Fighting the tide

Understanding the difficulties facing Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) Doctoral Students’ pursuing a career in Academia

Jason Arday
aerial view of graduates wearing hats


There are a plethora of  issues  within  higher  education  (HE)  which  continually  reinforce aspects of inequality and discrimination. These particular issues are aligned to institutionally racist structures, which continue to disadvantage and oppress Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME)1 individuals  attempting  to  navigate  their  academic  careers  within  the  Academy  (Leading  Routes, 2019).

In September 2019, Leading Routes produced a ground-breaking report which revealed that there were a total of 15,560 full time United Kingdom  (UK) domiciled  PhD students in their first  year of study and just 3% of those students were  Black  (Higher  Education  Statistics  Agency  (HESA), 2019). A Freedom of Information request to UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) revealed  that over the last three academic years (2016/2017–2018/2019) of the total 19,868 PhD funded studentships awarded by UKRI research  councils  collectively,  245  (1.2%)  were  awarded  to  Black or Black Mixed students, with just 30 of those being from Black Caribbean backgrounds (Leading Routes, 2019).

A contradictory position often adopted within the Academy posits universities as being a microcosm or a reflection of society. The counter-narrative to this is that within HE there continues to remain a dearth of  BAME  representation  among  academic  staff  workforces, which is not reflective of ever-increasing diverse, university student populations (AdvanceHE, 2018;  Alexander & Arday, 2015; Arday, 2019; Bhopal et al.,  2016).  Historically,  HE  within  the  UK  has  been situated within a White, Eurocentric majority context, which has often conflicted with egalitarian ideals associated with  diversification  and  representation  within  predominantly  White spaces (Arday, 2019; Tate & Bagguley, 2017). The constant disillusionment with discriminatory practices in academia has seen a subtle resistance begin to emerge  in relation to challenging the existing normative orthodoxy and the overt racial inequality which permeates issues such as BAME university access and transition; BAME attainment gap; racialised experiences of BAME academics within HE; and the barriers faced by BAME  academics  attempting  career  progression  within HE (Arday, 2017; Arday & Mirza, 2018; Bhopal, 2014; Shilliam, 2014).

BAME representation and diversification in HE

Recent discourses and social commentaries have begun to explore and reveal the depth and extent to which institutional racism pervades within HE and its continual systematic disadvantaging of BAME individuals (Arday & Mirza, 2018; Rollock, 2016; Law, 2017). The packaging of HE curricula has historically resembled a dominant Eurocentric curriculum, often omitting particular canons of knowledge subsequently leaving BAME individuals on the periphery of academia. Contention emerges when considering the types of embodied knowledge that are valued within normative White academic spaces (Andrews, 2019; Leonardo, 2002; 2016). Attempts to decolonise the existing curriculum within HE, have often resulted in a reluctance to acknowledge  the role that BAME  individuals play in explaining and relaying  their own histories, in a way that is not distorted or conveniently processed for the ‘consumer’ (Andrews, 2019; Pilkington, 2013).  Such contexts are further exacerbated when aspects of representation and diversification are considered, especially as numbers continue to increase with regards to the number of ethnic minority students entering HE. Presently, ethnic minorities are healthily represented within the sector, with just under half of the UK’s student population coming from the BAME backgrounds (AdvanceHE, 2018; HESA, 2019). Sadly, this is not reflected in the recruitment of academic staff, particularly when focusing on the lowly percentage of BAME academics within UK  universities  which constitute just 13% of the academic workforce throughout the sector (Alexander & Arday, 2015; AdvanceHE, 2018).

