strategies-for-supporting-inclusion-and-diversity-in-the-academy-higher-education-aspiration-and-inequality

1. Edited by Gail Crimmins
Strategies for Supporting
Inclusion and Diversity
in the Academy
Higher Education, Aspiration and Inequality

2. “This book brings together a comprehensive and diverse range of perspectives
and experiences of strategies and approaches that will be of value to anyone who
works in delivery, leadership or support of diversity and inclusion in higher
education. Its authentic voice, combined with a rich range of methodologies and
personal insights helps the authors to bring complex concepts to life in a manner
which is honest, thoughtful and challenging.”
—Professor Sarah Sharples, Pro-Vice Chancellor for Equality, Diversity and
Inclusion, University of Nottingham, UK
“This scholarly book provides a unique and coherent collection of ideas from
international researchers and practitioners. It promotes innovative research and
practice and is outstanding in its conceptual appreciation of diversity. It draws
together strategies to support the inclusion of a diverse range of students—racial,
gendered, social class/socioeconomic status, and dis/ability, and some with com-
plex backgrounds often rarely considered in equity policy in higher education.
In short this is an outstanding book with international appeal and the mes-
sages and practices contained in this book need to be heard by all in education
and in society in general! Every policy maker in education needs to read
this book!”
—Dr Gavin Reid, Psychologist and Author. Visiting Professor,
University of British Columbia (UBC) in Vancouver, Canada
“This volume goes a long way to extend the conversation about equity, diversity
and inclusion in our higher education institutions. It provides a contemporary
take on lowering institutional barriers, providing meaningful and effective sup-
port, and takes an unequivocal, learner-centred stance to teaching and the design
of the curriculum to ensure the success of individuals and equity groups. More
importantly, it normalises and celebrates those students as critical to the success
of the higher education enterprise. It is an excellent book and should be required
reading for all leaders and teachers in higher education.”
—Professor Kylie Readman, Pro Vice Chancellor
for Education, Murdoch University, Australia
“‘Crimmins’ excellent collection is a treasure trove of irrefutable statistical facts
and figures that blows away the myth that diversity and inclusion policies have
closed the equalities gap in higher education. Powerful fuel for policy makers and
Strategies for Supporting Inclusion and Diversity
in the Academy

3. social justice educators passionate about creating a truly global academy where all
can flourish regardless of race, gender, class, sexuality, and (dis)ability.”
—Heidi Safia Mirza, Professor Race, Faith and Culture,
Goldsmiths College, University of London, UK
“The chapters in this edited collection offer a refreshingly insightful and close
analysis of social and academic exclusion within higher education. Together, the
chapters demonstrate attentiveness to the intricate workings of structural and
cultural modes of exclusion and how these produce interrelated inequalities of
access, participation and outcome for students and staff. The book then har-
nesses these insights to develop a range of practical and pragmatic suggestions
for combating exclusion. This engaged commitment to action makes this book
particularly valuable for a wide range of university staff, including faculty, man-
agement and student support.”
—Carol A. Taylor, Professor of Higher Education and
Gender, Director of Research, University of Bath, UK
“‘Gail Crimmvins’ Strategies for Supporting Inclusion and Diversity in the Academy
is a thoughtful and inclusive inquiry into how leaders can maximize the human
potential in their institutions. This volume interrogates exclusionary practices
that limits access along the axes of race and ethnicity, gender and sexuality, abil-
ity status, and social class. In these 19 chapters, leading scholars bring forth
inclusive actions and practices that will be of immense value to scholars and
practitioners working towards an inclusive and equitable environment for all
those within higher education—a goal all leaders in all institutions should
strive for.”
—Richard J. Reddick, Associate Dean for Equity, Community
Engagement, and Outreach, The University of Texas at Austin, USA
“This edited collection confronts persistent and intersecting inequalities in
higher education internationally and the implications for the lives of students
and staff in Universities. This book illuminates the challenges faced by margin-
alised groups in different socio-cultural and higher educational contexts and
highlights the important of statistical evidence for demonstrating that equality,
diversity and inclusion is a rhetoric rather than a reality. The book addresses a
gap in the literature by focusing on innovative practices and initiatives deployed
by organisations and aiming to challenge and eradicate entrenched inequalities
of gender, ethnicity, race, sexuality and disability. In addition to breaking the
myth of equality in higher education the initiatives presented by the authors
disrupt arguments about the impossibility of equality within neo-liberal con-
texts of higher education and offers possibilities and ideas for change, action and
resistance.
—Maria Tsouroufli, Professor of Education, Brunel University London, UK

4. Gail Crimmins
Editor
Strategies
for Supporting
Inclusion and
Diversity in the
Academy
Higher Education, Aspiration
and Inequality

5. ISBN 978-3-030-43592-9 ISBN 978-3-030-43593-6 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43593-6
© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature
Switzerland AG 2020
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether
the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse
of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and
transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar
or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book
are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or
the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any
errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional
claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Cover illustration: © Stepan Popov / Alamy​
This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG.
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
Editor
Gail Crimmins
School of Creative Industries
University of the Sunshine Coast
Maroochydore, QLD, Australia

6. To Dave, Eadie and Will
And I’d choose you; in a hundred lifetimes, in a hundred worlds, in any
version of reality, I’d find you and I’d choose you (Kiersten White 2013).
I’d choose you again and again.

7. vii
It has been my pleasure to read Strategies for Supporting Inclusion and
Diversity in the Academy. The research and researchers are outstanding.
The editor has—with great skill—crafted a theorization of diversity that
is engaging, passionate, provocative, timely and rigorous.
The time is right for such a book. It is clear that higher education requires
revisioning. The university is an institution searching for a purpose.
Through much of its history, universities have maintained the power of the
powerful. Assuming that strategies for social mobility or widening partici-
pation—that is ‘access’—will transform the deep injustices in selection pro-
cesses or the diversity of graduates is not only naïve, but a denial of the
profound legacies of colonialism, misogyny, heterosexism and elitism.
Each chapter in this edited collection summons the most innovative
scholarship and evidence and offers profound visions and opportunities
for universities and higher education. I am inspired by the powerful
attention to women, disabling structures, and trans students and staff.
This is an inspiring book that offers agile and dynamic strategies for the
future of higher education.
Department of Cultural Studies
Flinders University
Bedford Park
SA, Australia
Tara Brabazon
Foreword

8. Inclusion is not simply about physical proximity. It is about intentionally
planning for the success of all students.
—Tim Villegas

9. xi
This edited collection of chapters establishes the importance of using statistical
evidence to demonstrate and remonstrate against inequities in higher education
(HE). In an age of ‘numeric nihilism’ statistics provide information about who is,
and who is not, included in various levels of academia, and presents evidence of
inequity in HE based along lines of race, gender, sexual orientation, social class or
socioeconomic status, and differing ability. Statistics that reflect widespread, lon-
gitudinal and inter/national inequity act as a foundation to the main focus of the
book—an examination of tried and tested strategy and interventions that sup-
port the full inclusion of a diversity of knowledge, students and faculty in the
academy. The volume captures specific examples of inclusive practice/s that are as
diverse as our (potential) student and faculty populations, and that are easy to
translate and employ by senior administrators, academics, and learning access/
student support staff. The practices presented in the collection thus can be
deployed by organisations, collectives, and individuals to both recognise and
combat social and academic exclusion within higher education environments.
Whilst most publications that explore academic inequality focus on
the causes and impacts of structural, psychological and cultural exclusion
based on racism, classism, sexism, and ableism, they rarely engage inter-
ventions to expose and combat such de/privilege. This book offers higher
education senior staff, policy makers, recruitment and student support
teams, as well as academics the tools to identify and subvert both explicit
and tacit exclusionary policy and practice. Through curating and collat-
ing the chapters in this volume, and by harnessing the expertise of equity
Preface

10. xii Preface
practitioners and academics who work towards social, racial, gender and
dis/ability e/quality, I hope to motivate direct action against social and
academic exclusion in the academy.
The collection is comprised of four main sections (excluding this introduction,
a framing chapter—Chap. 1, and conclusion—Chap. 19). These include:
Part II: Supporting Racial Diversity in the Academy. This section starts
with an introduction to and overview of policy and practice relating to
the promotion of race equality ethnic diversity in the Academy over two
decades in the UK. Professor Andrew Pilkington offers an account of
policy intent, action, and diversion in a repetitious pattern. He also iden-
tifies some clear strategy for breaking this self-repeating cycle by focusing
on accountability and outcomes in race equity in higher education. In
Chap. 3 Rebecca Gordon and Lakshmi S. Bose expose the limitations of
existing doctoral training programs and their opportunity to create epis-
temological pluralism. The doctoral program is thus presented as a mech-
anism to include a diversity of knowledges, ways of knowing, and knowers
in the academy that has the capacity to inform all future curricula. In
Chap. 4, Associate Professor Sandy O’Sullivan discusses the radical re-
thinking (and tearing down of existing structure) required to the support
of First Nations’ diversity in the modern university; including sensitising
the readers to the compounding impacts of gender non-conformity and
Indigeneity upon inclusion in HE. Dr Aura Lounasmaa, in Chap. 5,
explores institution-wide process and curriculum patterning designed to
support the inclusion of refugees in the context of neoliberalism. Within
the chapter, student-centred pedagogy is explored as a case study of good
equity practice. In Chap. 6 Dr Tina Lathouras demonstrates how a criti-
cal relational approach to community development can be adapted to
engage international students in post-graduate study. Lathouras also
employs a student-centred pedagogy to include the voice/s of interna-
tional students to inform the recruitment and engagement of interna-
tional students and action research to iteratively improve diversity and
inclusion in a Social Work program.
Part III explores strategy to engender gender diversity in HE. The first chapter
in this section, collaboratively written, focuses on a culturally sensitive research
support and mentorship program designed to engage Black American scholars
and graduate students to ‘thrive’ in the academy. Next, in Chap. 8, Professor

