***There is still time to register for our webinar with UCAS Chief Executive Jo Saxton, taking place at 10am today, Tuesday 13th August – sign up here***
This HEPI blog was kindly authored by Samantha Ahern, Senior Digital Research Trainer at UCL. Samantha co-leads the Education activity for UCL’s Centre of Advanced Research Computing (ARC) and leads ARC’s research theme Transforming Research Communities.
Discussions around whose and what knowledge is privileged, social justice and coloniality have been part of the higher education discourse for many years. Thus far, most efforts have led to a degree of diversification of teaching and learning materials and work to decolonise the curriculum. Examples of work in this area include the Decolonising the Curriculum Toolkit developed by Dr Monica Chavez Munoz and Dr Tya Asgari at the University of Liverpool, the Decolonising SOAS Learning and Teaching Toolkit, the Decolonising Pedagogy and Curriculum strand at University of the Arts London and Mind the Gap, a handbook of clinical signs and symptoms in black and brown skin developed via a staff-student partnership at St George’s, University of London.
Additionally, Open Science and Scholarship initiatives have been seen as a tool for a more socially just approach to research publication and authorship concerns, however this also privileges specific groups and ideologies. Barriers can be one or more of cultural, linguistic, financial or political factors. The Academic Wheel of Privilege (below) is based on 20 intersecting identity types structured in concentric rings of ‘identity circles’, with increased levels of privilege as you move towards the centre. It was adapted from Sylvia Duckworth’s Wheel of Privilege and acknowledges the intersectionality framework developed by Kimberlee Crenshaw.
In academic publishing, there are tensions between where items are published (prestige of the journal, whether it’s indexed, and so on), how it is published (varying levels of open access to paywalled content) and associated costs and restrictions. These considerations have varying levels of impact depending on seniority, funding available and natural language. For example, the CWTS Leiden Ranking only considers publications which are in English and that appear in core journals. Core journals are defined as having an international scope and a sufficiently large number of references to other core journals, indicating that the journal is situated in a field that is suitable for citation analysis. They recognise that there are a number of arts and humanities journals in particular that do not meet these criteria.
Recent initiatives such as: the Agreement on Reforming Research Assessment, The Singapore Statement, UK Concordat to support Research Integrity and articles such as Tegama, N., & Fox, A. (2023). Ethics, the University, and Society: Toward a Decolonial Approach to Research Ethics, are opening up the discussion to research culture more broadly. The Royal Society defines research culture as encompassing: ‘the behaviours, values, expectations, attitudes and norms of our research communities’.
The lenses of critical pedagogy, which challenges the notion that education is apolitical and requires consideration of who it serves, and critical digital pedagogy, “demands that open and networked educational environments not be merely repositories of content; rather, they must create dialogues in which both students and teachers participate as full agents”, An Urgency of Teachers, Sean Michael-Morris and Jesse Stommel ,require us to question the behaviours, values, expectations, attitudes and norms of our approaches to teaching and learning, can also be applied to research culture and questioning of the embedded privileged, social injustice and coloniality in both how we undertake, teach about and share research.
Some of the tools and frameworks developed to support critical digital pedagogy approaches, such as the Learning Technologists Anti-Racism tool and the ALT’s Framework for Ethical Learning Technology, can be utilised to facilitate discussions in moving towards a decolonised research culture.
Taking into consideration the reflection prompts from the Learning Technologists Anti-Racism tool and dimensions of research integrity identified by the UK Research Integrity Office, there are key areas for consideration when undertaking research activities, these include:
The Project Team
- Who is involved in the project and to what extent do you as the project team reflect the audiences for the work (bearing in mind seniority and influence as an axis)?
- What impacts might this have?
- If working with communities, are they equitable co-creators? E.g. talking to/running workshops to discuss or brainstorm solutions together.
- What level of agency do all members of the project team have? Are you respecting the autonomy and interests of different stakeholders?
Methodology
- Are there ways in which it might cause harm or be colonial in design? Are there ways in which the methodology may be designed for a white or privileged audience (include viewpoints or cultural norms based on their experiences/not discuss other experiences)?
- What systems of knowledge and politics could be included that currently aren’t?
- What level of agency do participants have over their interaction with the project and data gathered by or about them, and their communities?
- Are we undertaking “helicopter” research or a partnership?
Tools and Platforms
- How might the tools or platforms you are using preference one community over another?
- Do they have the potential to concentrate or disperse power, encourage, or discourage self-worth?
- What societal and/or environmental harms may arise?
Dissemination and recognition
- Is the entire project team recognised in outputs, is it equitable?
- Is it our knowledge to disseminate? Will dissemination cause harm?
- What assumptions are being made about the form of a research output?
- What range of communities will the piece of work be available for?
- Is it possible to identify any communities who may be ‘excluded’ in some way?
- Are there ways to engage – equitably and without putting a burden on them – with potentially excluded communities?
In recent years we have seen a shift towards conservative, autocratic, and in some instances, far-right, political ideologies across Europe and globally. This includes the repression of LGBT rights in Eastern Europe and the performances of both the French National Rally and the German Alternative für Deutschland in the 2024 EU elections and recent elections in Venezuela. It is recognised that there is a privilege in being able to ask these questions about the cultures within our departments and institutions. There is also a recognised risk in doing so. This work may raise personal and institutional challenges – whether of bringing up uncomfortable feelings within yourself or being exposed to attitudes and responses that may leave you feeling isolated or marginalised. Before engaging with this work, it is important to reflect on potential places of support, ways to take care of yourself and potential sources of allies.
Together, let’s start to question the behaviours, values, expectations, attitudes and norms of our current research culture.