has a fair and transparent pay system

3%

(1)

10%

(3)

6%

(2)

19%

(6)

10%

(3)

39%

(12)

13%

(4)

Disagree to some extent Agree to some extent

19% (6) 62% (19)

Staff are paid equitably regardless of their ethnicity or race

0%

(0)

3%

(1)

0%

(0)

26%

(8)

0%

(0)

55%

(17)

16%

(5)

Disagree to some extent Agree to some extent

3% (1) 71% (22)

• Whilst numbers are small, the data seems to indicate that 62% of respondents agree that the pay system is fair and transparent.

• One individual (3%) believed that staff were not paid equitably regardless of the ethnicity or race.

• Whilst the Employee Engagement Survey asked specific questions regarding pay, we have not as yet analysed the responses by protected characteristics, including ethnicity, to this depth (ACTION).

Actions arising from section 4

• Review numbers of BME academic staff in arts subjects (ACTION 5).

• In light of clustering of BME academic staff in part-time and lower grades review fairness and transparency of promotion and progression processes (ACTION 6).

• Review BME professorial data by UK and Non-UK and by full ethnic categories (ACTION 7).

• Consider exit interviews to ascertain why staff, particularly BME staff, may chose to leave (ACTION 8).

of 73

• Review density of BME professional support staff to more closely parallel local population particularly in lower grades (ACTION 9).

• Investigate the disproportionate numbers of BME professional and support staff on part-time contracts (ACTION 10).

• Continue to improve diversity at senior management level and on Board of Governors (ACTION 11).

• Conduct deeper analysis of the Employee Engagement Survey by equality characteristics including ethnicity (ACTION 2).

of 73

Section 5 - Recruitment and Selection

5a: Ethnic Profile of Individuals Applying for Academic Posts

The data provided in Table Twenty-four is from 1 August 2013 to 31 July 2014 and gives the applications, shortlisted and offered details by ethnicity for advertised academic vacancies.

Table Twenty-four: Recruitment Statistics for Academic Posts (2013/14)

Total WB % of total BME % of total

Applicants 1,796 1,245 69.3 551 30.7

Shortlisted 532 419 78.8 113 21.2

Offered 101 91 90.0 90.0 10.0

• The percentage of White British applicants is 69.3% as opposed to BME applicants at 30.7%

• At shortlisting the number of White British applicants increases to 78.8%, to the disadvantage of BME applicants who reduce to 21.2% of the total.

• At the offer stage, the number of White British applicants rises again to 90%.

• Qualitative information from human resources highlights that the University receives a number of speculative and inappropriate applications from international applicants, which may skew the number of BME applicants progressing to shortlisting stage. However, this would not explain the reduced proportion of BME applicants being appointed. The impact of this is address in Section 5c.

5b: Ethnic Profile of Individuals Applying for Professional Support and Management Posts

The data provided in Table Twenty-five is from the period 1 August 2013 to 31 July 12014 and gives the applications, shortlisted and offered details by ethnicity for advertised PSS and management vacancies.

of 73

Table Twenty-five: Recruitment Statistics for Professional Support and Management Posts (2013/14)

Total WB % of total BME % of total

Applicants 4,321 3,584 82.9 737 17.1

Shortlisted 896 796 88.8 100 11.2

Offered 157 149 94.9 8 5.1

• Although making up a smaller proportion of the total applications than that for academic posts, the percentage of BME applicants still decreases at the expense of applicants from White backgrounds.

• Although again, the University receives a number of speculative and inappropriate applications from international applicants, this would not explain the reduced proportion of BME applicants being appointed, as opposed to White British applicants.

• The number of applicants compares favourably to the local populations (see Section 3b).

5c: Recruitment and Selection is Conducted Transparently and Without Racial Bias

The University is committed to ensuring recruitment and selection is conducted transparently and without racial bias. Staff taking part in interview panels undertake recruitment, selection and interviewing skills training. These are supported by an online training which consolidates learning. Procedural guidance is also provided by human resources and is available on the University’s website.

The University uses an E-Recruitment System where competency based questions are linked to the essential criteria on the person specification. Shortlisting is undertaken independently by shortlisters and these decisions are then collated and inform the final shortlist. Information on equality is not released to any person shortlisting, interviewing or appointing.

Our vacancies all include the statement – “We value diversity and are committed to equal opportunities for all.” Our job vacancies webpage states – “We value diversity, promote equality of opportunity and recognise individuals for their skills and abilities.”

Pertinent comments from the survey include (n=48):

‘There have been multiple appointments during my time here and in only one instance did I see a candidate from an ethnic minority background at the interview stage.

of 73

‘When there are vacancies for part-time teaching, academics are bought in by managers and in a lot of instances person friends of theirs without the proper advertising.’

‘Applicants who are “foreign” and therefore have accents are often discounted because “it will be harder for the students to understand them” regardless of merit.’

However, the data from Tables Twenty-four and Twenty-five shows that BME applicants are less likely to be appointed than White British applicants across all roles. This would imply that further staff training, particularly around unconscious bias, is needed (ACTION).

The University may also need to review the components of the selection procedure to ensure that they support a fair and transparent process (ACTION). The statistics would suggest that further work could be undertaken on investigating the appropriateness of positive action messaging for all vacancies.

Actions arising from Section 5

• Review training in recruitment, selection and interviewing, including unconscious bias (ACTION 6).

• Review recruitment, selection and interviewing processes, including appointment of part-time hourly paid lecturers, fixed-term and agency workers, for fairness and transparency (ACTION 6).

of 73

Section 6 - Career progression and development

The University operates a transparent approach to career progression. Promotional positions are always advertised internally on a secondment or permanent basis and subject to standard recruitment processes. However, progression may also be achieved when an individual’s role is regraded in accordance with our reassessment of grade procedure.

6a: Ethnic Profile of Academic Staff Promotions

The Table Twenty-six outlines the number of academic regradings during the period August 2013 – March 2015.

Table Twenty-six: Academic Staff Regrading August 2013 – March 2015

White British BME Total no. of regradings*

HC % HC %

01.08.13 - 31.07.14 48 83.0 10 17.0 58

01.08.14 – 31.03.15 20 81.0 5 19.0 26

Total* 69 82.0 15 18.0 84

*unrounded

• During the academic year 2013-2014, 83% of successful academic regrading applications were from White British staff compared to 17% from BME staff. This compares favourably for BME staff who comprise circa 13% of the academic staff population.

• The figures for the current academic year follow a similar trajectory. However we will continue to review procedures including that for professorial appointments.

• A member staff comments in the survey (n=48):

‘I have never felt that my ethnicity has affected how much work was offered.’

6b: Ethnic Profile of Professional and Support Staff Promotions

Table Twenty-seven below outlines the number of PSS and management regradings during the period August 2013 to March 2015.

of 73

Table Twenty-seven: Professional Support and Management staff regradings during the period August 2013 to March 2015

White British Other BME Total no. of regradings*

HC % HC %

01.08.13 – 31.07.14 80 93.0 <5 7.0 86

01.08.14 – 31.03.15 25 96.0 >5 4.0 26

Total* 105 94.0 7 6.0 112

*unrounded

• During the academic year 2013-2014, 93% of successful regrading applications were from White British staff compared to 7% from BME staff. This compares favourably to the overall proportions of White and BME PSS and management.

• The figures for the current academic year suggest a slight fall in successful BME regradings, but the numbers are small. We will continue to track successful regradings by protected characteristics, including ethnicity.

• It is noted that BME academic staff have a higher percentage of successful regradings than BME PSS and management staff (Table Twenty-six). A member of staff comments in the Survey (n=48):

‘Promotion for ethnic groups is very rare and not applicable to many like myself.’

6c: Research Excellence Framework 2014

The Table Twenty-eight highlights the units of assessment, staff numbers and ethnicity profile for the University’s submission to the Research Excellence Framework (REF) 2014. We do not have ethnicity data from the Research Assessment Exercise.

of 73

Table Twenty-eight: Research Excellence Framework 2014

Unit of Assessment Total Staff H/C

Ethnicity – White British

Ethnicity – Other BME

Psychology, Psychiatry and Neuroscience 15 93% 7%

Computer Science and Informatics 9 67% 33%

General Engineering 10 50% 50%

Business and Management Studies 9 89% 11%

Education 8 75% 25%

Sport and Exercise Sciences, Leisure and Tourism 14 79% 21%

Art and Design: History, Practice and Theory 12 100% 0%

Communication, Cultural and Media Studies, Library and Information Management

14 100% 0%

Total 91 (76) 83.5 (15) 16.5%

• We know that the density of BME academic staff is 13%. Of those academics submitting to the REF, 17% were from BME backgrounds.