11. xiii
Preface
Kurana Chanana, explores both the processes and positive impacts of strategies
of gender inclusion in institutions of higher education in India. The chapter
specifically employs Indian women academics’ voices and their lived experience
of gender equity strategy to provide evidence of successful interventions that
might be adapted and implemented in other environments. In Chap. 9 Dr Tània
Verge outlines a series of measures employed to mainstream gender into the
quality assurance in Catalan universities. The chapter demonstrates the positive
impact that a collaborative approach to gender equity, which includes govern-
ment, university senior staff, and gender equity and Women’s Studies scholars,
can achieve. Chapter 10 focuses on strategy to support inclusion and success for
LGBTQ College Students and presents some easy to implement interventions
to include people of all sexualities in the academy. Drs Stephanie Mckendry and
Matson Lawrence also focus on interventions to support trans, non-binary and
gender diverse students and staff, and outline some of the processes developed
within the TransEDU project based at the University of Strathclyde, Scotland.
The TransEDU project is held up as best practice and was awarded a Guardian
University Award, a Herald Scotland GenAnalytics Diversity Award, and a
Strathclyde Medal Team Award in 2018.
Part IV examines strategy to support working-class or Low
Socioeconomic status (LSES) students in academia in Chap. 12 Dr Dawn
Mannay and Dr Michael Ward discuss ‘The Coffee Club’—an initiative
for mature and non-­
traditional university students. Creating a space for
networking, social inclusion and access to academic support, non-tradi-
tional learners can feel both included and heard. Such spaces also help to
create opportunity for student voice to inform academic and student
support process. In Chap. 13 Sally Tazewell demonstrates how she
employs a ‘funds of knowledge approach’ to engage diverse cohorts
through active and personally relevant learning. She outlines a pedagogy
and co-curricular design process designed to support epistemic equity by
valuing students and their existing knowledges, ways of working, inter-
ests and priorities. Chapter 14 investigates how students who have been
in the care system or looked after by local government services, transition
to higher education. Gemma Allnatt employs a case study methodology
to determine the need for partnerships between local authority and uni-
versities to both motivate aspiration and maintain care structures
throughout university. In Chap. 15 Dr Antoinette Geagea and Associate
Professor Judith MacCallum present a model of university outreach and

12. xiv Preface
school liaison that are designed to engage low SES students’ aspirations
for higher education. The chapter examines how a collaboration between
university and local industry can create a community of stakeholders
working collectively to engage students from non-traditional learning
backgrounds.
Part V: Disabling the Barrier of Dis/Ability in HE. Chapter 16 illustrates an
exemplary model of inclusive higher education (IHE), successfully implemented
at Vanderbilt University, USA, through the Next Steps at Vanderbilt program.
This chapter communicates how and why it provides college students with intel-
lectual disability the opportunity to learn and grow alongside their typically
developing peers in a rich and diverse academic environment. In Chap. 17 Dr
Susan Grimes discusses an ecological approach to address barriers to learning
within institutions that may create disability for those students with impair-
ments and presents the perspective of students on what would improve learning
for them in their university. They suggest that increased flexibility in delivery
and increased interaction with both teachers and peers, would improve their
engagement and sense of ‘belonging’. Finally, in Chap. 18 Dr Jacque Caskey
explores a tertiary educational inclusion strategy identified by 22 adult students
who have dyslexia and who are studying in a Queensland Technical and Further
Education (TAFE) Institute, Australia, and proposes that advocacy can be oper-
ationalised by all members of the higher education community to support inclu-
sion and diversity.
In the final chapter, Chap. 19, I discuss the principles on which strat-
egy for inclusion and diversity are built. These principles include learner
centredness, cohesive commitment to inclusivity, epistemological equity,
and adopting a radical approach to inclusivity in universities; and together
can be deployed to include and celebrate a plurality of bodies and bodies
on knowledge in the academy. I finally make recommendations for con-
sidering and striving to achieve equity transnationally.
I hope you enjoy this collection, and that it inspires you to maintain
your focus on equity and equality in all your endeavours. Thank you for
your engagement and I am happy to hear your feedback and/or ideas for
working collaboratively in this space.
Gail Crimmins

13. xv
I would like to acknowledge the scholarship, radical inclusion, collegial-
ity, and generosity of the authors who have contributed to this collection.
I would also like to acknowledge the work of Kristel Alla, and Eleanor
Christie and Becky Wyde from Palgrave Macmillan, for their consistent
support, sage advice, and general ‘smarts’.
Finally, to all the rockstars who are supporting inclusion and diversity
in higher education—keep on keeping on, the world needs your work!
Acknowledgement

14. xvii
Part I
Contextualising Layers of Exclusion in Higher
Education 1
1
Don’t Throw Out the Baby with the Bathwater: Statistics
Can Create Impetus to Address Educational Inequity 3
Gail Crimmins
Part II
Supporting Racial Diversity in the Academy 27
2
Promoting Race Equality and Supporting Ethnic
Diversity in the Academy: The UK Experience Over Two
Decades 29
Andrew Pilkington
3
Reflecting on Representation: Exploring Critical Tensions
Within Doctoral Training Programmes in the UK 49
Rebecca Gordon and Lakshmi S. Bose
Contents

15. xviii Contents
4
Killing the Indigene: Interrogating the Support of First
Nations’ Diversity in the Modern University 69
Sandy O’Sullivan
5
Refugees in Neoliberal Universities 85
Aura Lounasmaa
6
A Critical-Relational Approach to Community
Development That Increases Well-Being, Learning
Outcomes and Retention of International Students 99
Athena Lathouras
Part III
Engendering Gender Diversity in Higher Education 121
7
Thriving in the Academy: Culturally Responsive
Mentoring for Black Women’s Early Career Success123
Tamara Bertrand Jones, Jesse R. Ford, Devona F. Pierre,
and Denise Davis-Maye
8
Women and Leadership: Strategies of Gender Inclusion
in Institutions of Higher Education in India141
Karuna Chanana
9
Mainstreaming Gender into the Quality Assurance of
Higher Education Programs163
Tània Verge
10
Success for LGBT College and University Students183
Kristen A. Renn
11
Trans Inclusive Higher Education: Strategies
to Support Trans, Non-Binary and Gender Diverse
Students and Staff201
Stephanie Mckendry and Matson Lawrence

16. xix
Contents
Part IV
Re’class’ifying Academia 223
12
The Coffee Club: An Initiative to Support Mature and
Non-Traditional Higher Education Students in Wales225
Dawn Mannay and Michael R. M. Ward
13
Using a Funds of Knowledge Approach to Engage Diverse
Cohorts Through Active and Personally Relevant Learning249
Sally Tazewell
14
The Impact of Stigma, Placement Instability and
Individual Motivation on Successful Transitions in and
Through University for Care Experienced Young People267
Gemma Allnatt
15
Murdoch’s Aspirations and Pathways for University
(MAP4U) Project: Developing and Supporting Low SES
Students’ Aspirations for Higher Education Participation
Using School-­
Based University Outreach Programs287
Antoinette Geagea and Judith MacCallum
Part V
Disabling the Barrier of Dis/Ability in Higher
Education 307
16
Inclusive Higher Education for College Students with
Intellectual Disability309
Lauren Bethune-Dix, Erik W. Carter, Cassandra Hall, Elise
McMillan, John Cayton, Tammy Day, Megan Vranicar, Chad
Bouchard, Lindsay Krech, Jenny Gustafson, and Emilee Bauer
17
Student Suggestions for Improving Learning at University
for Those with Learning Challenges/Disability329
Susan Grimes

17. xx Contents
18
A Case Study of the Educational Experience of Adult
Students with Dyslexia Across Five TAFE Institutes
in Queensland353
Jacque Caskey
Part VI Conclusion 377
19
Inclusion in Practice: Operationalising Principles
of Inclusion and Diversity379
Gail Crimmins
Index401

18. xxi
Notes on Contributors
Gemma Allnatt is a PhD student in the School of Social Sciences at
Cardiff University, Wales. Her research explores the perception and expe-
riences of care leavers in higher education. She is currently working as a
Research Development Officer in the Wales School for Social Care
Research at Swansea University and is a registered Social Worker. Prior to
commencing her doctoral studies Gemma worked in a statutory child-
care team and also spent a number of years working in a residential unit.
Gemma has worked on a number of research projects during her studies,
including the Looked After Children’s Education project—understand-
ing the educational experiences and opinions, attainment, achievement
and aspirations of looked after children in Wales.
Emilee Bauer is Program Coordinator at Vanderbilt University, USA. As
the Program Coordinator, Emilee Bauer assists with admissions, recruit-
ment, and program operations. She also assists with development and
fundraising events in order to increase awareness and build new relation-
ships. Emilee moved to Nashville after earning a Bachelor’s Degree in
Human Environmental Science from the University of Alabama in 2016.
During her experience at Alabama, Emilee volunteered as a mentor for
‘Al’s Pals’—a program designed to help elementary students with com-
pleting homework, reinforcing reading and math skills, and participating
in enrichment and recreational ­
activities. She also dedicated her time to