Commentaries examining (Alexander & Arday, 2015; Arday, 2017; Mirza, 2018) racial discourse within education, aligned to inequality have highlighted concerns regarding issues concerning marginalisation and adequate career progression opportunities for BAME individuals. The AdvanceHE Statistical report 2017/2018 suggests that BAME individuals within HE institutions are less likely to benefit from permanent or open-ended contracts of employment in comparison to  their White counterparts (AdvanceHE, 2018). Despite legislation  (Equality Act,  2010;  Race Relations Act, 1976) to address inequality within society which often pertains to rhetoric, evidence suggests that BAME staff and students continue to experience significant disadvantage in HE in comparison to their White counterparts (Leading Routes, 2019; Mirza, 2018). Within HE matters of representation and diversification are often intertwined with race equality documents which are used as a barometer and indicator for equality and diversity practices and competence (Ahmed, 2012). Similarly, Pilkington (2013) notes that such surface approaches often provide a masquerade for the underlying issues which allow racial inequality to be fluidly maintained and flourish through overt and covert discriminatory institutional mechanisms.

The present context for addressing issues of race inequality and systematic racism within HE institutions lies in the hands of senior university stakeholders and administrators, best positioned to prioritise this agenda (Arday, 2018; Miller, 2016). Central to this argument is the need to prioritise diverse staff populations to reflect  better  representation.  Disappointingly,  this  often  ranks  low on the agenda of senior university stakeholders tasked with the responsibility of facilitating equality endeavours (Arday, 2018; Miller, 2016). Current strategies for challenging inequality have led many to question the extent to which HE institutions are addressing issues concerning racial inequities, particularly regarding access to HE for aspiring BAME academics (Bhopal et al., 2016; Boliver, 2016; Leading Routes, 2019; Rollock, 2016). Further research (Arday, 2018; Leadership Foundation, 2015) also signifies the dearth of BAME staff at senior management level and Professorial level, when  drawing comparisons with White counterparts.  Most notably the extent of this paucity has been illuminated within the ‘Staying Power’ report produced  by Dr Nicola Rollock (Reader in Equality and Education at  Goldsmiths, University  of  London)  which explores the career experiences and strategies of UK Black Female  professors. Rollock’s  report elucidated that within the UK (at the time the report was published  in  February  2019) only  27  Professors were Black women in British HE. This inequity is compounded with other statistical lacerations revealing alarming disproportionate figures which indicate that  overall,  there are just under 20,000 University Professors within the UK, with over 14,500 being White  Men  (AdvanceHE,  2018). Compared with only 150 Professors from BAME backgrounds (AdvanceHE, 2018; Rollock, 2019). In attempting to unpack such inequality it is important to acknowledge recruitment processes which continuously facilitate unconscious and implicit biases which inevitably disadvantage BAME individuals wishing to pursue academic careers (Arday, 2019).

Research undertaken by Mirza (2018) suggests that these types of biases occur automatically and are triggered by making judgments and assessments of people’s capabilities and situations, influenced by backgrounds, cultural capitals and personal experiences. Arday (2019) states that individuals in positions of power and authority must recognise and acknowledge potential personal biases and mitigate their impact on tacit and  instinctive behaviours and  decision-making. This anecdote becomes a powerful tool for the validation of existing racial inequality within HE when we begin to integrate which institutional actors maintain power and perhaps more pertinently how is this power exercised  (Andrews,  2019;  Modood,  2012).  Traditionally,  Gillborn  (2008) asserts that the beneficiaries of power and privilege within academia have been White middle class individuals. This cycle of inequality has been maintained by prevailing, normative orthodoxies which are reinforced through various facets of inequity and disparity (Ahmed, 2012; Mirza, 2015). Consequently, the landscape of academia operates within a patriarchal, hegemonic normatively White backdrop, where White privilege is consciously and unconsciously advocated as habitual practice, which subsequently marginalises and  excludes  ethnic  minority  groups  (Arday, 2017; McIntosh, 1990; Warren, 2007). Research indicates (Alexander & Arday, 2015; Burke, 2012; Pilkington, 2013) that attempts to address racial inequality within HE have been regarded as futile and underpinned by rhetoric and superficial endeavour in attempting to readdress the imbalance of equality regarding racial discrimination in HE (AdvanceHE,  2018;  Arday  &  Mirza,  2018). Dominant discourses suggest that insidious racism and organisational discrimination have become interwoven into the fabric of universities, with the authenticity of targeted widening participation interventions now heavily scrutinised and criticised for failing to address the structural and cultural inequalities that discrimination thrives upon within the  sector (Ahmed,  2012; Law, 2017).