• Our BME academic staff successfully submitting for the REF were focussed in four units of assessment in a greater proportion (i.e. above 16%). However this also reflects the split of BME staff across the Faculties, and again highlights the low numbers of BME academic staff in arts subjects.

6d and 6e: Training, Development and Career Opportunities

The University is committed to professional development for all staff. This provided centrally as well as locally sourced by the Faculty/Service.

Mandatory development is focused upon legal duties, including health and safety and equality. The last mandatory training for all staff in equality was in 2013/14.

Other centrally provided training is themed around leadership, management, academic or professional support development, with a current emphasis on coaching. Resources include face to face workshops, on-line resources, one day events, multi day programmes, both accredited and non-accredited. The impact of these programmes is evaluated and an annual report submitted to the Executive and the Board of Governors.

of 73

Development provided by Faculties and Services may range from one day external events (conferences, seminars etc.) through to the sponsorship of an individual to undertake a relevant qualification. This happens at all levels from NVQs to PHDs. All professional development requirements are identified through appraisal or ongoing dialogue between managers and staff.

Annually there is a two-week programme of professional development activities, including keynote conferences on leadership, learning and teaching and professional support. The Learning and Teaching Conference in 2014 focused upon the BME attainment gap.

There are secondment opportunities. Staff are also encouraged to actively network outside the institution as a core part of their roles, within sector and beyond. A number of University staff occupy roles on the governing bodies of local colleges and schools. Here, there would be opportunities for BME to act as role models for the local community.

Professional development successes are actively celebrated as part of the annual Celebrating Staff Success event.

Given the feedback from the Survey about progression and promotion it may be that the take-up of training needs to monitored more closely and processes reviewed to ensure fairness and transparency. Table Thirty-one shows that only 3% of those members of staff undertaking University modules/awards are from BME backgrounds, well below the overall percentage of BME staff (ACTION).

Actions arising from Section 6

• Monitor take-up of training opportunities (ACTION 12).

• Review access to, and processes around, professional development in respect of fairness and transparency (ACTION 12).

of 73

Section 7 - Student Pipeline

7a: Ethnic Profile of Undergraduate Student Body

Broadly the ethnicity of the student population has remained static until the recent slight rise (Table Twenty-nine). This headline data is published in our Equality and Diversity Annual Report and on the website.

Table Twenty-nine: Ethnic breakdown of whole student population, tracked for 4 years

All Students

Ethnicity 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

BME 20% 20% 20% 22%

White 80% 80% 80% 78%

Undergraduate body: Domicile - UK and Non-UK

Table Thirty below profiles the domicile of undergraduates by faculty for the academic year 2013/14.

Table Thirty: Undergraduate Student Body, UK and Non-UK, 2013 to 2014

Domicile ACT ACT % BEL BEL % CES CES % HS HS % Total* Total %

UK BME 745 14.5 1040 21.2 755 16.6 885 15.7 3425 16.8

UK white 4270 82.8 3840 278.5 3775 82.7 4705 83.8 16590 82.9

Non UK BME 210 48.4 290 66.6 850 67.0 25 31.6 1375 64.1

Non UK white 210 47.7 125 29.0 385 30.3 50 64.5 770 34.7

Total BME 995 17.8 1330 25.0 1610 38.7 910 15.9 4845 20.7

Total white 4480 80.2 3970 74.5 4160 71.1 4750 83.5 17360 78.2

Grand Total* 5587 **24.8 5330 23.6 5837 25.8 5690 25.2 22561

* unrounded; **% of total UG Body – includes information refused and unknown

• 16.8% of our UK students were from BME backgrounds, lower than the current national figure available (2012/13) of 19.6%. However, it is higher than that of the local populations (see Section 3b).

• The density of BME students varies greatly from faculty to faculty, for both UK and Non-UK domiciled. BEL has the highest proportions of both UK and Non-UK BME students. CES also has a high proportion of Non-UK BME students.

of 73

• Of Non-UK undergraduate students, 34.7% identify as White. This can partly be explained by the high numbers of students from Europe.

Tables Thirty-one and thirty-two below give a full break down by ethnic category for UK and Non-UK undergraduate students.

Table Thirty-one: Undergraduate student body UK, 2013/14

UG Domicile Faculty

UK ACT ACT % BEL BEL % CES CES % HS HS % SO Total Overall %

A/AB-B 20 0.3 70 1.4 30 0.6 10 0.2 0 130 0.6

A/AB-I 100 2.0 180 3.6 125 2.7 150 2.7 0 550 2.7

A/AB-P 45 0.9 275 5.6 140 3.1 95 1.7 >5 555 2.7

B/BB-A 125 2.4 220 4.5 185 4.1 250 4.4 >5 775 3.8

B/BB-C 95 1.8 80 1.6 50 1.0 125 2.2 0 340 1.7

C 20 0.4 10 0.2 25 0.5 15 0.3 0 70 0.3

G/T 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 >5 0.0 0 >5 0.0

M-W/A 50 0.9 30 0.6 30 0.7 15 0.2 0 120 0.6

M-W/BA 15 0.3 10 0.2 20 0.4 15 0.2 0 55 0.3

M-W/BC 75 1.4 40 0.8 40 0.8 75 1.4 0 230 1.1

OAB 35 0.7 60 1.3 60 1.3 65 1.1 >5 220 1.1

OBB 15 0.3 15 0.3 5 0.1 15 0.2 0 45 0.2

OEB 115 2.2 25 0.5 20 0.5 35 0.6 0 195 1.0

OMB 45 0.9 30 0.6 35 0.7 30 0.5 0 140 0.7

OWB 0 0.0 >5 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 >5 0.0

Total BME 745 14.5 1040 21.2 755 16.5 885 15.7 5 3425 16.8

White 4270 82.9 3840 78.5 3775 82.7 4705 83.8 108 16695 82.1

IR/U 140 2.6 15 0.3 36 0.8 28 0.5 >5 220 1.1

UK Total* 5153 25.3 4896 24.1 4564 22.4 5614 27.6 114 20341 100.0

* unrounded; BME categories 1.0% or higher highlighted; data for Black background shown in bold

• Nationally, 19.6% of UK domiciled students are from BME backgrounds, 6.3% from Black backgrounds (Equality in HE: Statistical Report 2012, ECU). 7.1% of our students are from Black backgrounds.

of 73

Table Thirty Two: Undergraduate student body Non-UK, 2013/14

UG Domicile Faculty

Non-UK ACT ACT % BEL BEL % CES CES % HS HS % Total Total %

A >5 0.5 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 >5 0.1

A/AB-B >5 0.5 0 0.0 5 0.4 0 0.0 5 0.3

A/AB-I 25 5.3 70 16.6 535 41.9 >5 1.3 630 28.3

A/AB-P 10 2.5 10 2.3 20 1.7 5 3.9 45 2.1

B/BB-A 25 5.5 10 2.3 90 6.9 10 14.5 135 6.0

B/BB-C 5 1.2 35 7.8 10 0.6 0 0.0 50 2.1

C 25 5.5 100 23.5 40 3.1 >5 1.3 165 7.5

G/T 0 0.0 0 0.0 >5 0.1 0 0.0 >5 0.0

M-W/A 5 1.4 5 0.7 5 0.5 >5 1.3 15 0.7

M-W/BA 0 0.0 0 0.0 10 0.8 0 0.0 10 0.5

M-W/BC >5 0.2 5 1.6 5 0.2 0 0.0 10 0.5

OAB 25 5.3 20 4.4 55 0.2 >5 1.3 100 4.4

OBB 10 2.3 5 1.2 25 1.9 5 6.6 45 2.0

OEB 60 14.3 20 4.6 50 3.8 >5 1.3 130 5.9

OMB 15 3.9 5 1.6 10 0.8 0 0.0 35 1.5

Total BME 210 48.4 290 66.6 850 67.0 25 31.6 1375 62.0

White 210 47.7 125 29.0 385 30.3 50 64.5 770 34.7

IR 20 3.9 20 4.4 35 2.7 5 3.9 75 3.3

Non-UK Tot.* 434 19.5 434 19.5 1273 57.3 756 3.4% 2220 100.0

Grand Total* 5587 24.8 5330 23.6 5837 25.8 5690 25.2 **22561 100.0

* unrounded;** includes 117 staff; BME categories 1.0% or higher highlighted; data for Black background shown in bold.

• 34.7% of Non-UK students identify as white, and make up 47.7% of students in ACT and 64.5% of Non-UK students in HS. 57.3% of our Non-UK students were studying subjects within CES. This included 85% of those identifying as Asian Indian, 66% of those identifying as Black African and 56% of those identifying as Other Asian Background. 62% of our Chinese students study within BEL.