19. xxii Notes on Contributors
the Boys and Girls Club of West Alabama by tutoring children and assist-
ing with special events while earning her degree.
Tamara Bertrand Jones is an Associate Professor of Higher Education
and Associate Director of the Center for Postsecondary Success at Florida
State University, USA. She uses qualitative methods and critical and fem-
inist theories to examine the sociocultural contexts that influence educa-
tion and professional experiences of underrepresented populations,
particularly Black women, in academia. Her previous work as a higher
education administrator and program evaluator also contribute to her
research interests in culturally responsive assessment and evaluation. Her
work has broad implications for recruitment, retention, advancement,
and professional development of faculty and doctoral students.
Lauren Bethune-Dix earned a PhD in Special Education at the
University of North Carolina, Charlotte, USA, in 2015. Lauren oversees
the program of study and all academic support initiatives at Next Steps at
Vanderbilt. She works closely with a growing number of faculty and aca-
demic support services to expand academic course participation and
progress. Lauren’s responsibilities include supporting admissions/recruit-
ment, supporting faculty, collaborating with various on-campus aca-
demic supports on best teaching practices for faculty, and assisting with
the evaluation of academic supports.
Lakshmi S. Bose is a PhD candidate at the University of Cambridge,
England. Her research centres on intergenerational female activism in the
contextofstatesecuritisationandmilitarisationinSouthAfricaandEgypt.
Chad Bouchard is Director of Career Development at Vanderbilt
University, USA. Chad Bouchard is responsible for leading the career
development initiatives for Next Steps at Vanderbilt, Vanderbilt
University, USA. Chad oversees the career development team, supporting
them to develop opportunities for students to increase self-determination
and employment skills through on and off campus opportunities. He is
currently involved in developing training and supports for Next Steps job
coaches, graduate assistants and community members. Chad is eager to
meet with any company or organization who wishes to increase inclusion
in their workplace. Chad graduated from the University of Victoria in

20. xxiii
Notes on Contributors
Canada with a degree in Psychology and Economics. He has been work-
ing with individuals with disabilities and their families for over twelve
years with a focus on employment for the past nine years. He has been
instrumental in co-authoring three Self-Determination curricula which
are currently being used in school districts and community organizations
throughout Canada. Prior to his position at Vanderbilt University, Chad
was responsible for all aspects of one of the most successful customized
employment programs in British Columbia, Canada. He is passionate
about empowering others to realize and achieve their potential in life.
Erik W. Carter is Cornelius Vanderbilt Professor of Special Education
at the Department of Special Education, Vanderbilt University, USA. His
research and teaching focuses on evidence-based strategies for supporting
access to the general curriculum and promoting valued roles in school,
work, community, and congregational settings for children and adults
with intellectual disability, autism, and multiple disabilities. Prior to
receiving his doctorate, Dr. Carter worked as a high school teacher and
transition specialist. He has published more than 200 articles, chapters,
and books in the areas of educational, transition, and community services
for children and youth with disabilities. He was the recipient of the
Distinguished Early Career Research Award from the Council for
Exceptional Children, the Early Career Award from the American
Association for Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, the Patricia
L. Sitlington Research in Transition Award from the Division on Career
Development and Transition, the Research Award from the Division on
Autism and Developmental Disabilities, and the Young Professional
Award from the Association of University Centers on Disabilities. He is
an active member of the Vanderbilt Kennedy Center and invests in col-
laborative partnerships across the university and state.
Jacque Caskey holds a Doctor of Philosophy, a Master of Education, a
Graduate Diploma in Further Education and Training, a Bachelor of
Applied Science, and has successfully completed Teaching Handwriting,
Reading and Spelling Skills (THRASS) training. She is an independent
scholar (currently undertaking her second PhD) and an experienced
tutor in Anatomy, Biology, Chemistry, Communication, English as a
Second Language (ESL), Essay Writing, General Science, Health Studies,

21. xxiv Notes on Contributors
Human Biology, Microbiology, Philosophy, Physiology, Reading, Society
and Culture, Sociology, Special Needs, Statistics, and Dragon Naturally
Speaking (assistive software). Jacque was a Disability Officer with
Technical and Further Education (TAFE), Australia. She has worked
with students for their learning support for many years and has a keen
interest in researching and supporting the learning and teaching of adults
with dis/ability.
John Cayton is the Director of Student Supports and Campus Life at
Vanderbilt University, USA. John Cayton joined the Next Steps team in
May 2016. He oversees the Ambassadore student organization and all
efforts involving Next Steps students’ campus involvement opportuni-
ties. Knowing who to join while eating meals, exercising, studying, or
participating in group(s) adds so much to a student’s overall college expe-
rience, and John looks forward to ensuring all Next Steps students can
participate in and contribute to Vanderbilt’s campus life. John earned his
Bachelor’s degree in psychology from Monmouth College, his Master’s
degree in Leadership in Higher Education from Baldwin Wallace
University, and previously managed community integration and residen-
tial services for individuals with disabilities in Indianapolis.
Karuna Chanana worked as Chairperson and Professor of the Zakir
Husain Centre for Educational Studies, School of Social Sciences,
Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India. She is a specialist in the
sociology of education and sociology of gender, focusing on higher edu-
cation, diversity, social change through inclusion, equality and educa-
tional policy. She was a national and international visiting professor at
universities, and a member of the United Nations Educational, Scientific
and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Forum on Higher Education,
Research and Knowledge. Professor Chanana has published peer-­reviewed
academic essays in national and international academic journals and
international books. She also authored Interrogating Women’s Education:
Bounded Visions, Expanding Horizons, and edited Socialisation, Education
and Women: Explorations in Gender Identity.
Gail Crimmins is a feminist academic at the School of Creative
Industries at the University of the Sunshine Coast, Australia. She works

22. xxv
Notes on Contributors
with arts informed and feminist research methodologies to unearth and
re-present the narratives and voice of various marginalised groups includ-
ing women casual academics, mothers with rheumatoid arthritis, women
survivors of domestic and family violence, and women in drought-­
impacted communities. Gail presents her research using both traditional
and non-traditional forms of research communication including perfor-
mance, film, creative writing, and traditional academic discourse. Gail’s
monograph, Theatricalising Narrative Research onWomen Casual Academics
(2018) and an edited collection of essays, Strategies for Resisting Sexism in
the Academy (2019) were published by the Gender and Education Series,
Palgrave Macmillan.
Denise Davis-Maye is currently Chair and Professor in the Graduate
Program in the Department of Social Work at Alabama State University,
USA. Dr. Davis-Maye is a licensed clinical social worker. She is an alumna
of Clark Atlanta University, with over 28 years of social work experience.
Her research interests include the cultural, community, and familial
impact on the emotional development of adolescent and the well-being,
contributions, and roles of women of colour.
Tammy Day, M.Ed. is Program Director at Vanderbilt University,
USA. Tammy Day joined Vanderbilt Kennedy Center in April 2009, as the
founding director of Next Steps at Vanderbilt. Tammy began her career
over 30 years ago as a special education teacher who was always interested
in the question, ‘What happens after high school?’ This interest inspired
her to pursue certification as a Work-Based Learning facilitator, and the
completion of a Master’s degree from Peabody College at Vanderbilt with a
focus on transition services. Prior to joining Vanderbilt, she worked for
Rutherford County Schools as a special education teacher and then the
high school liaison and transition specialist, where she developed many
new initiatives. Tammy works tirelessly with creative professionals and stu-
dents both on and off the Vanderbilt campus in the development of our
successful inclusive higher education program. She has worked to expand
these college opportunities across our state and country and currently serves
astheChairpersonoftheTennesseeAllianceforInclusiveHigherEducation.
Tammy feels honored to be in the business of helping to build a diverse
community that benefits all of its members.

23. xxvi Notes on Contributors
Jesse R. Ford is an Assistant Professor of Higher Education at University
of North Carolina Greensboro. He was a PhD candidate in the Higher
Education Program at Florida State University (FSU), USA. His scholar-
ship seeks to illuminate how students of colour experience higher educa-
tion. More specifically, his research explores academic and career
socialization, identity development, oppressive environments, and the
influence of race and gender on postsecondary educational settings.
Before his work at FSU, he served as an Assistant Director of Multicultural
Student Affairs at the University of Miami, where he provided cultural
and social justice programming for the university community. Jesse
earned his Bachelor’s degree in History with a minor in Communication
at Coastal Carolina University and a Master’s degree in Higher Education
and Student Affairs at the University of South Carolina.
Antoinette Geagea completed a PhD in which she explored academic
aspirations in adolescence. She is particularly interested in developmental
psychology in relation to childhood and adolescent behaviour, aspiration,
and social inclusion. Antoinette also engages arts education within
school-based outreach programs to support young people’s transitions to
higher education. She is also keen to inform Australian education policy
to support inclusive, robust and authentic learning in Australian class-
rooms. Her most recent projects include YAPS-WA study on youth activ-
ity participation and the Murdoch Aspiration and Pathways for University
(MAP4U).
Rebecca Gordon is a PhD candidate at the University of Cambridge,
England, exploring the work of a grassroots microfinance organisation in
rural India, impacts on women’s lives and daughters’ education.
Susan Grimes is a sessional academic at the University of Newcastle,
Australia. She has extensive experience in both university and school sec-
tors. She has performed the roles of advocate, teacher and mentor for
students living with the learning challenges of dyslexia and autism within
both sectors. Her research explores the experiences of students with vari-
ous challenges to their learning in higher education, including those liv-
ing with mental health issues, ongoing medical conditions and learning
differences.