Equality and policy interventions

Equality policies tasked with dismantling inequality and discrimination often fall short of their desired remit, with regards to increasing diversification and reducing marginalisation of minority groups (Ahmed, 2012). Infrastructures for implementing equality initiatives by university institutions are often weak as this issue has historically retained low priority status (Bhopal, 2014). Universities in particular have been accused of prioritising this agenda only when tangible  rewards and positive external exposure are to be gained (Tate & Bagguley, 2017). Within HE, initiatives such as  Athena SWAN  have  primarily targeted inequity situated around gender inequality, with a particular focus towards encouraging and recognising commitment to advancing the careers of women in Science, Technology, Engineering, Maths and Medicine  (STEMM)  within  HE and research. This became the catalyst for the potential advances that  could  be  made  with  regards to dismantling racial inequality within the sector.

Recent commentaries concerning this discourse claim that cynically, commitment by universities to address inequality are advanced by the potential for increased  external funding streams  and improved university league table placings (Ahmed, 2012; Arday & Mirza, 2018). Such endeavour often undermines the authenticity of initiatives which have a specific remit to address and  target inequality (Shilliam, 2015). Importantly, most equality initiatives have historically concentrated predominately on gender inequality, resulting in gradual but positive institutional advancements concerning this particular agenda, particularly in relation to the installation  of women in senior leadership  positions  within  the  Academy  with  modest  advancements  also made towards reducing the gender pay gap (AdvanceHE, 2018). However, there still remains a paucity of initiatives which specifically target racial inequality.  Within  UK  HE,  the  development  and initiation of the AdvanceHE Race Equality Charter Mark provides a framework for university institutions to examine, identify and self-reflect on institutional and cultural barriers which disadvantage minority ethnic staff and students. This initiative attempts to remove the long-held complacency entrenched within university cultures which have previously disregarded or neglected issues of equity, diversity and equality. Historically, the importance of this issue has regularly received secondary status within university institutions, as race continues to remain an uncomfortable narrative to unpack in the predominately White terrain of academia  (Ahmed,  2012; Arday, 2019).

Tate and Bagguley (2017) state that resistant attitudes towards challenging racial inequality within HE often promote cultures which view developing awareness of discrimination and diversification as laborious and arduous resulting in racial inequality remaining interwoven within our institutions. The contexts provided resonate with Ahmed’s (2007) notion of the politics of  diversity, which aligns itself with image management rather than challenging, disrupting and decentring normative Whiteness within academia. Essentially, the normativity of Whiteness in  its  various operant guises ensures that diligent examinations of  racism  often  succumb  to  nominal and non-committed endeavour within HE institutions (Leonardo, 2009).

Micro-aggressions and Whiteness within the Academy

The entrenchment of these racist cultures for BAME academics that already reside within the Academy are maintained through micro-aggressions, which sort to undermine and demean the presence of ethnic minorities within HE spaces (Huber & Solorzano, 2015; Rollock, 2012). Micro-aggressions for many BAME academics become indicative of the insidious racism that transpires fluidly through daily overt and covert mechanisms. This becomes a significant contributing factor to many BAME academics made to question and examine their own academic and professional capabilities (Arday, 2019). Du Bois’ notion of double consciousness encapsulates this lived reality within academia for many BAME individuals. The racial micro-aggressions is carefully articulated through subtle persistent daily reoccurrences which attempt to position faculty of colour as incapable or inferior to their White counterparts (Rollock, 2012). The identification of a more subtle type of racism, conflicts with a political and legal commitment  to  address  overt  racism and race equality within education (Law, 2017). Within this context, conflictions of racism are under-estimated and situated within a narrow and unsophisticated version of  racism  which  is considered only to exist in overt forms (Huber & Solorzano, 2015). Arday  (2019) contends  that  the  viewing of racism through such a constrained lens reduces ‘racism’ to  merely  the  recording  of racist incidents which only transpire outside of the ‘egalitarian’ Academy.