• It would be useful for faculties to compare the diversity of their areas comparison with other parts of the institution (ACTION).

of 73

• The International Barometer 2012 shows that international students generally have a good experience especially with support and teaching. Some would like opportunities to mix more readily with UK students. One comments (n=62):

‘I don’t have British friends and this is very bad for me because I wish to know more about the country I live in, especially the people.’ (International Student Barometer 2012).

• Those that do get involved have a better experience. The current vice president of the SU is an international student and comments:

‘The best thing about studying here are the diverse range of modules, the amount of support available for intentional students and the sheer diversity within the University.’ (International Welcome Guide 2015)

• More attention to the reasons for coming to us to study and experiences of UK, European and international students would help tailor support (ACTION).

• Reviewing welcome and induction activities, allocation of accommodation and social spaces may help students to make friends across cultural boundaries (ACTION).

Undergraduate Body – Mode of study

Tables Thirty-three (FT) and Thirty-four (PT) below give a summary of mode of study of the undergraduate body split by broad ethnicity.

of 73

Table Thirty-three: Ethnic Profile of Full-time Undergraduates, three years

UG FT Faculty

Ethnicity ACT ACT % BEL BEL % CES CES % HS HS % Total FT %

2011/12

Tot BME 385 12.5 830 46.8 635 23.0 375 17.1 2225 22.7

White 2680 86.5 910 51.6 2075 75.4 1805 82.5 7470 76.2

IR/U 30 1.0 30 1.6 45 1.6 10 0.4 115 1.1

Total * 3093 100.0 1769 100.0 2754 100.0 2188 100.0 9804 100.0

2012/13

Tot BME 385 13.5 760 46.5 645 23.8 400 18.6 2190 23.4

White 2445 85.6 850 52.2 2010 74.5 1750 81.0 7055 75.5

IR/U 25 0.9 20 1.2 45 1.7 10 0.4 100 1.0

Total * 2856 100.0 1631 100.0 2699 100.0 2158 100.0 9344 100.0

2013/14

Tot BME 360 13.5 610 42.2 510 23.2 400 19.3 1880 22.4

White 2265 84.8 780 53.9 1590 72.7 1665 80.0 6300 75.1

IR/U 45 1.7 55 3.9 90 4.1 15 0.7 210 2.5

Total* 2672 100.0 1450 100.0 2189 100.0 2078 100.0 8389 100.0

• The density of BME students studying FT has remained steady, although the proportion has decreased slightly in BEL and increased slightly in HS.

• The overall percentage of BME students studying with us, 22%, masks a considerable difference between faculties, with ACT attracting around 13% BME students, HS 18% and CES 23%. In BEL in 2011/12 nearly half the students were from BME backgrounds. This has now dropped to 42% but is still much higher than other faculties.

• ACT has a higher percentage of full-time undergraduates, but a lower density of BME students. The take-up of arts by students from BME backgrounds is generally low nationally compared to other subjects – 13% for art and design (Equality in HE: Statistical Report 2014, ECU). Although the percentage does match that for the local area, this could be an area to investigate at faculty level, especially given the numbers of UK BME undergraduates is around 15% for health courses as well as the full-time undergraduate density being higher.

• Pertinent comments from the survey include (n=62):

‘BME staff should be more visible.’

‘Visiting speakers/artists should be selected from a variety of cultural backgrounds.’

of 73

‘Suggested reading and exhibitions should be representative of the wider population. This will help existing students feel they have a voice.’

‘The art world is very white, male and middle class – universities have the opportunity and obligation to stat to change this culture.’

These comments of course mirror the solutions given for tackling underrepresentation generally, including that of women in science.

Table Thirty-four: Ethnic Profile of Part-time Undergraduates, three years

UG PT Faculty All UG PT All UG

Ethnicity ACT ACT % BEL BEL % CES CES % HS HS % Total % Total %

2011/12

Tot BME 36 18.8 107 14.0 78 20.4 103 8.4 324 12.6 2548 20.6

White 154 80.2 653 85.6 304 78.6 1117 90.7 2228 87.6 9695 78.3

IR/U 2 1.0 3 0.4 5 1.0 11 0.9 21 0.8 134 1.1

Total * 192 100.0 763 100.0 387 100.0 1231 100.0 2573 100.0 12377 100.0

2012/13

Tot BME 44 22.9 88 12.2 53 17.0 100 9.8 285 12.7 2474 21.3

White 147 76.6 634 87.6 255 82.0 913 89.4 1949 86.7 9005 77.7

IR/U 1 0.5 2 0.3 3 1.0 8 0.8 14 0.6 113 1.0

Total* 192 100.0 724 100.0 311 100.0 1021 100. 2248 100.0 11592 100.0

2013/14

Tot BME 26 19.4 86 15.4 41 17.8 44 8.0 197 13.3 2079 21.1

White 107 79.9 467 83.5 183 79.6 504 91.3 1261 85.5 7561 76.7

IR/U 1 0.7 6 1.1 6 2.6 4 0.7 17 1.2 224 2.3

Total * 134 100.0 559 100.0 230 100.0 552 100.0 1475 100.0 9864 100.0

*unrounded

• Although the density of BME students is overall lower for PT undergraduates, this again hides considerable differences between faculties. ACT has the highest density of BME students at around 20%, higher than that of its full-time students (13%). It would be worth investigating what it is about arts that attracts more part-time BME students.

• Health has the lowest density of PT BME students at around 8%. This again is worth investigating due to the high numbers of part-time students and the fact that many are from an area with a high BME local population. Many of the part-time courses in HS concern professional development which suggests historically low numbers of ethnic minorities coming into health related professions.

of 73

Tables Thirty-five (FT) and Thirty-six (PT) profiles the undergraduate student body for the last academic year, 2013/14 by faculty disaggregated into ethnic categories.

Table Thirty-five: Ethnic Profile of Full-time Undergraduates, 2013/14

UG FT

2013/14

Faculty All UG FT All UG

Ethnicity ACT ACT %

BEL BEL %

CES CES %

HS HS % Total % Total %

A >1 >0.1 5 0.4 15 0.7 >5 0.0 25 0.3 25 0.2

A/AB-B 10 0.4 45 3.0 15 0.8 10 0.5 80 1.0 85 0.9

A/AB-I 55 2.0 70 4.8 80 3.7 40 1.8 240 2.9 270 2.7

A/AB-P 35 1.2 175 12.1 85 3.8 35 1.6 325 3.9 365 3.7

B/BB-A 55 2.1 120 8.4 125 5.8 160 7.6 460 5.5 510 5.1

B/BB-C 40 1.5 40 2.8 30 1.4 55 2.6 170 2.0 190 1.9

C 15 0.5 65 4.3 25 1.2 5 0.2 110 1.3 110 1.1

G/T 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

M-W/A 30 1.1 15 1.0 15 0.7 10 0.4 70 0.8 70 0.7

M-W/BA 10 0.4 5 0.4 15 0.6 5 0.3 35 0.4 40 0.4

M-W/BC 50 1.8 20 1.2 20 1.0 30 1.5 115 1.4 130 1.3

OAB 20 0.6 30 1.9 40 1.9 20 1.0 110 1.3 125 1.3

OBB 10 0.4 10 0.6 5 0.3 10 0.4 35 0.4 35 0.4

OEB 15 0.6 15 0.9 15 0.6 15 0.7 55 0.7 70 0.7

OMB 20 0.8 10 0.5 15 0.7 10 0.5 55 0.6 60 0.6

OWB 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Tot BME 360 13.5 610 42.2 510 23.2 400 19.3 1880 22.4 2080 21.1

White 2265 84.8 780 53.9 1590 72.7 1665 80.0 6300 75.1 7560 76.7

IR/U 45 1.7 60 3.9 90 4.1 15 0.7 205 2.5 225 2.3

Total* 2672 1450 2189 2078 8389 9864

*unrounded; note ethnic categories above 1.0 highlighted; Black background highlighted in bold

• Undergraduate full-time students identifying as Black are clustered in CES and HS, making up nearly half of all BME students. Issues of progression and attainment are particularly pertinent here (ACTION).