24. xxvii
Notes on Contributors
Jenny Gustafson is Director of Residential Supports at Vanderbilt
University, USA. Jenny Gustafson works with students, families, and the
Nashville community to develop off-campus housing options. For Jenny,
expanding opportunities for people with disabilities to live as indepen-
dently as possible is a principal value and crucial goal. A native of Jackson,
Tennessee, Jenny earned M.Div. and M.Ed. degrees from Vanderbilt
University. She then worked as a behavior analyst in school, home, and
community-based settings with children and youth with intellectual and
developmental disabilities and behavior disorders. Prior to returning to
Vanderbilt to work, she was the Education Series Director for Autism TN
and the Executive Director of a private residence for adults with disabili-
ties for five years.
Cassandra Hall is a Master’s student at Peabody College of Vanderbilt
University, USA, specializing in severe disabilities. She is from Apple
Valley, California, and plans to return there following graduation to cre-
ate and facilitate effective transition programs for individuals with dis-
abilities in her community. Under the supervision of Dr. Erik Carter, she
has been active in Next Steps at Vanderbilt—an inclusive higher educa-
tion program for students with intellectual disabilities, where she worked
in academics and data collection. At Vanderbilt she was a UCEDD
(Center for Excellence in Developmental Disabilities) trainee at the
Vanderbilt Kennedy Center where she was encouraged to expand her
knowledge surrounding the field of intellectual and developmental dis-
abilities. Her research interests include: transition, inclusive higher edu-
cation, and programs for low-income transition aged-students.
Lindsay Krech (Assistant Director of Career Development). As the
Assistant Director of Career Development, Lindsay Krech oversees all
career exploration and development initiatives for underclassmen enrolled
at Vanderbilt University, USA, though the Next Steps at Vanderbilt pro-
gram. She collaborates with university partners to create strategic career
exploration experiences and internship placements for students each
semester, and creates workplace supports to maximize the students’ inde-
pendence. Lindsay holds a Master’s of Community Development from
Vanderbilt University. Previously, she worked in community outreach
roles for the Vanderbilt Center for Nashville Studies, Monroe Carell Jr.

25. xxviii Notes on Contributors
Children’s Hospital at Vanderbilt, and Habitat for Humanity. Lindsay
currently serves on the Best Buddies Tennessee young professional board.
Athena Lathouras is a Senior Lecturer in the Social Work program at
the University of the Sunshine Coast, Australia. She has 30 years practice
experience in the areas of community development, disability support
and with peak bodies. Athena’s areas of scholarship include learning and
teaching, and community development. She engages in community work
practice and research working to weave links back and forth between
these spaces so that one informs the other. Through this dialogue she
seeks to promote better teaching, research and practice in commu-
nity issues.
MatsonLawrence isaResearchAssociateattheUniversityofStrathclyde,
Scotland, focusing on gender, sexualities and education. He is previously
worked on the award-winning TransEDU research and resources, and is
co-author of Supporting Transgender and Non-Binary Students and Staff in
Further and Higher Education: Practical Advice for Colleges and Universities.
He currently works with Professor Yvette Taylor on New Opportunities
for Research Funding Agency Cooperation in Europe (NORFACE)
funded research examining intersectional lifecourse (in)equalities among
LGBTQI+ people in four European countries. Matson has acted as a
Senior Policy Analysis Officer at the Scottish Funding Council, with
responsibility for the Gender Action Plan for Scotland’s colleges and uni-
versities. He holds an interdisciplinary Doctorate in Law and Applied
Social Sciences from Durham University, and had worked extensively
with intersectional LGBTQI+ communities in the third and arts sectors.
Aura Lounasmaa is a lecturer in social sciences at the University of East
London (UEL), England, and the director of the Erasmus+ funded Open
Learning Initiative (OLIve). The OLIve course started in UEL in 2017
and introduces forced migrant students to the UK Higher Education
system. Dr Lounasmaa also worked on the award-winning Life Stories
course in the Calais unofficial refugee camp ‘Jungle’ and co-edited a book
of stories by students of the course with colleagues. Her PhD is in wom-
en’s studies, and her research currently focuses on ethics and decoloniality
in education and refugee studies. She is a research fellow at the Centre for
Narrative Research.

26. xxix
Notes on Contributors
Judith MacCallum is an Associate Professor of Education at Murdoch
University in Western Australia. She uses multiple methods and sociocul-
tural perspectives to examine social interaction for learning and develop-
ment in a range of educational and community contexts. Judith’s research
focuses on motivational development and classroom instructional prac-
tices, mentoring and role model programs for young people, and profes-
sional learning.
Dawn Mannay is a Senior Lecturer in Social Sciences (Psychology) at
Cardiff University, Wales. Her recent books include Visual, Narrative and
Creative Research Methods (Routledge 2016); Emotion and the Researcher
(Emerald 2018); and Children and Young People ‘Looked After’? Education,
Intervention and the Everyday Culture of Care inWales (University of Wales
Press 2019).
Stephanie Mckendry is Widening Access Manager at the University of
Strathclyde, Scotland. Prior to this, Stephanie gained over ten years’ expe-
rience teaching and researching in higher education. More recently her
work has involved the closer alignment of access and equality. For exam-
ple, she led the award-winning TransEDU research project, which
explored the experiences of trans and gender diverse students and staff.
She also acts as Implementation Advisor for Scotland’s Commissioner for
Fair Access, sits on the Editorial Board of the Journal of Widening
Participation and Lifelong Learning and is the publication lead for the
Forum for Access and Continuing Education.
Elise McMillan, JD is Director of the Vanderbilt Kennedy Center for
Excellence in Developmental Disabilities, Director of Community
Engagement and Public Policy, Senior Lecturer in Psychiatry and
Behavioral Sciences. Elise McMillan has more than 20 years’ experience
in leading programs and projects that support individuals with intellec-
tual and developmental disabilities, their families, and their communi-
ties. She holds leadership roles in numerous national, state, and
community disabilities organizations, including The Arc U.S., the
Tennessee Council on Developmental Disabilities, Disability Law and
Advocacy Center of Tennessee, and the Tennessee Disability Coalition.
As Co-Director of the Vanderbilt Kennedy Center for Excellence in

27. xxx Notes on Contributors
Developmental Disabilities (UCEDD), she provides oversight of daily
operations and assists area coordinators and directors of core functions in
planning and implementation. She is responsible for personnel, budget
oversight, and representing the UCEDD at the local, state, and national
level. She is an attorney and Senior Associate in the Vanderbilt University
Medical Center (VUMC) Department of Psychiatry, USA. She holds
leadership roles with TennesseeWorks, Tennessee Disability Pathfinder,
and Next Steps at Vanderbilt.
Sandy O’Sullivan is a Wiradjuri (Aboriginal) transgender person, and
Associate Professor of Creative Industries at the University of the Sunshine
Coast, Australia. Their research intersects First Nations’ identities, cre-
ative practices, queer identities, and inclusion and resistance in the
academy.
Devona F. Pierre currently serves as Assistant Director of Diversity and
Inclusion at the University of South Florida, USA. With over 15 years’
experience in higher education, she has served as a diversity executive,
student affairs professional, academic affairs administrator, and faculty
member. Dr. Pierre is an alumna of Dillard University and Auburn
University. Her research interests include exploring the recruitment,
retention, persistence, and advancement of minorities and marginalized
populations in post-secondary institutions. Her work has been geared
towards the implementation of programs that seek to provide parity to
marginalized populations within higher education.
Andrew Pilkington is a is Professor of Sociology at the University of
Northampton, England, and a Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts. His
research has especially focused on issues relating to race and ethnicity,
and he has published widely in this area, including Racial Disadvantage
and Ethnic Diversity in Britain (Palgrave 2003) and, with Shirin Housee
and Kevin Hylton, an edited collection, Race(ing) Forward: Transitions in
Theorising Race in Education (Higher Education Academy 2009). A par-
ticularly influential book is Institutional Racism in the Academy: A Case
Study (Trentham 2011) in which he compares the response of universities
and the police to legislative measures and policy initiatives designed to
promote equality. He is co-author of successive editions of a very popular

28. xxxi
Notes on Contributors
textbook, Sociology in Focus (Pearson 2009). He has been an Associate of
the Centre for Sociology, Anthropology and Politics and Vice President
of the Association of Teachers of Social Sciences.
Kristen A. Renn is Professor of Higher, Adult, and Lifelong Education
at Michigan State University, USA, and serves as Associate Dean of
Undergraduate Studies for Student Success Research. With a background
in student affairs administration, she has for the last 20 years focused her
research on the identities, experiences, and development of minoritized
students in higher education. She is co-PI of the National Study of
LGBTQ Student Success, a two-phase study of LGBTQ college students
comprising a mixed methods survey/interview phase conducted in 2013
and a four-year longitudinal interview study conducted with LGBTQ
students who entered university in fall 2013.
Sally Tazewell is a lecturer in Education and Early Years at University
Centre Weston, a college-based (16–19 years) higher education provider
in south-west England which offers a variety of 2-year vocationally-­
orientated Foundation degrees and Bachelor-level top-ups. Students are
generally more likely to be mature, live and work locally, declare a dis-
ability or learning difference, and be in possession of diverse prior quali-
fications than at more traditional universities. Following more than a
decade of school teaching and advisory work in economically deprived
and sometimes socially challenging contexts, she has an active interest in
the widening participation agenda from a social justice perspective. Sally
works for the Evaluation Committee and Study Skills Focus Group of her
local National Collaborative Outreach Project (NCOP), and is a member
of the NERUPI network, supporting the development of a framework
for positive in-reach work targeted at non-traditional learners at Levels
5 and 6.
Tània Verge is Associate Professor at the Department of Political and
Social Sciences, Universitat Pompeu Fabra (Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain),
where she also serves since 2014 as the director of the Equality Unit. Her
research interests lie in gender and politics, political parties and political
representation as well as in the adoption and implementation of gender
equality policies. She is the coordinator of the Gender Mainstreaming

