The nine papers that comprise this volume/issue belong to two Special Issues: (a) Special Issue on Decolonising Education and Pedagogies (in collaboration with AdvanceHE) and (b) Special Issue on Equity & Inclusion Efforts: Tackling inequality in educational and other contexts. Our decision to bring the two sets of papers together reflects their similarities in two ways: first, the content or focus of the papers, and second, the recognition and celebration of organisational practice. In effect, the papers offer readers and the wider field of education and/or organisation studies, case studies of practice, and meaningful evidence of practice-led organisational impacts. Accordingly, these papers move away from simply describing problems to showing how individuals and teams can work together to improve equity conditions within different organisational settings. Simultaneously then, these papers provide timely counter narratives to equity-focused research primarily located in the ‘problem-description’ realm, as well as hope. Both are equally important. Responsible research needs to not only articulate and describe problems of the day, but it also needs to seek out and amplify good practice so that the field can be much more balanced (or nuanced) in its understanding and/or interpretation of problems. Furthermore, the field also needs to understand what is working (practice or approach), where (in what settings), and under what conditions (leadership, resourcing, environment, and culture), and researchers have a duty to tell these stories and amplify this evidence.
In their paper, ‘“Our Community Building and Belonging”: A Student and Staff Co-creation Project’, Shakir and Siddiquee present evidence of a co-creation research project regarding improving ‘belonging’ and ‘community’ at a post-1992 university in the North of England. They highlight a range of co-created activities, events, and campaigns undertaken by both students and staff and how belonging and community were experienced by students. The authors conclude by noting vital relationships between connection and retention, and progression and success.
The paper, ‘Improving the Equity Landscape at U.S. Academic Institutions: 10 Strategies to Lead Change’, by Fernandez et al., shifts focus away from UK higher education to the United States. The authors note disparities with respect to race, ethnicity, and gender in US higher education institutions, particularly larger ones with health research-oriented missions. Through a review of available literature and practice, the authors provide 10 strategies for advancing engagement around Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Belonging (DEIB) in academic institutions. The authors conclude that the strategies are easily implementable and can lead to change for institutions and organisations. Crucially, the strategies are not seen as an end in themselves but as a springboard for greater and further action.
We remain in the United States through the paper, ‘Let Her Play: An Analysis of Title IX and the Development of the Modern Female’, in which Williams and Green link the modern development of women’s sports in the United States with the passing of Title IX in 1972 as an amendment to the 1964 US Civil Rights Act. The authors note that the Act provided access to scholarships for women at degree level and allows women to access to sports. They point to a multiplier effect of Title IX as a growth in the pool of women athletes worldwide (mainly through US college athletic recruiting). Despite criticisms and/or shortcomings of Title IX, the authors see it, regardless, as a tool for social transformation which has underpinned the sporting and education opportunities enjoyed by generations of women today.
Paul Miller takes us back to the United Kingdom, albeit to the schools’ sector instead of the higher education sector. His article, ‘School Leaders Leading Anti-racism and Inclusion: Evidence from Schools in England’, spotlights the work of five schools/school leaders in England involved in anti-racism and equity-focused work. Miller notes that the school leaders in question have come to this period of their work on the back of the murder of George Floyd. The paper provides evidence from one primary and four secondary schools of leaders re-imagining their practice and their organisations and, as a result, leading change at individual and organisational levels to improve experiences and outcomes for staff and students over a two and half year period.
In his paper, ‘Disrupting the Discourse: Applying Critical Race Theory as a Conceptual Framework for Reflecting on Learning and Teaching in Higher Education’, Brazant keeps the focus on the United Kingdom, although we are taken back to the higher education context. The author notes that the Higher Education Sector in the United Kingdom (UK) is being held to account regarding outcomes for learners who are not white. Citing the degree awarding gap, the author applies Critical Race Theory, as a framework through which UK higher education and structural inequality can be examined. The author concludes by noting the importance of ‘uncomfortable conversations’ about race as part of learning and teaching, and as part of understanding and dismantling with structural racism.
Charitaki, Kypriotaki, and Alevriadou take us to Greece, in their paper, ‘Greek Adaptation of the Teachers’ Attitudes Towards Teaching All Students (ATTAS-mm) Scale’. In their study of in-service teachers, they attempted to assess reliability and construct validity of the Greek version of the Attitudes Towards Teaching All Students Scale. By looking at results across two studies involving 863 teachers, the authors concluded that the Greek-adapted version of ATTAS-mm is a reliable and valid research tool for both pre-service and in-service teachers’ training.
The nine papers in this combined volume/issue offer the field some additional opportunities. Six papers are from the United Kingdom, five of which are about UK higher education. Two papers are from the United States: one is about the law as a force for good and the other is about improving belonging in US higher education. One paper is from Greece and its focus is teachers. So, in effect, two papers in the combined issue/volume are about teachers, one is about the law and seven are about higher education. As ever, a range of methods are applied including mixed methods, literature reviews, and qualitative and quantitative studies. Together, these add enormously to our understanding whilst highlighting gaps and opportunities for future research.