• BEL has a particularly high % of BME full-time students. Just over half of these are from Asian backgrounds (c23%) and around 13% from Black backgrounds.

of 73

Table Thirty-six: Ethnic Profile of Part time Undergraduates, 2013/14

UG PT

2013/14

Faculty All UG PT All UG

Ethnicity ACT ACT % BEL BEL % CES CES% HS HS % Total % Total %

A 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 25 0.2

A/AB-B 0 0.0 >5 0.5 >5 0.4 0 0.0 5 0.3 85 0.9

A/AB-I 0 0.0 10 1.8 5 3.0 10 1.6 25 1.8 270 2.7

A/AB-P 5 3.7 20 3.2 10 5.2 5 0.9 40 2.7 365 3.7

B/BB-A 10 6.0 20 3.6 10 3.9 10 1.8 45 3.2 510 5.1

B/BB-C 5 3.0 10 1.8 5 1.7 5 0.7 20 1.5 190 1.9

C >5 0.7 0 0.0 0 0.0 >5 0.2 >5 0.1 110 1.1

G/T 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

M-W/A >5 0.7 >5 0.4 >5 0.4 0 0.0 5 0.3 70 0.7

M-W/BA 0 0.0 >5 0.2 0 0.0 >5 0.2 >5 0.1 40 0.4

M-W/BC >5 2.2 5 0.7 0 0.0 5 0.7 10 0.7 130 1.3

OAB >5 1.5 10 1.6 >5 1.3 5 0.9 20 1.3 125 1.3

OBB 0 0.0 >5 0.2 0 0.0 0 0.0 >5 0.1 35 0.4

OEB >5 0.7 5 0.9 >5 0.9 5 0.5 10 0.7 70 0.7

OMB >5 0.7 >5 0.5 >5 0.9 >5 0.4 10 0.5 60 0.6

OWB 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Tot BME 25 19.4 85 15.4 40 17.8 45 8.0 195 13.3 2080 21.1

White 110 79.9 465 83.5 185 79.6 505 91.3 1260 85.5 7560 76.7

IR/U >5 0.7 5 1.1 5 2.6 5 0.7 15 1.2 225 2.3

Total * 134 559 230 552 1475 9864

*Unrounded; note ethnic categories above 1.0 highlighted; Black background highlighted in bold

• We already know that some health courses draw their students from nearby urban areas with a higher BME density than the local area. Analysis at faculty level around ethnicity and mode of study would help to staff gain a deeper understanding of the student body (ACTION).

• Comment by a member of staff in the survey (n+48):

‘From my experience the number of ethnic minorities on the course is small – I don’t know if this is representative of the local community. If not, more should be done to recruit minority groups.’

of 73

7b: Ethnic profile of undergraduate students’ continuation rates

Table Thirty-seven below shows the percentage of students progressing onto the next stage of their course, along with a national bench mark. A new student information system currently being embedded should make tracking future continuation rates easier. Tracking is done at award level and careful attention given to why students might leave or be withdrawn.

Table Thirty-seven: Summary of student progression rates by ethnicity, three years with national benchmark

* data for 2012/13 – Equality in HE: Statistical Report 2014, ECU.

• Both White and BME students show greater rates of progression than the national benchmark. However this may hide issues for particular ethnic categories.

Table Thirty-eight below shows the data for 2013/14 from Table Thirty-seven ranked by progression rate, highest to lowest. While Table Thirty-nine gives greater detail of progression tracked across 3 years by ethnic category.

Ethnicity 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 National*

At start Prog % At start Prog. % At start Prog. % %

BME total 3947 3534 89.5 4235 3793 89.6 4092 3644 89.1 88.7

White 17055 16295 95.5 16117 15174 94.2 15067 14157 94.0 92.2

IR/U 1564 1541 98.5 3288 3058 93.0 4045 3710 91.7 -

Total 22566 21370 94.7 23640 22025 93.2 23204 21511 92.7 91.4

of 73

Table Thirty-eight: Percentage of students progressing to next year, 2013/14 ranked

Progression - ranked lowest to highest

Ethnic group 2013/14 Number (rounded)

Gypsy or traveller 100.0% >5

Other white background 100.0% >5

White British 100.0% >5

White 94.0% 15065

Other ethnic background 93.9% 295

Chinese 93.1% 535

Not known 91.7% 3800

Information refused 91.4% 245

Mixed - White and Asian 91.4% 115

Asian or Asian British - Indian 91.3% 550

Other mixed background 89.8% 135

Other Black background 89.7% 60

Mixed - White and Black African 89.3% 55

Mixed - White and Black Caribbean 88.8% 205

Other Asian background 88.6% 385

Asian or Asian British - Pakistani 87.4% 525

Asian or Asian British - Bangladeshi 86.2% 130

Black or Black British - African 85.9% 780

Black or Black British -Caribbean 85.1% 325

% progressed all UG students 92.7% 23205

The disaggregation above shows a wide gap between the percentage of White students progressing compared to other ethnicities particularly those from Black backgrounds. This is further analysed below.

of 73

Table Thirty-nine: Ethnicity of students progressing to next year of study, all courses, 3 years (not tracked)

2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

Ethnicity

At start Prog. Prog. % At start Prog. Prog. % At start Prog. Prog.%

A/AB-B 125 105 84.0 116 100 86.2 130 112 86.2

A/AB-I 602 557 92.5 594 535 90.1 549 501 91.3

A/AB-P 546 469 85.9 563 490 87.0 523 457 87.4

B/BB-A 661 556 84.1 739 627 84.8 778 668 85.9

B/BB-C 313 268 85.6 342 305 89.2 323 275 85.1

C 530 495 93.4 662 631 95.3 533 496 93.1

G/T >5 >5 100.0

M-W/A 125 118 94.4 128 118 92.2 116 106 91.4

M-W/BA 43 38 88.4 56 46 82.1 56 50 89.3

M-W/BC 202 183 90.6 201 183 91.0 206 183 88.8

OAB 354 326 92.1 356 324 91.0 385 341 88.6

OBB 79 69 87.3 65 56 86.2 58 52 89.7

OEB 209 202 96.7 290 269 92.8 296 278 93.9

OMB 158 148 93.7 123 109 88.6 137 123 89.8

OWB 1 1 100.0

W 17046 16286 95.5 16112 15169 94.2 15065 14155 94.0

WB 9 9 100.0 5 5 100.0 >5 >5 100.0

IR 212 199 93.9 375 321 85.6 245 224 91.4

U 1352 1342 99.26 2913 2737 93.96 3800 3486 91.74

Total 22566 21370 94.70 23640 22025 93.17 23204 21511 92.70

Note – Prog.= number progressing to next year

• The national progression figure 2012/13 for students from B/BB-C is 85.7%. This means that although our overall progression rate is higher than the national average, our B/BB-C students did less well in 2014. This is not typical however and progression rates vary from year to year. For instance in 2012/13 the progression rate was 89.2% for the same ethnic category.

• We will continue to track progression rates, particularly at Award level (ACTION). However, we recognise the issues are complex - for instance one course in HS attracts a number of single parents who struggle to balance caring, travel and study. This has a greater impact on their success than the fact that many are from Black backgrounds.

• Progression will be one of the areas being looked at by the Attainment Gap Working Group as outlined in the Section 7c below (ACTION).

of 73

7c: Ethnic Profile of Undergraduate Degree Awarding Rates by Classification

Table Forty below shows the percentage of undergraduates gaining a ‘good degree’ (a first or 2:1). It highlights the ethnic groups with the highest and lowest percentages of ‘good degrees’.

Table Forty-one and Chart One below give a summary of this information with the calculated attainment gap.

Table Forty: Percentage of undergraduates gaining a ‘good degree’

% UG gaining first or 2:1 Academic year

Ethnicity 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

Asian or Asian British - Bangladeshi 21% 36% 50% 46%

Asian or Asian British - Indian 33% 35% 40% 51%

Asian or Asian British - Pakistani 30% 34% 43% 47%

Black or Black British - African 19% 27% 39% 40%

Black or Black British - Caribbean 21% 16% 33% 36%

Chinese 29% 33% 35% 41%

Mixed - White and Asian 44% 46% 44% 63%

Mixed - White and Black African 25% 50% 44% 67%

Mixed - White and Black Caribbean 52% 37% 43% 54%

Other Asian back ground 39% 45% 32% 51%

Other Black back ground 23% 32% 29% 29%

Other ethnic back ground 30% 42% 62% 66%

Other mixed back ground 55% 50% 50% 42%

White 54% 59% 61% 68%

Overall % of good degrees 49% 54% 55% 63%

Table Forty-one: Attainment gap tracked over four years

Year White All BME Gap

2010/11 54.35% 30.4% 23.9%

2011/12 59.2% 36.2% 23.1%

2012/13 60.9% 41.8% 19.1%

of 73

2013/14 67.6% 46.8% 20.8%

Chart One: BME attainment gap tracked over three years

• In 2012/13 nationally, 73.2% of white students gained a ‘good ‘degree’ while overall for BME students this was 57.2%. For Black students this was 46.8%. Our students achieved lower results overall, with 60.9% of white students achieving a ’good degree’ in 2012/13 and 41.8% of BME students.

• This is also true nationally where 63.9% Chinese students and 59.3% Asian students achieve a ‘good degree’ (Equality in HE: Statistical Report 2012, ECU). For our Chinese students in 2012/13 this was 35%.