29. xxxii Notes on Contributors
Taskforce of the Women and Science Committee (Inter-University
Council of Catalonia, CIC). Her most recent research has been published
in the journals Politics Gender, Party Politics, West European Politics,
Government and Opposition, European Journal of Political Research, and
European Journal of Women’s Studies.
Megan Vranicar is Employment Specialist at Vanderbilt University,
USA. Megan Vranicar is responsible for overseeing the employment ini-
tiativesofNextStepsatVanderbilt.UtilizingtheCustomizedEmployment
Model, Megan works with students to develop and implement employ-
ment plans based on individual strengths, interests, and conditions. She
consults with businesses in the Nashville community to identify employ-
ment solutions and develop customized employment opportunities for
individuals in the program. Megan works to implement recruitment, hir-
ing, training, and employment supports for individuals in the program
and for businesses. Megan received her Bachelor’s Degree in Special
Education from Vanderbilt University in 2016. Megan’s involvement
with Next Steps began in 2012. Throughout the past seven years she has
served in multiple roles including as an Ambassadore peer mentor during
her time as a student and as a job coach supporting students on-site at
employment placements after spending some time teaching upon gradu-
ation. She is passionate about creating a more inclusive community for
individuals with disabilities through Next Steps at Vanderbilt’s innovative
career development initiatives.
Michael R. M. Ward is lecturer in Social Sciences at Swansea University,
England. He has held visiting professor posts in Canada, USA, Iceland
and Germany. His work centres on the performance of working-class mas-
culinities within and beyond educational institutions. Mike is the author
of the award-winning book From Labouring to Learning, Working-­
class
Masculinities, Education and De-industrialization (Palgrave Macmillan).
Furthermore, he is the editor of Boyhood Studies, an Interdisciplinary
Journal.

30. Part I
Contextualising Layers of Exclusion
in Higher Education

31. 3
© The Author(s) 2020
G. Crimmins (ed.), Strategies for Supporting Inclusion and Diversity in the Academy,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43593-6_1
1
Don’t Throw Out the Baby
with the Bathwater: Statistics Can
Create Impetus to Address Educational
Inequity
Gail Crimmins
Before I provide statistical ‘evidence’ of structural inequality in the inter-
national academy, I discuss the important role statistics offer educational
policy makers and practitioners. Even though I first consider their limita-
tions, I offer a detailed rationale for both gathering and employing large
scale data captured in statistical form.
All statistics share some limitations. When decontextualised they can-
not determine or communicate the complexity of gendered, raced,
classed, and ableist structures and cultures of organisations. They also fail
to communicate the intersectional disadvantage experienced by people
who identify as ‘woman’, transgender, Black, Asian, minority ethnic,
Indigenous, working-class, differently abled, et cetera; and/or the com-
pounded disadvantages people from other marginalised locations people
inhabit. Statistics might also create emotional distance between an audi-
ence and the phenomenon presented as they can mask or even obscure
significant contextual factors or impacts, and masquerade as a positivist
G. Crimmins (*)
University of the Sunshine Coast, Maroochydore, QLD, Australia
e-mail: gcrimmin@usc.edu.au

32. 4
‘truth’. As a result, they can fail to evoke the lived experience of people
represented as a ‘number’ or ‘percentage’ and diminish the felt experience
of people’s location/s. Furthermore, statistics often communicate and
thereby further entrench dichotomies of ‘difference’ such as male/female,
which can cause further exclusion/s and symbolic violence against gender
diverse people. And not every aspect of a given population has been cap-
tured by statistics, as ‘there is always an implicit choice in what is included
and what is excluded’ (Davies, 2017). For instance, as a feminist, I am
cynical (read: angry) that Gross Domestic Product (GDP) only captures
the value of paid work and excludes the domestic work traditionally/most
often undertaken by women. Similarly, Davies (2017) identifies that in
France it is illegal to collect census data because it is feared that such data
might be used for racist political purposes even though a by-product of
this exclusion is a difficulty in quantifying the systemic racism in the
labour market.
Nevertheless, we need to be careful not to dismiss the use of statistics
because this could bolster what some political analysts have identified as
the anti-intellectual manoeuvre by the far-right to discredit statistical
data and analysis in favour of personality politics (Motta, 2018). It could
also render invisible significant societal inequities, and the structures that
create or propagate them.
Davies (2017) identifies a growing cynicism towards statistics in many
societies, and the political schism of such mistrust. For instance, shortly
before the US November 2016 presidential election 68% of Donald
Trump supporters noted a distrust for the economic data published by
the then federal government; this compared with the 40% of distrusting
respondents who did not identify as Trump supporters (Rampell, 2016).
Similarly, politically conservative or right-leaning Republicans in the US,
and Republicans who watch Fox News, are more likely to distrust statis-
tics about rising temperatures, and their causes and impacts, than people
who identify as Democrats (Matthews, 2017). An analysis of these stud-
ies reveals that people with right-wing political views tend to assume that
statistics are manipulated and dislike what is considered their abstract
and elitist form. This leads to a decline in the authority of statistics and a
vilification of the experts who present them (Davies, 2017).
G. Crimmins

33. 5
A contrasting position is that statistics can offer easy to understand
information which enable researchers, citizens, and politicians to under-
stand and discuss society ‘as a whole’, and in ways that can be validated.
Statistics can indicate levels of health, prosperity, equality, and whether
certain policy development makes things better or worse for groups or
sub-groups of society. And here-in lies the main benefit of statistics in
relation to this collection of essays: statistics can help to provide informa-
tion about who is, and who is not, included in various levels of academia;
information which can be used to directly address any identified areas of
under-representation/s, and help to shape education or institution policy
development. Statistics can thus provide impetus and political will (and
financial and human resource) to address inequity.
However, statistical data is only credible if people accept the limited
range of demographic categories that are on offer (Davies, 2017). I
acknowledge that many of the statistics I present to demonstrate struc-
tural inequity in academia are based on traditional, and outdated/exclu-
sionary categories of male and female. I concede their limitation/s. Many
of the statistics are also based on the Global North, which may suggest/
propagate a narrowed ontological lens. I nevertheless use them because
they are readily available and illuminate gendered inequity both in fac-
ulty and student representations within various levels of seniority and
disciplinarity in academia. However, I will (and encourage us all) to
include non-binary persons as a category in surveys and other means by
which we collect data from now on, and to keep searching for data that
extends the international boundaries of the Global North. Now that we
know better, we must do better.
The next section of the chapter will therefore present a summary of
statistical data that collectively determines the systematic exclusion of
staff and students within higher education based on lines of ethnicity,
social or socio-economic status, gender, and disability. Dispiriting as the
statistics may seem, we can use them to inspire equity strategy and inter-
vention: we need to see landscape to know where our energies, creativity
and activism is needed.
1 Don’t Throw Out the Baby with the Bathwater…

34. 6
Statistics of Structural Inequity
Inequity Based on Race: Faculty Data
Numerical and statistical data reveals structural and systemic under-­
representation of Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) staff in uni-
versities in the UK, Australia, and the US. This is highly problematic
because students need to see ‘people like them’ in senior and leadership
roles in order to aspire to leadership roles themselves, and need leaders
from a diversity of experience and location to inform university curricu-
lar (in its broadest sense, including knowledge and knowledge systems)
(Crimmins, 2019). Consequently, an under-representation of people
with diverse ethnicities in senior roles serves to propagate existing inequi-
ties and straightjackets conceptions of knowledge.
When Black, Asian and minority ethnic people are employed in British
Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) they are over-represented in lower
academic ranks and non-academic roles, and under-represented in senior
levels of academic employment. Out of the 145,560 people (UK nation-
als) employed at British universities in 2017–2018, 7480 identified as
Asian and 2040 as Black, and the vast majority of BAME staff occupied
technical, administrative or lower-level academic positions (Higher
Education Statistics Agency, 2019b). In addition, out of the 1350 senior
managers (including all highest levels of university management) only
ten identify as Asian, and none as Black (Henry et al., 2017).
Concomitantly, specific ethnic groups are also under-represented amongst
the professoriate. Only 0.4% of the UK professoriate are Black, com-
pared to 11.1% who identify as White (University and College Union,
2013). Yet the most startling fact emerging from the data is that the vast
majority of HEIs have so few non-white professorial staff that pay gap
data is not available. For instance, not a single HEI has data relating to
the pay of Black professorial staff which indicates that no UK HEI has
more than seven Black professorial staff. The statistics again reveal that
the ethnicity of large numbers of staff are unknown. Yet where data is
provided, significant pay gaps are revealed. In England, statistical data
reveals that professors of Black, Chinese and other ethnic origins earned
G. Crimmins