Importantly, for BAME Doctoral students the dearth of  academics  of  colour  within  the Academy, only serves to remind that entry into the Academy for ethnic minorities remains problematic with regards to  access  and  opportunities, as  targeted  diversification  and representation  of BAME academic staff continues to remain an after-thought (Leading Routes, 2019).

Academia has been a vehicle for the symptomatic ways in which Whiteness is constructed as normative, and illustrates how differing discursive techniques of White privilege operate together to racialize, marginalise and exclude ethnic minorities from academic spaces (Modood, 2012). As power becomes the operative, it is essential to observe institutional occurrences and the impact on representation and experiences of faculty and students of colour (Arday, 2019). These occurrences operate within a reluctance to diagnose and prioritise institutional racism. For  BAME Doctoral students many of their experiences draw parallels with ethnic minority academics  that have already traversed the invidious terrain of academia (Leonardo, 2009).

Such proclamations situated in colourblindness only  illustrate  the  continual  devaluation  of  race as a trivial issue which has become over-sensationalised, with people of colour now being perceived as hyper-sensitive or forever ‘playing the race card’. Such assertions remain a definitive ‘tool of whiteness’ that sorts to distract from the continuous victimisation of BAME  individuals within the Academy and society more generally (Leonardo, 2016). Unfortunately, the centrality of Whiteness, allows for the normativity of racism  to  fluently  pervade  as  many  individuals  within  the Academy continue to consciously and unconsciously benefit from institutional racism, discrimination and inequality at the long-suffering expense of academics of colour (Dei et al., 2004; Leonardo, 2016). Picower (2009) comments on the wide range of ideological, emotional and performative tools utilised to maintain hegemonic understandings of race in accordance with normativity. Hence, the manifestation of Whiteness within academia aligns itself with a symbolically violent legacy which continually and residually affects the mental health and wellbeing of BAME academic staff (Arday, 2018). Ominously, while this is a significant factor in attempting to understand the racialized experiences of BAME individuals within the Academy, Gillborn (2008) asserts that ‘Whiteness’ and ‘White privilege’ does not sufficiently reveal the multi-faceted power and domination of this phenomena. In essence, it becomes impossible to determine the effect of such dominant cycles of power and privilege and the effect they have  upon  ethnic  minority  groups within the Academy, due to the fluid normativity of these hegemonic behaviours.

Within the Academy there is an overwhelming disconnect  between  actions  and  words espoused by HE institutions regarding race equality (Ahmed, 2012). The rhetoric surrounding commitment by HE institutions to develop their equality and diversity practices around recruitment, promotion and student attainment remains questionable, with the continual inequitable landscape. Comprehensive initiatives implemented by universities lack the targeted and penetrative action required to systematically dismantle and fragment racial inequality within HE, with monitoring protocols rarely evaluated for impact and effectiveness by senior university administrators within institutions  (Mirza, 2018). The  introduction of the AdvanceHE Race Equality Charter in January 2015 provided a seminal moment for universities throughout the UK to prioritise and advance this agenda by developing targeted interventions against a set of equality  benchmarks  that have attempted to penetrate the perniciousness of structural, cultural and systemic racism within the sector (Arday, 2019). The relatively recent implementation of this initiative  means  that the long-term potency of this scheme remains under continuous evaluation particularly in the ever-changing face of existing racial inequalities (Andrews, 2019; Arday & Mirza, 2018).