• This gives an overall gap of 16%. Ours for the same academic year was 19%.

• Chart One shows improvement over time which we need to maintain. We also need to benchmark ourselves against similar institutions (ACTION).

• Analysis of the data on ‘good degrees’ and attainment by UK and Non-UK, both European and international, would help inform discussions, although feedback suggests 90% of international students are very satisfied with the University (International Student Barometer 2012)

• However, one student commented in the Survey (n=14):

‘I believe I need to work a lot harder than the majority White to be able to get the opportunities which I deserve.’

Other work currently underway to address BME attainment gap

Careers service project

2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14gap 23.90% 23.06% 19.07% 20.79%

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

atta

inm

ent g

ap

Attainment Gap, 2010-2013

of 73

A recent careers service project focused on employability and students from BME backgrounds. The aim was to positively address discrepancies between graduate destinations and raise levels of confidence. One of our current Equality Objectives (see Section 9) is to improve the equality of student outcomes while there is also a Key Performance Indicator around improving graduate destinations.

Around two thirds of the project focus group were from Black backgrounds. They felt their experience at the University was equal to their White peers, but were concerned about attitudes of future employers. They suggested preparation for work should be integrated in courses, and were interested in having access to mentors. They also requested access to work experience and help in networking. As a result twelve students undertook work experience at the county council and a successful networking event was held with the Black Business Network. Careers are offering more coaching/mentoring to students to boost confidence and help with work experience and networking.

BAME Attainment Working Group

Since the reports first emerged around 2011, there has been considerable foundation work on the BME attainment gap, and it is a standing idem on the student experience committee agenda. The existing data has been analysed and reported on by the Director on Academic Enhancement as well as being the theme of last year’s Teaching and Learning conference.

We now have a separate working group looking particularly at our attainment gap and measures we can put in place to close it. This can be seen in more detail in Section 8 (ACTION).

Applications and offers

The data on ethnicity of applicants is tracked regularly but as can be seen in Table Forty-two, we have not been able to do so with any accuracy due to a lack of equality data before enrolment. This will improve from 2014/15 onwards with the implementation of the new student information system.

of 73

Tables Forty-two (A) and (B): Undergraduate offer rates, three years

A -All students 2013-14 2012-13 2011-12

Applications Offers Applications Offers Applications Offers

White 20% 23% 12% 8% 12% 8%

BME 8% 9% 7% 14% 6% 15%

Not known 73% 68% 81% 78% 82% 77%

B - UK Students 2013-14 2012-13 2011-12

Applications Offers Applications Offers Applications Offers

White 25% 29% 16% 19% 15% 18%

BME 7% 9% 8% 10% 7% 9%

Not known 68% 62% 76% 70% 79% 73%

• The data does seem to suggest that generally when BME students apply they do receive offers. Once more comprehensive data is available this can be tracked more accurately.

Destinations of leavers

The information on the destinations of full-time first degree graduates is collated and analysed each year. Table Forty-three below profiles this data for those graduating summer 2014.

Table Forty-three: Destinations of full-time first degree graduates, January 2014

Ethnicity FT Work % PT Work % Work + Study % Study % Study all Unemployed %

Asian 37.5 16.2 8.1 14.0 22.1 23.5

Black 48.8 16.3 8.8 11.3 20.1 13.8

Chinese 29.4 23.5 0 29.4 29.4 17.6

Mixed 45.2 14.3 9.5 14.3 23.8 11.9

Other 20.0 10.0 0 40.0 40.0 30.0

Unknown 40.0 0 10 30.0 40.0 10.0

White 48.2 20.2 7.6 9.5 17.1 12.9

TOTAL 47.1 19.5 7.6 10.4 27.5 13.7

• The numbers going straight into fulltime work are generally lower than the national data which is 59% of White leavers and 51% of BME leavers. Nationally, 19% of white and 20% of

of 73

BME leavers go on to further study (Equality in HE: Statistical Report 2012, ECU). The University has slightly fewer White students going on to further study at 17%, whereas the numbers of BME students is much higher.

Student Complaints

The annual student survey provides data on a range of equality issues. Table Forty-four below shows the results for the last three years, focusing on race issues.

Table Forty-four: Responses from annual student survey regarding discrimination

Annual Student Survey - Equality questions 2014 2013 2012

Do you think that Staffordshire University is an inclusive community that treats students fairly and provides equality of opportunity?

94.3% 94.5% 96.8%

Have you encountered any discrimination or harassment while studying at Staffordshire University?

6.3% 7.8% 7.0%

If yes, did it involve staff? 25.1% 32.4% 29.2%

If yes, did it involve students? 74.9% 75.5% 81.1%

Was it due to race? 32.7% 35.9% 43.7%

Did you report it? 33.3% 21.9% 19.0%

Was it dealt with effectively? 57.9% 32.3% 36.0%

Overall the feedback is that we are an inclusive and welcoming institution. It is particularly disappointing to see that there are still incidents involving staff despite mandatory equality training (ACTION). However, more incidents are reported and dealt with satisfactorily.

Race Equality Survey

The student respondents to the Survey were generally more positive than staff although care needs to be taken with such a small sample.

The students felt able to be themselves, and felt safe on campus. They felt fellow students and staff treated them with respect and would recommend the University to others. They felt the lecturers were confident in facilitating discussions around race and they themselves felt comfortable raising issues around race in academic discussions. They felt supported and knew where to access support.

There were some negative comments with some racially inappropriate banter going unchallenged. Increasing student awareness of behaviour, harassment and discrimination is one of our current equality objectives.

of 73

Some commented that the curriculum and suggested reading could be more culturally diverse. This is picked up under Section 8.

7d: Ethnic profile of postgraduate students

Post graduate Taught and Research Degrees

Analysis of the destination of undergraduate leavers shows that 27% BME students went on to further study as opposed to 17% of white students. Table Forty-five below shows the data for postgraduate degrees, both taught and research, for the last academic year by ethnic category.

of 73

Table Four-five: Postgraduate Taught and Research Degrees, 2013/14

PG

2013/14

PG Taught (PGT) PGT Total PG Research (PGR) PGR Total PG Total

Ethnicity ACT %

BEL %

CES %

HS % % ACT %

BEL %

CES %

HS % %

A 0.8 0.1 3.0 0.0 18 1.1 0.0 0.0 5.1 0.0 5 2.9 23

A/AB-B 0.0 0.6 0.9 0.0 9 0.6 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 >5 0.6 10

A/AB-I 4.8 8.4 66.7 4.5 433 26.6 0.0 0.0 3.0 4.0 >5 2.3 437

A/AB-P 0.0 3.3 2.2 0.7 36 2.2 3.3 0.0 2.0 0.0 3 1.8 39

B/BB-A 0.0 2.2 2.1 2.4 33 2.0 0.0 5.9 12.1 0.0 13 7.6 46

B/BB-C 1.6 1.8 0.0 1.4 18 1.1 0.0 0.0 1.0 4.0 >5 1.2 20

C 0.8 0.1 1.1 0.3 9 0.6 6.7 0.0 2.0 4.0 5 2.9 14

G/T 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0

M-W/A 1.6 0.7 0.2 0.7 10 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 >5 0.6 11

M-W/BA 0.8 0.6 0.2 0.0 6 0.4 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 >5 1.8 9

M-W/BC 2.4 0.7 0.0 1.7 13 0.8 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 >5 0.6 14

OAB 4.8 2.4 2.1 0.0 33 2.0 0.0 0.0 18.2 4.0 19 11.1 52

OBB 1.6 0.0 0.4 0.0 >5 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 >5

OEB 4.8 0.9 0.6 0.3 16 1.0 0.0 0.0 15.2 0.0 15 8.8 31

OMB 0.0 1.0 0.6 1.0 13 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 13

OWB 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0

Tot BME 24.2 23.0 80.0 13.0 651 40.0 13.3 5.9 62.6 20.0 72 42.1 723

W 74.2 76.6 16.8 86.0 950 58.4 86.7 94.1 36.4 80.0 98 57.3 1048

IR/U 1.6 0.4 3.2 1.0 26 1.6 0.0 0 1.0 0 >5 0.6 27

Total * 154 830 963 330 2278 34 18 161 30 243 2521

BME** 2012/13

17.3 24.5 83.6 10.5 907 39.8 14.7 15.4 55.1 13.5 61 35.3 968

BME** 2011/12

11.6 22.0 66.4 12.7 765 30.7 6.5 0 60.9 9.5 45 29.2 810

* unrounded; **BME % shown for 2012/13 and 2011/12 for comparison; highlighted cells show BME density of 1.5 or more

• Nationally BME students make up 16% of PGR students and 19.4% of PGT students (Equality in HE: Statistical Report 2012, ECU).

of 73

• While the data for BME PGT and PGR in Table Forty-five above shows that around 40% of PGT and PGR students are from BME backgrounds, this is skewed by the data from CES where there are high numbers of Non-UK postgraduate students.