35. 7
between 9.7% and 3.6% less than their White colleagues. In Wales,
insufficient data for Black professors is available yet Chinese professorial
staff earned 7.5% less than White colleagues. Finally, in Scotland, Black
professorial staff earned 9.9% less than White professorial staff, Chinese
professors earned 10.2% less, and professors from other ethnicities,
including mixed race professors earned 7.5% less than their White col-
leagues (University and College Union, 2013).
Similarly, and even though Asian Australians are the fastest growing
minority group in Australia constituting 14.4% of the population in
2016 (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2017), only 3.4% of Deputy Vice-­
Chancellors were Asian-born in 2015, and there are currently no Asian-­
born Vice-Chancellors within Australian universities. This is in stark
contrast to other overseas-born academics where 33% of Deputy Vice
Chancellors and 25% of Vice-Chancellors were born overseas (Oishi,
2017). Yet most Vice-Chancellors in Australia have an Anglo-Celtic
background (82.5%) or a European background (15%). Furthermore,
there are no Vice-Chancellors with an Indigenous background
(Soutphommasane, 2016) despite that 3.3% of Australian society identi-
fies as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (Australian Bureau of
Statistics, 2017). Indeed, Indigenous people are so dramatically under-­
represented as employees of Australian universities at all levels that popu-
lation parity in academic and general staff representation is not achievable
by any pipeline effect. Staff numbers in ‘teaching’, ‘research and teaching’
and other general positions would need to increase by a factor of between
two to three to reach population parity, while staff numbers in ‘research
only’ roles would need to increase by a factor of over six (AGDET, 2016).
In the US, the National Center for Education Statistics reported that
approximately 3.9 million people were employed in the nation’s 4724
degree granting institutions (Snyder, de Brey, Dillow, 2016, p. 532).
Of that 3.9 million, roughly 377,000 identified as Black. And staff who
identified as Black were concentrated in office/administrative support
and service occupations, 73,000 and 56,000 respectively. McGee (2017)
identifies that of the 1.5 million academics employed, 105,000 (about
6.8%) are Black faculty—a percentage considerably smaller than their
percentage (13.2%) of the U.S. population. Conversely, about 72% (or
1.1 million) of academic staff were White individuals)—a percentage
1 Don’t Throw Out the Baby with the Bathwater…

36. 8
significantly greater than their percentage (62.2%) of the US population
(McGee, 2017).
The professorial rank for Black full-time academics in the US is more
likely to be at the lecturer, instructor, or assistant professor level where
they number approximately 20,000, compared to 302,000 White faculty.
Correspondingly, Black full-time faculty are less likely to be appointed at
an associate professor or full professor level where they numbered 15,000
compared to 337,000 White faculty (Snyder et al., 2016). Additionally,
an assessment of the probable ethnic representation of Provosts in the
next 10–20 years (a role most often adopted before that of university
President) identified that African Americans were the least likely demo-
graphic to serve in the positions that lead to the college presidency
(McGee, 2017). It is axiomatic, then, that race is also a determining fac-
tor in the (under)representation and success of students.
Inequity Based on Race: Student Data
In 2017 in the UK, 1,417,860 enrolments in UK universities were from
White students, while 133,590 were from Black students, 201,580 were
from Asian students, and 101,825 were from students from other or
mixed ethnic minority backgrounds (Higher Education Statistics Agency,
2019a). Data also reveals that the rates at which UK-domiciled students
leave their first degree after one year, what classification of degree they
attain, and which universities BAME students enrol into, significantly
varies across ethnic groups. Chinese students have the lowest rates of
non-continuation, and the non-continuation rate for Black students, at
10.3%, remains 3.4 percentage points higher than the rate for White
students. Additionally, ethnic minorities have lower university admission
rates relative to comparably qualified White peers and achieve lower
degree results than their A-level grades would predict (Boliver, 2015).
Most strikingly, controlling for entry qualifications, Black students are
between six and 28 percentage points less likely than White students to
get a higher classification degree (Stevenson, O’Mahony, Khan, Ghaffar,
Stiell, 2019). Relatedly, Black students are more than 50% more likely
to withdraw from university than their White and Asian counterparts,
G. Crimmins

37. 9
with more than one in 10 (10.3%) Black students dropping out of uni-
versity in England, compared with 6.9% for the whole student popula-
tion (Bulman, 2017). A similar phenomenon of an under-representation
of ethnically marginalised faculty and the under-completion of ethnically
diverse students is also prevalent internationally.
A disproportionate representation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander people is particularly evident within the Australian higher educa-
tion system (Dandy, Durkin, Barber, Houghton, 2015). Indigenous
students make up 1.6% of domestic student enrolments in Australian
universities—a figure that falls short of the Indigenous working age pop-
ulation at 2.7%. Indigenous students also experience high rates of attri-
tion (Bennett et al., 2015). A study that examined the under-completion
of Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander students in higher education
identified that for many Indigenous students, financial worries were
compounded by feelings of isolation at university, and Harwood,
McMahon, O’Shea, Bodkin-Andrews, and Priestly (2015) identify that a
lack of educational role models can present a critical barrier for the edu-
cational attainment and feeling of connectedness of Indigenous students.
In the United States, 34 million Americans over age 25 (more than
10% of the entire U.S. population) who have some college credits with-
draw from their program before receiving a diploma, and students who
have dropped out of their diploma or degree programme are nearly twice
as likely as college graduates to be unemployed. Yet more specifically,
WhiteandAsianstudentscompletedtheirprogramsatsimilarrates—62%
and 63.2%, respectively—while Hispanic and Black students graduated
at rates of 45.8% and 38%, respectively (Shapiro et al., 2017). Specifically,
Black men completed their degrees at the lowest rate (40%) within
American HEIs (Shapiro et al., 2017).
These statistics demonstrate that people of different ethnicities experi-
ence higher education dissimilarly and pose a significant challenge to us
(as policy makers or educationalists) to not only attract more racially
diverse populations into higher education, but to ensure that they have
the same chance/s of completion and success as White students.
1 Don’t Throw Out the Baby with the Bathwater…

38. 10
Social Class, Socioeconomic Status
and Higher Education
In the following paragraphs I offer a summary of how class distinctions
are understood, plus a broad definition of social class and its relationship
to socioeconomic status (SES). I also provide an overview of current
debates around the relevance of the class concept in the twenty-first cen-
tury. I do so because many of the discourses around the class concept
converge with a growing level of cynicism towards statistics (a cynicism
that has been established above). I therefore seek to directly challenge ‘the
individualist turn’ which seeks to both undermine the role of statistics
and dismiss the boundary setting function of social class. I do this by
offering international data that demonstrates how social stratification sig-
nificantly impacts inclusion and success in higher education.
Defining Social Classifications
Most social scientists would accept that there can be no single, ‘correct’
definition of social class. Wright argues that ‘a concept whose task is to
help answer a question about broad historical variations in the social
organisation of inequality is likely to be defined quite differently from a
concept used to answer a relatively narrow question about the subjective
identity of individuals in contemporary society’ (Wright, 2005, p. 180).
Thus, because this collection explores strategies to address structures of
inequity (and not individual cases) I consider a series of broad definitions
which can be used to categorise large numbers of people or a nation.
Employment was the traditional measure used to establish social hier-
archies or stratifications. Classifications of social hierarchy have been
linked with levels and types of employment since Marx described the
proletariat as a class of workers who had only their labour power to sell,
and the bourgeoisie as a classification of those who controlled the prole-
tariat’s labour. Similarly, official statisticians began to divide up occupa-
tional structures to create employment ‘class schemes’, such as the
Registrar-General’s classification in 1913 (Crompton, 2010).
G. Crimmins

39. 11
Yet due to radical changes in work and employment in many industri-
alised countries in the late twentieth century, some theorists suggest that
the notion of class (or the class concept) is no longer relevant. Specifically,
Beck (2007) argues that de-industrialisation; the rise in managerial, pro-
fessional and service employment; women’s increasing participation in
the labour market; and the encouragement of workers to become ‘entre-
preneurs of the self’, both created and demonstrated the end of class. He
insists that ‘old’ sociological concepts such as class must therefore be jet-
tisoned (Crompton, 2010).
Although I refute Beck’s conclusion (of the death of class), he does
expose a problem with social classifications that are based solely on a
person’s employment type or status. For instance, while employment-­
derived class schemes group together individuals, the most important
force of class reproduction is considered to be the family. This is not to
say that family relationships create classes and class relationships, but they
do play a significant role in reproducing class identities and behaviours.
Crompton (2010) therefore suggests that it is not just the work you do,
but the work your parents do or did, that informs class fate. She further
posits that declining rates of social mobility in Britain suggest that the
significance of family might be on the increase.
Whilst employment, and the employment status of one’s parents, still
feature in many definitions of social class, the characteristics of what con-
stitutes social classifications has broadened over the last 40 years, with
some researchers and policy makers replacing social class with socioeco-
nomic status (SES) or using the terms interchangeably (APA, 2006). Yet
an important distinction between social class and SES needs to be made.
Social class is generally associated with characteristics established from
birth, whereas SES is a broader measurement of education, occupation,
and income (APA, 2006). Although individuals may achieve different
SES over a lifetime, their relations among social classes remain constant
(APA, 2006). And crucial to this chapter, educational attainment is often
considered to be the most common difference that separates social classes
(Stephens, Markus, Townsend, 2007). Most definitions of social class
therefore encompass criteria related to a person’s education, employment
and income, and those of the person’s parents.
1 Don’t Throw Out the Baby with the Bathwater…