Concluding thoughts

As custodians of the Academy we must continue to challenge and  hold  universities  to  account with regards to recognising and acknowledging the importance of having culturally, diverse HE institutions which are reflective of an ever-increasing multi-cultural society. If HE continues to  remain the province of the White middle-class, this will continue to compromise and contradict all the ideals we associate with the university being a reflection of egalitarianism and inclusivity. Greater urgency is required by the sector and senior stakeholders within university institutions to address disproportionate levels of under-representation  concerning  BAME  academics  in  HE (Arday, 2017; Arday & Mirza, 2018). Universities must aim to develop targeted initiatives which actively identify potential BAME students at undergraduate and postgraduate level and support their trajectory towards pursuing an academic career. Future scholars must be supported with applications for studentships at Masters and Doctoral level, in addition to being provided with reciprocal and equitable mentorship opportunities (Leading Routes, 2019).

A tectonic shift within HE is required to address the discriminatory and  exclusionary  topography of the sector. Targeted strategies should encourage the development of communities of practice and peer-mentoring initiatives with a specific remit towards developing bespoke support and targeted interventions such as career progression support and access to extensive networks (Leading Routes, 2019). Research awarding bodies must  also  reflect  on  their  distribution  of funded PhD Studentship awards to Black and ethnic minorities as the number receiving  such  awards are appallingly nominal, in comparison to White applicants (Leading Routes, 2019). Comprehensive and funded approaches towards  mentoring  BAME  individuals  with  an  ambition to pursue a career in academia must be developed in conjunction with academics of colour tra- versing this process to ensure agency and equity within  the  process  (Arday,  2017).  Presently,  these types of formal support mechanisms are non-existent for ethnic minorities within UK HE institutions (Law, 2017). There is also a need for universities to engage and work more collaboratively with policy and public-facing equality organisations such as AdvanceHE; The Runnymede Trust and the newly formed Centre for Transforming Access and Student Outcomes (TASO) in HE in a bid to procure pertinent counsel  on  suitable  and  effective  equality  intervention. University institutions also have a responsibility to recognise the  impact  of  cultural,  structural and organisational spaces within the Academy  and  their  continued  influence  in  perpetuating and sustaining discriminatory cultures.

Developing an appetite to  engage in difficult  conversations concerning race  and  racism and  the dynamics that impact this such as power and privilege are essential in sustaining anti-racist momentum. This is imperative if we are to prioritise racial discrimination and inequality as a persistent problem within HE. The acknowledgment of this is paramount in attempting to eliminate racism and create a truly inclusive Academy.


  1. Commentators suggest the use of precise descriptions regarding the  ethnic  background  when  describing  research findings (Bradby, 2003; McKenzie & Crowcroft, 1996).  For  the  purposes  of  this  paper, the term Black and Minority Ethnic and the abbreviation BAME will be used to refer  to  people  who  are  from ethnic backgrounds other than white British (including Black African,  African  Caribbean,  Asian,  Latin-American  and other minority ethnic communities) with more precise descriptions used where appropriate.  There  is  a recognition, however, that the term BAME is not universally accepted in spite of its use within the British  vernacular. It is important to acknowledge that the term BAME,  despite  its  widespread  use,  has  severe limitations and usually follows non-specific quantifiers such as ‘most’ or  ‘some’  (Glover  &  Evison,  2009). Typically, there has been an accepted use of the term BAME, which has been illustrated in research and Government papers. Given the purpose of this paper, this term is applied purely as a descriptive term having  been the preferred term for most of the participants throughout this study.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.


This work was supported and funded by the University and College Union (UCU).


AdvanceHE. (2018). Equality in higher education: Statistical report 2018. AdvanceHE.

Ahmed, S. (2007).  You end  up doing  the document  rather than  the doing:  Diversity, race  equality  and the  politics  of documentations. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 30(4), 590–609.

Ahmed, S. (2012). On being included: Racism and diversity in institutional life. Duke University Press.

Alexander, C., & Arday, J. (2015). Aiming  higher  race,  inequality  and  diversity  in  the  academy.  AHRC:  Runnymede  Trust, (Runnymede Perspectives). London, Common Creative: Runnymede Trust, (Runnymede Perspectives).

Andrews, K. (2019). Blackness, Empire and migration: How Black Studies transforms the curriculum. Area, 10, 1–7.   Arday, J. (2017). University and College Union (UCU): Exploring Black and Minority Ethnic (BAME) Doctoral Studentsperceptions of a career in Academia: Experiences. Perceptions and Career Progression. Creative Commons.