• Nationally students from Black backgrounds make up 6.2% of those doing PGT courses and 3.3% of those doing PGR courses (Equality in HE: Statistical Report 2012, ECU). Our PGT is around 5% and PGR around 11% - but this is again skewed by Non-UK students. Data will need to be disaggregated to plot the progress into academia of UK BME students (ACTION).

Postgraduate Taught Masters and PHDs

Tables Forty-six and Forty-seven show taught masters programmes and PhDs by ethnic category for 2013/14 along with the headline BME percentages for 2012/13 and 2011/12 for comparison.

We have very few students studying for a Masters by Research - they are all in CES and all are white. There were six 2011/12 rising to twelve in 2013/14.

of 73

Table Forty Six: Taught Masters 2013/14

PG 2013/14 Taught Masters

Ethnicity ACT % BEL % CES % HS % Total %

A 0.8 0.3 3.2 0.0 1.9

A/AB-B 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.5

A/AB-I 4.7 16.0 71.6 2.0 42.4

A/AB-P 0.0 2.1 2.4 0.0 1.9

B/BB-A 2.3 2.1 1.8 0.0 1.9

B/BB-C 3.9 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.6

C 2.3 4.2 1.0 0.0 2.1

G/T 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

M-W/A 7.8 0.3 0.2 0.0 1.3

M-W/BA 0.0 0.3 0.2 0.0 0.2

M-W/BC 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1

OAB 1.6 2.8 2.2 0.0 2.2

OBB 2.3 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.5

OEB 3.9 0.0 0.6 2.0 0.9

OMB 1.6 1.0 0.4 2.0 0.8

OWB 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total BME 32.0 29.5 85.0 6.1 (549) 57.3

White 62.5 70.5 12.2 91.8 (391) 40.8

IR/U 5.5 0.0 1.8 2.0 (18) 1.9

Total * 128 288 493 49 (958) 100.0

BME**2012/13 15.8 27.2 88.6 13.1 (733) 55.3

BME**2011/12 11.6 20.8 84.3 9.2 (660) 45.9

* unrounded; highlighted cells show a BME density of 1.5% or more

• There is participation in taught masters courses across all ethnic categories, but with high densities of Asian/Asian British Indian students in BEL and CES. Arts show good numbers of Black students taking up taught masters courses. This is pleasing considering the numbers of BME students on undergraduate arts courses.

of 73

Table Forty-seven: PHDs 2013/14

PG 2013/14 PHD

Ethnicity ACT % BEL % CES % HS % Total %

A/AB-I 0.0 0.0 4.5 4.0 2.4

B/BB-A 0.0 5.9 0.0 0.0 1.2

B/BB-C 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 1.2

C 0.0 0.0 4.5 4.0 2.4

M-W/A 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 1.2

OAB 0.0 0.0 13.6 4.0 4.7

OEB 0.0 0.0 9.1 0.0 2.4

Total BME 0.0 5.9 31.7 20.0 (11) 15.5

White 100.0 94.1 68.3 80.0 (72) 84.5

Total * 21 17 22 25 (85) 100.0

BME**2012/13 0.0 11.1 23.8 18.0 (11)13.2

BME**2011/12 6.4 0.0 **61.0 9.7 (45) 29.5

* unrounded; ** unusually large group of PHD students studying in this faculty in 2011/12

• PHDs are clustered in certain ethnic categories and faculties. All those undertaking PHDs in arts are white. There are students from Black backgrounds studying for PHDs in BEL and HS. Those in CES again tend to be Asian and Chinese.

• The overall percentage of PHDs being undertaken by students identifying as BME is 15.5%, less than the undergraduate student body at 21% but not significantly so. Analysis by domicile would be useful (ACTION).

Other Postgraduate students

Two of our Faculties also offer Professional Doctorates. The ethnic profile for these is shown below. Only ethnic groups containing data have been included:

of 73

Table Forty Eight: Ethnicity of Professional doctoral students

Professional Doctorate

2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

Ethnicity BEL % HS % Total % BEL % HS % Total % BEL % HS % Total %

A/AB - I 3.1 3.9 3.7 0.0 2.6 1.8 0 6.0 4.5

A/AB - P 0.0 3.9 3.0 2.9 0.0 0.9 0 0.0 0.0

B/BB - A 3.1 1.0 1.5 2.9 0.0 0.9 0 1.5 1.1

B/BB - C 0.0 2.9 2.2 0.0 2.6 1.8 0 4.5 3.4

M - W/BC 0.0 1.0 0.7 0.0 1.3 0.9 0 1.5 1.1

OAB 0.0 1.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0

OEB 0.0 1.0 0.7 0.0 1.3 0.9 0 0.0 0.0

Total BME 6.2 14.7 12.5 5.8 7.8 7.2 0 13.5 10.1

White 93.8 85.3 87.5 94.2 92.2 92.8 100 86.6 89.9

Total numbers* 32 102 134 35 76 111 21 67 88

* unrounded; highlighted cells show a BME density of 1.5% or more

• There has been a steady take-up of professional doctorate opportunities by both White and BME students. However the percentage of BME students is lower than the percentage of BME undergraduates – 10% as opposed to 21%. This may reflect the lower progression rates and attainment of BME students, preventing them from pursuing postgraduate study. This is turn would lead to a lower percentage of BME academic staff. Again more analysis by domicile would be beneficial (ACTION).

7e: Ethnic Profile of Early Career Researchers

We have very few early career researchers. Those progressing from PHD’s and coming into the institution from elsewhere tend to take up roles as lecturers and combine teaching with research. We have very few pure researchers. Of the 23 Early Career Researchers we do have, only one is from a BME background.

This, coupled with the data above, suggests we are missing out on progressing our own students, many of whom are from BME backgrounds, from PG courses to academic careers (ACTION).

of 73

7f: Supporting Minority Ethnic Individuals who are at the Beginning of Their Academic Careers

The University currently does not provide separate support for BME individuals at the beginning of their academic careers.

We do provide training for all new academic staff who will be teaching. Our PG certificate in higher and professional education is also open to PhD students and professional support staff who have some teaching time, and also to more experienced staff who wish to refresh their skills. It provides a route to Fellowship of the Higher Education Academy. We have our own teaching fellowship scheme, linked to the national scheme, to encourage pedagogical research. Analysis of take-up by ethnicity would be useful (ACTION).

Hourly paid sessional academics achieve permanency following four years continuous service.

Action points from section 7

• Encourage BME students to take-up postgraduate research opportunities and progress into academia (ACTION 15).

• Review diversity of student ambassadors (ACTION 13).

• Promote inclusive practices and multicultural approaches in pedagogy and curricula (ACTION 16).

• Analyse PHD and postgraduate data by UK and Non-UK (ACTION 15).

• Analyse faculty data at a deeper level to provide a profile of the diversity of each faculty (ACTION 20).

• Review analysis of the experiences of UK, European and international students (ACTION 1).

• Consider further ways students can be encouraged to mix across cultural boundaries by reviewing welcome and induction, allocation of accommodation and use of social spaces (ACTION 14).

• Track progression and attainment of Black students in particular in business, health, computing and engineering. Benchmark against similar institutions (ACTION 16).

• Conduct deeper analysis of student surveys (ACTION 1).

• Review promotion of hate incident reporting; raise confidence in reporting (ACTION 19).

of 73

Section 8 - Diversity in Curriculum and Pedagogy

8a: Race Inequalities in the Curriculum

The University has a proud history of providing an inclusive learning environment that caters for our diverse student body.

As an institution we have focussed on inclusive curriculum for some time, initially with disabled students in mind. Developing inclusivity of curriculum and pedagogy with regard to supporting disabled students has been a very successful journey, which can be evidenced by attainment figures and qualitative data. This approach puts the University in a good starting position which enables us to address other diversity areas, including race.

However, evidence gathered at policy level (quality service, academic development) and at implementation level (faculties) suggests a more implicit rather than explicit approach to ethnicity and race has been adopted, especially in comparison to disabled students and staff.

Whilst we have an inclusive curriculum web resource with clear guidance for working with disabled students, the information provided for race/ethnicity and internationalisation mainly refers to webpages of other organisations and lacks University ownership. While our course approval procedures state that panels will consider diversity and inclusion, no specific reference is made to race equality. In the absence of clear guidance, the consideration of race equality is likely to lack a consistent approach and may be dependent on the experience of the chair and panel. In order to improve this we will need to explicitly refer to race equality at policy level with regard to curriculum design.