40. 12
Why Examining Class in Relation to Higher
Education Diversity and Inclusion
Remains Important
Before providing statistical evidence of inequity in higher education
based on social class, I offer a rationale for examining class in relation to
educational access and inclusion. Even though Beck (2002) claimed that
individuals have become ever more free of structure, rendering ‘old’ or
zombie categories such as class, social status, gender, and family (Beck,
2002) as moribund; such neo-liberalist discourse is not borne out in
international statistics on higher education inclusion and participation. It
is mere (though powerful) rhetoric which serves to undermine equity
policy and practice.
Lolich and Lynch (2016) identify that neoliberalism signalled a trans-
formation in the way that government—of the state, civil society, the
economy, and the self—is understood. Indeed, Margaret Thatcher’s
mid–1980s proclamation that ‘there is no such thing as society’ signalled
an attempt within neoliberal rationalities to govern through the behav-
iours and dispositions of individuals, rather than society (Kelly, 2007).
Such a logic, and related governance structures, lead to an imaginary of
individual responsibilisation, where ‘self-regulating subjects’ become
responsible for their own welfare (Giddens, 1994). Moreover, and par-
ticularly pertinent to this chapter, discourses of individualisation of
responsibility serve to ‘invisibilise’ the asymmetry and inequity within
higher education. Consequently, the saturation of discourses of responsi-
bilisation present the lack of inclusion or success in higher education as
individuals’ problems rather than collective ones, and conceive people
who are not successful in the neoliberal organisation as lacking the com-
petency or confidence to compete. Thus, the individualist turn, as part of
a neoliberalist ideology, focuses the lens of social inequality onto indi-
viduals and directs attention away from broader structural trends, the
persistence of national and occupational class differences, and the impor-
tance of national policies in shaping them. Yet, international statistics
identify that there are broad trends of entry and completion in higher
education that point to structural barriers or ‘bounded agency’ (Evans,
G. Crimmins

41. 13
2007) in relation to social class. The reason for sharing the following
statistics is to illuminate the continued pertinence of social or economic
status in equity aims and provision within higher education.
Social Class and Economic Background
as a Determinant to Access and Inclusion in HE
It is well established that there are major disparities in access and partici-
pation in higher education in Australia (Naylor Mifsud, 2019), with
several groups, including those from low SES (LSES), accessing higher
education at only half the number predicted by their population share
(AGDET, 2016). In addition, students from LSES backgrounds are rela-
tively overrepresented in some (arguably low status) fields, such as nurs-
ing and education, and underrepresented in fields such as medicine or
architecture. The elite Group of Eight (research intensive) institutions
enrol LSES students at approximately half the rate of the newer, subur-
ban ‘red brick’ institutions, and a third that of the regional universities
(AGDET, 2016). Correspondingly, in 2016, the 20–24-year-old children
of managers and professionals were nearly 2.5 times as likely to be enrolled
in university or to have already attained a degree than the children of
drivers or labourers (Norton, Cherastidtham, Mackey, 2018).
Moreover, even when LSES students access higher education in Australia,
their experience is different from non-LSES students. Whilst Universities
Australia (2018) found that most domestic undergraduate students
(58%) are worried about their financial situation, this rises to 63% for
LSES students. Student finances also impact how students spend their
time during their undergraduate study: An Anglicare and NSU (2018)
survey of 1985 university students found that those from the lowest
income backgrounds without family resources to draw on were most
likely to report severe financial stress or having to work so many hours it
has a significant impact on both their study and their overall wellbeing
(Norton, 2018).
In the UK in 2017, the most financially privileged students were 14.5
times more likely to enter top universities than their disadvantage
1 Don’t Throw Out the Baby with the Bathwater…

42. 14
peers—and this increased in 2018 despite a push to widen access to
higher education (Busby, 2019). Additionally, the gap between rich and
poor students going to Britain’s best universities has widened for the first
time in nearly a decade (Busby, 2019). The Universities and Colleges
Admissions Service (UCAS) figures reveal that more than half of univer-
sities in England have fewer than 5% of White working-class students in
their intakes, and when enrolled their experience of working-class stu-
dents differs from that of their middle or upper-class peers. Students
from poorer backgrounds struggle to pay for food, heating, transport as
well as accommodation, which can leave them feeling isolated because
financial worries prevent them from taking part in social activities.
Indeed, working-class students are most likely to be employed in a job
that requires more than the recommended 15 hours per week while
studying (NUS, 2018) which potentially (at least partly) explains why
attrition is highest among working class students, with a third of part
time students leaving before their second year of study (NUS, 2018).
Additional correlatives include that the dominant culture of HE is mid-
dle class and working-class students can be made to feel they do not
belong, and report feeling disconnected or bullied (NUS, 2018).
It is difficult to determine how social class impacts the inclusion and
diversity of faculty within the UK because no large-scale study on the
class status of academics has been undertaken since 1989, when sociolo-
gist AH Halsey reported that 17% of academics, but only 13% of profes-
sors, had fathers in routine and manual occupations (Wilby, 2019). Yet,
Reynolds (2018) suggests that one way to increase the number of
working-­class students, and enhance their experience, would be to employ
more academics from a similar background. It is argued that an increase
in academics from working class or LSES backgrounds would make stu-
dents feel less alienated and more at home.
Similarly, in the US, qualitative evidence suggests that there are few
faculty members from low-SES backgrounds and that they struggle
intensely with feelings of isolation, lack of belongingness and generally
feeling like misfits (Case, 2017). It is not just a lack of financial capital
that puts many working-class students and faculty at a disadvantage; they
lack social and cultural capital also. It is argued that LSES staff do not
have the social connections that allow them to learn about a fellowship
G. Crimmins

43. 15
program or a job opening. They often feel that they do not fit in academia
because they entered lacking the cultural and social indoctrination that is
part of their wealthier peers’ educations (Pain, 2014).
Relatedly, students from working-class backgrounds in the US are sig-
nificantly less likely to attend college and persist to degree completion
than their peers from middle- and upper-social classes. In particular, by
24 years of age, 12% of students from low-income families earn a bac-
calaureate degree compared with 73% of their higher income peers (Soria
Bultmann, 2014). Working-class students also experience a lower
sense of belonging, perceive a less welcoming campus climate, and pursue
fewer social engagements than their peers who self-identify as middle/
upper-class (Soria Bultmann, 2014). On private four-year college
campuses, which attract and retain more middle or high SES students,
just 14% of students were considered food insecure yet 36% of all college
students and 46% of community college students were housing insecure
(Hess, 2018). Food and housing insecurity have also been linked to
delayed graduation, which can force students to take on even more debt
in order to finish their degrees (Hess, 2018).
Williams (2016) argues that those who have gone to college beget
those who go to college and if your parents didn’t go to college, you are
much more likely to work at or near minimum wage. Only 9% of those
from the lowest quartile of wealth complete college degrees, whereas
about three-quarters from the top quartile do. A key impediment has
been the exponential rise of tuition prices since the 1970s, at several times
the rate of inflation, correlated with the reduction of public support,
which in turn has brought the steep increase in student debt and student
work hours (Williams, 2016). This reflects a cycle of de/privilege, as cur-
rent research shows that having a bachelor’s increases lifetime earnings on
average by 65% compared to only having a high school diploma, and
82% of students in the top third of the income distribution go to college,
compared to 53% in the bottom third (Bond Hill, 2016).
These statistics both reinforce the relevance of the class concept in the
twenty-first century, and compel us to employ interventions to provide
equity of access and opportunity to students from LSES or working class
backgrounds in an attempt to break the circuit of de/privilege.
1 Don’t Throw Out the Baby with the Bathwater…

44. 16
Gender De/Privilege in Higher Education
Despite equal opportunity legislation relating to both education and
employment, women remain marginalised as faculty in universities. In
2016, women comprised the majority (57%) of the Australian university
workforce and were more likely to be employed at lower academic ranks,
on casual, short-term or fixed term contracts, and earn less than male
academics (Strachan et al., 2016). Women comprise 75% of the frac-
tional fulltime academics at Level A (Associate Lecturer), but only 31%
of academics above Senior Lecturer level, 26% of professors (AGDET,
2016), and one in four Deputy Vice-Chancellors (Jarboe, 2017). A gen-
der difference in salaries is also evident. In 2016, a total of 10,092 male
academics commanded salaries of between $110,000 and $170,000 com-
pared to only 4519 women (Cervini, 2016).
The Australian context reflects the international circumstance where
the gender gap increases with higher academic ranks across all nations.
Women on average occupy only 21% of A level (full professorship) aca-
demic positions in the European Union (European Commission, 2015).
There is one woman for every five male professors in countries such as
Germany, Italy, Hungary, Poland and Portugal but fewer female profes-
sors than this in Ireland, Greece, Cyprus, Netherlands and Belgium.
Indeed, at the current rate of academic promotions and appointments, it
is estimated that it will take 119 years for women to achieve equal num-
bers as men in the professoriate (Savigny, 2014). The national data for the
United States of America shows similar patterns where 24% of professors,
and yet 56% of lecturers/instructors, are women (Monroe et al., 2014).
Moreover, intersectional factors provide further evidence of structural
de/privilege in academia. For instance, in the UK, according to Higher
Education Statistics Agency (HESA) data, there are around 350 Black
female professors in the UK, out of a total number of 18,000 professors
across the UK, meaning that Black women make up less than 2% of the
professoriate in higher education (Solanke, 2017). In the US, in 2015,
among full-time professors, 27% were White females and 2% each were
Asian/Pacific Islander females (NCES, 2016). In India gender intersects
with caste identities to provide varying levels of privilege where in a state
G. Crimmins