Arday, J. (2018). Understanding mental health: What are the issues for black and ethnic minority students at university? Social Sciences, 7 (10), 196.

Arday, J. (2019). Dismantling power and privilege through reflexivity: Negotiating normative  Whiteness,  the Eurocentric curriculum and racial micro-aggressions within the Academy. Whiteness and Education, 3(2), 141–161.

Arday, J., & Mirza, H. (Eds.). (2018). Dismantling race in higher education: Racism, whiteness and  decolonising  the  Academy. Palgrave Macmillan.

Bhopal, K. (2014). The experiences of  BAME  academics  in  higher  education:  Aspirations  in  the  face  of  inequality: Stimulus paper. Leadership Foundation for Higher Education.

Bhopal, K., Brown, H., & Jackson, J. (2016). BAME academic flight from UK to overseas higher education: Aspects of marginalisation and exclusion. British Educational Research Journal, 42(2), 240–257.

Boliver, V. (2016). Exploring ethnic inequalities in admission to Russell Group universities. Sociology, 50(2), 247–266.

Bradby, H. (2003). Describing ethnicity in health research. Ethnicity & Health, 8(1), 5–13. 13557850303555

Burke, P. J. (2012). The right to higher education: Beyond widening participation. Routledge.

Dei, G. J. S., Karumanchery, L. L., & Karumanchery, N. (2004). Playing  the  race  card:  Exposing  white  power  and  privilege. Peter Lang.

Gillborn, D. (2008). Racism and education: Coincidence or conspiracy? Routledge.

Glover, G., & Evison, F. (2009). Use of new mental health services by ethnic  minorities  in  England.  North  East  Public Health Observatory.

Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA). (2019). Higher education student statistics: UK, 2017/18 Student numbers  and characteristics. HESA.

Huber, L. P., & Solorzano, D. G. (2015). Racial microaggressions as a tool for critical race research. Race Ethnicity and Education, 18(3), 297–320.

Law, I. (2017). Building the anti-racist university, action and new agendas. Race  Ethnicity  and  Education20(3),  332–343.

Leadership Foundation. (2015). Why does ethnicity matter in higher education leadership? Leadership insights. Leadership Foundation in Higher Education.

Leading Routes. (2019). The broken pipeline: Barriers to Black PhD students accessing research council funding. UCL/ Leading Routes.

Leonardo, Z. (2002). The souls of White folk: Critical pedagogy, whiteness studies, and globalization discourse. Race Ethnicity and Education, 5(1), 29–50.

Leonardo, Z. (2009). Race, whiteness and education. Critical social thought series. Routledge.

Leonardo, Z. (2016). The color of supremacy. In E. Taylor, D. Gillborn, & G. Ladson-Billings (Eds.), Foundations  of  critical race theory in education (2nd ed.). Routledge.

McIntosh, P. (1990). White privilege: Unpacking the invisible knapsack. Independent School, 49(2), 31–36.

McKenzie, K., & Crowcroft, N. S. (1996). Describing race, ethnicity, and culture  in medical  research. BMJ, 312(7038), 1054.

Miller, P. (2016). ‘White sanction’, institutional, group and individual interaction in the promotion and progression of black and minority ethnic academics and teachers in England. Power and Education, 8(3), 205–221. https://doi. org/10.1177/1757743816672880

Mirza, H. S. (2015). Respecting difference: Widening participation  in  post-race  times.  In  C.  Alexander  &  J.  Arday  (Eds.) Aiming higher race, inequality and diversity in the academy (pp. 27–30). Runnymede Perspectives.

Mirza, H. S. (2018). Racism in higher education: What then, can  be  done?  In  J.  Arday,  &  H.  S.  Mirza  (Eds.), Dismantling race in higher education: Racism, whiteness and decolonising  the  academy  (pp.  1–7).  Palgrave  Macmillan.