The University’s Assessment Policy does make reference to a ‘commitment to the provision of an environment which encourages and properly supports a diverse learning community’. It is also explicit in its requirement that ‘the equality impact assessment carried out early in the process of planning a programme should explicitly cover assessment as well as other aspects of the learning and teaching strategy’. Comment is made regarding cultural background in two places, but nothing specific is provided in how adjustments or changes may be made to be more inclusive, or indeed what impact cultural background might have when it comes to assessment. None of the documents for staff relating to the student online learning system provide any guidance on inclusivity. Some of these issues are being tackled by the BME Attainment Gap Working Group.

Encouragingly, there are also some projects under way that aim to increase our understanding of equality issues; the Forensic award group for example is investigating under-achievement amongst BME students and is adjusting its learning, teaching and assessment methods to suit those with BTEC entry qualifications – a group of students with a higher proportion of those from ethnic minorities. These outcomes and resulting good practice will need to be shared across the University.

of 73

Although race equality is not explicitly addressed at policy level, there appears to be plenty of evidence of good practice across all Faculties and subject disciplines at modular level. A number of examples were identified whilst collating evidence for this part of the application involving courses across all four faculties. They included examples of where diversity, culture and ethnicity is addressed as a matter of course in critical theory and concepts, historical aspects, ethics, discussions, practical demonstrations, course materials, reading/viewing lists, visiting speakers, outside visits and placements. There were also good examples where academic staff were using the diversity of the students themselves to enrich the course for others.

Although there are many examples where equality and diversity issues are being addressed within the existing range of subject disciplines, there is evidence of a lack of consistency and strategy. An Inclusive Practice Sub-Committee which includes student representation has been formed to look at this. The group will report to the main Learning, Teaching and Assessment Committee.

8b: Addressing Inclusivity in Pedagogy

Given that every member of staff has undergone Equality and Diversity training, it cannot come as a surprise that many academic staff are mindful of inclusivity when it comes to pedagogy and are making a conscious effort to include equality and diversity in their teaching practice. However this is focused on general awareness and not pedagogy.

The PG Certificate in Professional and Higher Education, mandatory for new academic staff, has offered a specific session on inclusive practice for a number of years. This has been reviewed and a more integrated approach taken so that inclusive practice now underpins the whole award. The needs and expectations of overseas students with the added impact of cultural identity and culture are being discussed, alongside discussion of issue encountered by home-based BME students. All this results in many small scale pieces of research as staff chose aspects of equality to focus on for assignments. This then translates into the good practice described in the previous section. However, the relative lack of general guidance and advice, especially for longer standing academic staff, results in a lack of consistency, especially from a pedagogical perspective, which will need addressing. Training opportunities on pedagogy promoting inclusivity with particular focus on race will need to be developed. An inclusive practice ‘toolkit’ is being prepared by the Inclusive Practice Sub-Committee

When collecting evidence in became apparent almost all responses were contextualised within the notion that students are treated the same, regardless of race, ethnicity or other characteristic. Whilst demonstrating a desire to be fair to all students regardless of background, this masks the necessity to treat students differently to afford them the same opportunities. This link is often not made by academics, even when the evidence suggests otherwise.

of 73

It can be evidenced that Non-UK students have a disproportionately high percentage of academic misconduct cases. It is obvious that this group of students needs to be treated differently in order to provide them with the same opportunities of achievement as students from backgrounds where issues of academic misconduct are well understood. Over the last few years appropriate measures (workshops and extra support, provision of additional information etc.) have been put in place to address this issue. The Inclusive Practice Sub Committee will consider this further.

Library staff have undertaken a detailed analysis of customer segmentation, and aim to support costumers in line with their different needs. This is a clear move away from a ‘one size fits all’ approach. Where gaps were discovered, appropriate action was taken. This included specific induction sessions for Non-UK students delivered by academic skills tutors and improving access to online resources for overseas students.

Research projects support and further our agenda in addressing inclusivity in pedagogy. One such project is MINDSET, an EU (European Union) collaborative project. It aims to address issues of social inclusion in schools hosting large numbers from diverse backgrounds and educate students in social inclusion and acceptance of diversity. Outcomes include on-line resources and a diverse classroom management toolkit. The results can be used across the University to improve inclusive practice.

As feedback is generally anonymous, there are currently no mechanisms that allow feedback from minority ethnic students to be separated from general module and award feedback. To gain meaningful insight into the views and perspectives of BME students, qualitative research will need to be undertaken, such as the focus groups outlined in Section 2. This would also underpin and help to interpret the outcomes of the most recent National Student Survey (NSS).

In the NSS for 2014, response rates for students identifying as ‘Black’, ‘Asian’ or ‘Other’ are noticeably lower than for White students. In terms of overall satisfaction, Black students are more satisfied than the population as a whole, but this is a significant difference from 2013, where this group were considerably less satisfied. Asian students are the least happy with the teaching on the course, and with assessment and feedback. The BAME Attainment Working Group will continue to analyse this data. Once greater insight and understanding regarding the views and perspectives of BAME students has been gained, the outcomes will need to be translated into advancements of inclusive pedagogy in all subject areas.

A number of specific actions have already been identified with regard to changing policy and procedure to act as a catalyst to change practice. These are outlined below and form part of a separate Action Plan around closing the attainment gap and progress will be monitored through the BAME Attainment Working Group and the Learning, Teaching and Assessment Committee:

• Application and Admissions: o Review pre-admission communication to clarify expectations and support mechanisms o Staff involved with recruitment should receive training in unconscious bias o Augment data available to staff re previous educational background.

• Learning and Teaching:

of 73

o Review learning experiences of different groups of students to determine changes to teaching/support

o Further develop monitoring of progress through personal tutoring o Self-audit curriculum materials and assessment methods; introduce changes in line

with Inclusive Practice Toolkit o Disseminate best practice from similar Universities o Monitor take-up of academic skills support and target according to need o Improve monitoring of data (at award, School and institutional levels) in order to

inform actions • Student Experience:

o Review/monitor take-up of welcome and Induction, careers service, study skills sessions, student guidance advisors, placement opportunities.

o Undertake equality analysis of key policies/regulations to check for bias o Ensure existing practice for plagiarism, anonymous marking and academic integrity is

further explained and communicated. • Cultural and workforce:

o Identify BAME advocates within Schools who will be visible to all BAME students and work with staff

o Work with SU and BAME associated clubs/societies to collect qualitative data to inform other projects

o Further develop peer mentoring, encouraging involvement of BAME students o Through the Teaching Excellence Fellowship scheme, introduce a focus on recognising

and rewarding pedagogic approaches that promote inclusive practice o Prioritise funding for University-based action-research-projects that address inclusive

practice issues o Seek to improve the BAME staff profile through positive action o Introduce high visibility BAME role-modelling and mentoring scheme.

In summary, a number of issues around staff training, student awareness, policy, guidance, data collection/interpretation, and sharing of good practice, have been highlighted which will be addressed in the action plan.

Action points from section 8

• Implement and progress BAME Attainment Strategy Action Plan 2015-17 (ACTION 16). • Review quality documentation to refer to inclusive practice and diversity of protected

characteristics including ethnicity in line with QAA documentation (ACTION 17). • Planning, approval, validation and review of programmes to include more detailed guidance

on equality analysis (ACTION 17).

of 73

• Programme review meeting guidance to include more detail to guide discussion around inclusivity including ethnicity (ACTION 17).

• Share good practice on inclusive practice in pedagogy, particularly those that impact on BME attainment (ACTION 18).

of 73

Section 9 -Any other Comments

As mentioned in Section 7, our current equality objectives are all pertinent to improving the experiences of students and staff from BME backgrounds. These are:

• Ensure our staff profile improves as measured by equality and diversity requirements

• Increase staff awareness of their responsibilities under the Equality Act 2010

• Enhance staff equality, information and improve disclosure rates by promoting a culture in which people feel confident to disclose.

• Improve equality of staff opportunities and experiences

• Achieve and maintain an appropriately diverse student body

• Increase student awareness of their responsibilities under the Equality Act 2010

• Enhance student equality information

• Improve equality of student opportunities and experience

• Improve equality of student outcomes

• In all our internal operations to seek to – eliminate discrimination, advance equality of opportunity and foster good relations.

Each department has a local action plan based on the above objectives. These are regularly discussed at management team meetings and progress reported annually.

Work around Athena SWAN will also improve equality of opportunity for staff from BME backgrounds particularly professorial appointments, support for early career researchers and representation on decision making bodies.