Parliament of the United Kingdom. (2010). The Equality Act. UK Parliament. Parliament of the United Kingdom. (1976). The Race Relations Act. UK Parliament.

Modood, T. (2012). Capitals, ethnicity and higher education. In T. N. Basit & S. Tomlinson (Eds.), Social inclusion and higher education (pp. 17–40). The Policy Press.

Picower, B. (2009). The unexamined whiteness of teaching: How White teachers maintain and enact dominant racial ideologies. Race Ethnicity and Education, 12(2), 197–215.

Pilkington, A. (2013). The interacting dynamics of institutional racism in higher education.  Race  Ethnicity  and  Education, 16(2), 225–245.

Rollock, N. (2012). Unspoken rules of engagement: Navigating racial microaggressions in the academic terrain. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 25(5), 517–532. 543433

Rollock, N. (2016). How much does your university do for racial equality? tion-network/2016/jan/19/how-much-does-your-university-do-for-racial-equality

Rollock, N. (2019). Staying power: The career experiences and strategies of UK Black female professors. UCU.

Shilliam, R. (2014). Black academia in Britain: The disorder of things. black-academia-in-britain/

Shilliam, R. (2015). Black Academia in Britain. The Disorder of Things. black-academia-in-britain/

Tate, S. A., & Bagguley, P. (2017). Building the anti-racist university: Next steps. Race Ethnicity and Education, 20(3), 289–299.

Warren, S. (2007). Migration, race and education: Evidence-based policy or institutional racism? Race Ethnicity and Education, 10(4), 367–385.

Notes on contributor

Dr Jason Arday is an Assistant Professor in Sociology at Durham University in the Department of Sociology. He is a Visiting Research Fellow at The Ohio State University in the Office of Diversity and Inclusion, a Research Associate at Nelson Mandela University in the Centre for Critical Studies in Higher Education Transformation and a Trustee of    the Runnymede Trust, the UK’s leading Race Equality Thinktank. Jason is also a Trustee of the British Sociological Association (BSA). He sits on the Centre for Labour and Social Studies (CLASS) National  Advisory  Panel  and  is  a  School Governor at Shaftesbury Park Primary School in London.

Jason’s research focuses on Race, Education, Intersectionality and Social  Justice.  He  sits  on  the  following  trade  union equality committees; Trade Union Congress (TUC) Race Relations Committee; University and  College  Union (UCU) Black Members’ Standing Committee and the UK Council for Graduate Education (UKCGE) Working Group on BME Participation in Postgraduate Research. Jason is also part of the  Universities  UK  Advisory  Group  on  tackling racial harassment of students. He is a Graduate of the Operation Black Vote (OBV) MP Parliamentary  Scheme,  a  scheme focused on unearthing the next generation of ethnic minority Parliamentarians.

Jason is the author of the following titles: Considering  Racialized  Contexts  in  Education:  Using  Reflective Practice and Peer-Mentoring to support Black and Ethnic Minority educators (Routledge); Being Young, Black and Male: Challenging the dominant discourse (Palgrave); and  Exploring  Cool  Britannia  and  Multi-Ethnic  Britain:  Uncorking  the Champagne Supernova (Routledge). He is the Co-Editor of the highly acclaimed Dismantling Race in Higher Education: Racism, Whiteness and Decolonising the Academy (Palgrave) with Professor Heidi Mirza (Goldsmiths, University of London).

Jason also serves on the Editorial Boards of Educational Philosophy  and  Theory;  and  the  British  Sociological  Association (BSA) journal Sociology.

Jason Arday, Department  of  Sociology,  Higher  Education  and  Social Inequalities, Durham  University,  Durham, UK


Share this article on Social Media

Full Citation Information:
Arday, Jason (2020): Fighting the tide: Understanding the difficulties facing
Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) Doctoral Students’ pursuing a career in Academia,
Educational Philosophy and Theory, DOI: 10.1080/00131857.2020.1777640
Article Feature Image Acknowledgement: Photo by Good Free Photos on Unsplash