We recognise that although we have made good progress more could be done. New objectives to be formulated next year will be informed in part by our RECM Action Plan. As staff commented in the survey (n=48):

‘The University must go beyond seeing racial equality as a paper exercise. It must be on the agenda at every level.’

‘We need to be aware that while BME groups are in a minority, efforts should be jades at every level to ensure their needs in terms of quality and social justice is made. We can’t become an inclusive university if it is not on everyone’s agenda.’

of 73

Section 10: Action plan

Ref Objective Action Milestones Lead Success criteria 1 (Sections 2 & 7: Students)

Improve understanding of lived experiences of BME students, separating out the experiences of UK BME, European and international students.

Conduct focus groups with BME students in 2014/15 and again in 2016/17. Fuller analysis of current student surveys by equality characteristics, including ethnicity. Investigate ways of gaining regular feedback from students regarding race issues as part of an embedded approach to continuous review.

Focus groups organised and information analysed summer 2015 and summer 2017 Fuller analysis of surveys summer 2016 then annually Regular feedback points identified, end of 2015/16.

Director of Student Experience Director of Student Experience Director of Corporate Services

Focus groups held and used to inform actions for Equality Objectives, BAME Attainment Strategy and other key projects. Analysis by equality characteristics reported and used to more closely target actions. Feedback embedded in cycle by end of 2016/17.

2 (Sections 2 & 4: Staff)

Improve understanding of lived experiences of BME staff.

Conduct focus groups with BME staff in 2014/15 and again in 2016/17. Fuller analysis of current staff surveys by equality characteristics including ethnicity Investigate ways of gaining regular feedback from students regarding race issues as part of an embedded approach to continuous review.

Focus groups organised and information analysed summer 2015 and summer 2017. Fuller analysis of survey autumn 2015 then annually. Regular feedback points identified, end of 2015/16

Equality & Diversity Manager Director of Corporate Services Director of Corporate Services

Focus groups held and used to inform RECM Actions, Equality Objectives and other key staff projects. Analysis by equality characteristics reported and used to more closely target actions. Feedback embedded in cycle by end of 2016/17.

of 73

Ref Objective Action Milestones Lead Success criteria 3 (Section 2: University)

Improve links with BME staff and students to enable issues to be raised and dealt with appropriately.

Review role of student networks in communicating issues arising for ethnic minority groups (BAME Strategy – Action 18). Consult with BME staff around establishing a network and/or contact with national bodies.

Discussed at focus groups summer 2015 Discussed at focus groups, summer 2015. Launch event spring 2016

Students’ Union Equality & Diversity Manager

Discussion of issues raised by BME students on appropriate committees. Staff network meeting regularly by 2016/17and issues raised at appropriated committees.

4 (Sections 3 & 4: University)

Review the current programme of cultural/religious events to determine if the balance of events is appropriate and can engage and harness the local BME community.

Consult with Marketing, Multi-faith Chaplaincy and Creative Communities to map current events and participation by students, staff and local community.

Meeting held and plan of events produced and in place by September 2015. Plan of events reviewed summer 2017

Equality & Diversity Manager

Improvement in BME student and staff attendance at events Number of events held involving local BME groups by 2017/18.

5 (Section 4; Staff)

Look to increase number of BME academic staff in subject areas where currently below national level.

Review numbers of BME staff by academic group. Review advertising and recruitment.

Autumn 2015 Spring 2016

Deans of faculty

Proportions of BME academic staff in subjects areas where currently low, approaching national levels by 2017/18

6 (Sections 4 & 5; Staff)

In light of BME staff clustering in lower grades, improve fairness and transparency of promotion and progression procedures.

Review training in recruitment, selection and interviewing. Rollout Unconscious bias training

Autumn 2015 Focus on unconscious bias at Teaching and Learning Conference, summer 2015

HR Senior Business Partners Dean of Academic Policy & Development

Training in place for all staff involved in recruitment, selection and interviewing activities. Unconscious bias discussed at conference

of 73

Ref Objective Action Milestones Lead Success criteria Programme of training for senior staff, 2015/16

Equality & Diversity Manager

All senior managers completed training in unconscious bias, end of 2016


Deeper analysis of professorial data by UK and Non-UK and ethnicity.

Analysis of BME professorial data by UK and Non-UK and full categories.

Analysis of data autumn 2015 Research Projects Manager

Analysis completed and used to inform professorial call-out 2016.


Consider Exit interviews to ascertain why staff, particularly BME staff, might leave.

Review policy on exit interviews. Policy reviewed summer 2016 HR Senior Business partners

Exit interview or similar process in place, end of 2016.

9 (Sections 4 & 5; Staff)

Improve diversity of professional support staff to more closely parallel local population particularly in lower grades.

Review density of BME professional support staff. Review recruitment, selection and interviewing processes particularly of part-time hourly paid lecturers, fixed-term and agency workers for fairness and transparency. Consider positive action approaches in advertising vacancies.

Summer 2015 Equality and Diversity Manager Deans of Faculty with HR Senior Business Partners HR Senior Business Partners

Density of BME in professional and support roles improved and approaching that of local population, by end of 2017/18.


Reduce density of BME professional support staff on PT contracts and improve numbers on FT contracts.

Investigate the disproportionate numbers of BME professional and support staff on PT contracts

Issue investigated 2015/16

Directors of service with HR Senior Business Partners

Staffing profile more proportionate in respect of white and BME staff, end of 2017/18

of 73

Ref Objective Action Milestones Lead Success criteria 11 (Section 4; Staff)

Continue to improve diversity at senior management level, on decision making bodies and on Board of Governors.

Already subject to Key Performance Indicator.

Ongoing annual tracking Director of Corporate Services

Staffing profile more proportionate in respect of white and BME staff, end of 2017/18.

12 (Section 6: Staff)

Review access to and processes around, professional development in respect of fairness and transparency.

Monitor take-up of training opportunities by professional support staff by equality characteristics Monitor take-up of academic development opportunities by equality characteristics

Annual tracking from end of 2014/15 Annual tracking from end of 2014/15

HR Business Partners (Developmt.) Head of Academic Staff Development

Take up reported through annual review and Equality and Diversity Report

13 (Section 7: Student)

Increase number of BME student ambassadors to better reflect student profile.

Review diversity profile of student ambassadors. Encourage participation especially by minority groups.

Summer 2015

Student Ambassador Manager

Profile of ambassadors more closely mirroring that of overall student profile, end of 2016/17.


Consider further ways students can be encouraged to mix across cultural boundaries.

Review welcome and induction activities Review availability and use of general social spaces. Review approach to accommodation of international students to establish whether improvements can be made in the assignment of accommodation, recognising the needs of these students as the primary aim.

Summer 2015 During 2015/16 During 2015/16

Director of Student Experience Accommod-ation Manager

of 73

Ref Objective Action Milestones Lead Success criteria 15 (Section 7: Student)

Encourage UK BME students to take-up PGR opportunities and progress into academia.

Analyse current take-up of PHD and PG courses by ethnicity, UK and Non-UK.

End of 2015/16 Deans of Faculty and Heads of School

Increased density of UK BME students taking-up PGR and PHDs opportunities by end of 2017/18.


Implement and progress BAME Attainment Action Plan.

As detailed in separate Action Plan and as outlined in Section 8).


Deputy Vice Chancellor – Academic; Director of Corporate Services



Quality documentation to explicitly refer to equality characteristics including race.

Review quality documentation to explicitly refer to inclusive design and diversity of protected characteristics as per QAA guidance.

To be in place of QAA review Director of Quality Enhancement

All quality and course validation and review documentation revised by QAA review.


Incorporate good practice on inclusive practice, particularly with BME UK students and international students.

Share outcomes of good practice between Faculties. Consider workshops. Develop inclusive practice ‘toolkit’

Workshops held during 2015/16 Summer 2015

Head of Academic Staff Development

Good practice available to all academic staff on website. Inclusive practice ‘toolkit’ available for use by academic staff.


Increase knowledge and use of hate-incident reporting process.

Continue to track rate of reporting and confidence through undergraduate student survey. Review information available on website around hate incidents, reporting and policing.

Ongoing End of 2015/16

Director of Student Services

Increase in reporting and confidence reported in annual Diversity Report

of 73

Ref Objective Action Milestones Lead Success criteria 20 (All sections: University)

Inform decision making with deeper analysis of HESA and other monitoring data, both staff and student.

Provide data on student equality characteristics, particularly ethnic category. Provide data on staff equality characteristics, particularly ethnic category. Monitor and provide data on other pertinent students groups such as low-socio-economic, care-leavers, parents, part-time and distance learners.

End of 2015/16 Corporate Performance Information Manager.

Monitoring information available for relevant decision making bodies, faculties and services and for equality analysis.

level of award application – bronze pilot application form... · level of award application –...

Documents