45. 17
university in western India, women make up only 39% of faculty, and yet
78% of women faculty come disproportionately from ‘upper castes’
(Tambe, 2019).
I recognise that snapshots and decontextualised ‘facts’ undermine the
complexity of the gendered (academic) institution because they fail to
consider the compounded disadvantage experienced by women who
identify as Black, Asian, minority ethnic, Indigenous, mothers, women
who are differently abled, et cetera. I also understand that the term
‘woman’ is problematic and that it might in itself create exclusion/s and
symbolic violence against gender diverse people. For this I apologise, but
I use the statistics available to illuminate structural disadvantage. For if
we fail to demonstrate systematic and structural barriers to ‘women’s’
advancement in academia we allow ‘individualizing technologies’ to take
hold; and such technologies place blame on women themselves for their
lack of academic success, and remedial professional development is intro-
duced in a bid to change women, rather than to challenge an unjust
world (Gill Orgad, 2015). In response, subsequent chapters in this
collection will discuss tried and tested interventions that have been devel-
oped to dismantle current gender-based barriers to access and success.
Higher Education for People with Dis/Ability
18.3% of the Australian population, or approximately 4.3 million people
in Australia have a dis/ability. Yet only 17% of people with disability have
a bachelor’s degree or higher, compared to 30% for individuals without
disability (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2015). In addition, disability
success ratios are below parity across the country, meaning that students
with disability are less successful than students without disability. More
specifically, the success of students with disability is generally between 5
and 10% lower than students without any reported disability (AGDET,
2018). Students without disability also have a lower retention rate than
students without a disability, are more likely to provide low scores in the
Student Experience Survey (SES), and are 7 percentage points more likely
to have considered leaving their institution than students who did not
report having a disability (NCVER, 2018).
1 Don’t Throw Out the Baby with the Bathwater…

46. 18
According to data provided by the National Center for Education
Statistics in 2019, 19.4% of undergraduate students in the US reported
having a disability (NCES, n.d.) yet college students with disabilities are
more likely to attrite than their peers without disabilities (Haber et al.
2016). Students with a disability also have a different social experience to
those without. US-based students with disabilities participate in fewer
extracurricular activities, like clubs or on-campus events, than non-­
disabled peers (Sachs Schreuer, 2011). This is due to a lack of social
inclusion yet serves to propagate such exclusion. It is also impacted by the
fact that many colleges and university programs predominantly focus on
academic and physical accessibility and accommodations, so the social
participation of students with disabilities receives less attention. Similarly,
researchers found that 66% of the websites of California State Universities
had minimal information about disabilities on university homepages,
which prevents students with a disability to feel welcome on campus in
the same way that images of racial or gender diversity are used to attract
diverse applicants (Gabel, Reid, Pearson, Hume-Dawson, 2016).
The Impact of Educational Inequity
A snapshot of statistics that expose significant structural disadvantage
across lines of race, social class or economic status, gender and ability
eschew the notion that individual students or faculty are fully responsible
for their education attainment or have full agency and choice. They thus
demonstrate that the impact of demographic characteristics/locations on
student and faculty inclusion and experience of higher education is an
international phenomenon (Petersen, 2006).
This is concerning because the cycle of education de/privilege both
reflects and propagates income disparity within society and has signifi-
cant societal problems. Wilkinson and Pickett (2010) compared each
nation’s level of income inequality (measured by the size of the gap in
income between the wealthiest and poorest in society), in relation to a
nation’s level of health, social cohesion, and social problems. The societal
factors Wilkinson and Pickett (2010) measured include physical health,
education, housing, imprisonment, mental health, drug abuse, obesity,
G. Crimmins

47. 19
social mobility, trust and violence, all of which were substantially worse
in countries with the greatest disparity of wealth distribution. Specifically,
they posited that inequality eroded trust, increased anxiety and illness,
and encouraged excessive consumption. Australia sat with the UK,
Singapore, New Zealand and the USA at the most unequal end of the
scale, where social cohesion and well-being were identified as very low. In
contrast, those countries that have, over decades, introduced government
policies that support gender equity and a redistributive taxation, have the
smallest gap between rich and poor, and men and women, and the high-
est social well-being and cohesion. These include Finland, Sweden,
Norway, and Netherlands. Importantly, Wilkinson and Pickett’s (2010)
study proved that it was inequality and not poverty that creates negative
social effects in affluent countries.
Conclusion
Within a time characterised by increasing scepticism about the relevance
and neutrality of statistics (especially within the far fight) leading to
‘numeric nihilism’ (Davies, 2017), this chapter offers a defence for using
large statistical data sets as quantitative indicators of inequity in higher
education (expressed in access, progression, satisfaction and completion
rates). Therefore, I presented numerical and statistical data to provide
evidence of the (lack of) inclusion and diversity of higher education insti-
tutions in relation to race, gender, social class or socioeconomic status
and disability, I offered also an argument for the continued relevance of
the class concept, and the need to continue to identify the broad trends
of entry, experience, and completion in higher education that point to
class-based structural barriers. This argument sought to identify that
despite an attempt to individualise peoples, to pathologise the excluded
or those that attrite, and to undermine the notion of class or socioeco-
nomic based community, there remains a community of experience
which is determined by a social and economic basis. There also remain
other communities, we are not all individual/ised. There is this commu-
nity, a community of academics, policy makers and practitioners who are
committed to inclusion and diversity in HE. The following chapters in
1 Don’t Throw Out the Baby with the Bathwater…

48. 20
this book, are therefore designed to provide us with equity interventions
that we can adopt, adapt, or amalgamate in our pursuit of inclusive edu-
cation, which in its broadest sense seeks to increase access, presence, par-
ticipation and success for all students in education.
References
American Psychological Association (APA). (2006). Report of the APA task force
on socioeconomic status. Washington, DC: APA Task Force of
Socioeconomic Status.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). (2015). Disability, ageing and carers,
Australia: Summary of findings, 2015. ABS Catalogue No. 4430.0.
Canberra: ABS.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). (2017). Census of population and housing:
Australia revealed, 2016. ABS Catalogue No. 2024.0. Canberra: ABS.
Australian Government Department of Education and Training (AGDET).
(2016). National Indigenous higher education workforce strategy. Retrieved
November 2019, from https://docs.education.gov.au/documents/
national-indigenous-higher-education-workforce-strategy-0
Australian Government Department of Education and Training (AGDET).
(2018). Selected higher education statistics – 2017 student data: Section 11 –
equity groups, section 16 – equity performance data. Retrieved November 2019,
from https://www.education.gov.au/selected-higher-education-statistics-
2017-student-data
Beck, U. (2002). The cosmopolitan society and its enemies. Theory, Culture
Society, 19(1–2), 17–44.
Beck, U. (2007). Beyond class and nation: Reframing social inequalities in a
globalising world. British Journal of Sociology, 58(4), 679–705.
Bennett, A., Naylor, R., Mellor, K., Brett, M., Gore, J., Harvey, A., … Whitty,
G. (2015). The critical interventions framework part 2: Equity initiatives in
Australian higher education: A review of evidence of impact. Retrieved November
2019, from http://www.newcastle.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0016/
261124/REPORT-FINAL.pdf
Boliver, V. (2015, February 3). Universities must aim higher on ethnic equality
and diversity. The Conversation. Retrieved November 2019, from https://the-
conversation.com/universities-must-aim-higher-on-ethnic-equality-
and-diversity-37073
G. Crimmins

49. 21
Bond Hill, C. (2016, June 23). The high court just upheld affirmative action.
But for disadvantaged students, the odds are still daunting. The Hechinger
Report. Retrieved November 2019, from https://hechingerreport.org/
high-court-just-upheld-affirmative-action-disadvantaged-students-odds-
still-daunting/
Bulman, M. (2017, July 19). Black students 50% more likely to drop out of
university, new figures reveal. The Independent. Retrieved November 2019,
from https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/black-students-
drop-out-university-figures-a7847731.html
Busby, E. (2019, January 31). Gap between rich and poor students at top uni-
versities widens for first time in decade. The Independent. Retrieved November
2019, from https://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-
news/students-universities-applications-ucas-social-mobility-equality-gap-
russell-group-a8755156.html
Case, K. A. (2017). Insider without: Journey across the working-class academic
arc. Journal of Working-Class Studies, 2(2), 16–35.
Cervini, E. (2016, February 7). Equal pay is an academic concept for women in
higher education. The Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved November 2019,
from http://www.smh.com.au/national/education/equal-pay-is-anacademic-
concept-for-women-in-higher-education-20160131-gmifcn.html
Crimmins, G. (Ed.). (2019). Strategies for resisting sexism in the academy: Higher
education, gender and intersectionality (Palgrave studies in gender and educa-
tion). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
Crompton, R. (2010). Class and employment. Work, Employment and Society,
24(1), 9–26.
Dandy, J., Durkin, K., Barber, B. L., Houghton, S. (2015). Academic expec-
tations of Australian students from Aboriginal, Asian and Anglo backgrounds:
Perspectives of teachers, trainee-teachers and students. International Journal
of Disability, Development and Education, 62, 60–82.
Davies, W. (2017, January 19). How statistics lost their power – and why we
should fear what comes next. The Guardian. Retrieved November 2019, from
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jan/19/crisis-of-statistics-
big-data-democracy
European Commission. (2015). SHE figures 2015. Luxembourg: Publications
Office of the European Union.
Evans, K. (2007). Concepts of bounded agency in education, work and the
personallivesofyoungadults.InternationalJournalofPsychology,42(2),85–93.
1 Don’t Throw Out the Baby with the Bathwater…

50. 22
Gabel, S., Reid, H., Pearson, L., Hume-Dawson, R. (2016). Disability and
diversity on CSU websites: A critical discourse study. Journal of Diversity in
Higher Education, 9(1), 64–80.
Gale, T. (2015). Widening and expanding participation in Australian higher
education: In the absence of sociological imagination. The Australian
Educational Researcher, 42(2), 257–271.
Giddens, A. (1994). Beyond left and right. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Gill, R., Orgad, S. (2015). The cult(ure) of confidence. Australian Feminist
Studies, 30(86), 324–344.
Haber, M. G., Mazzotti, V. L., Mustian, A. L., Rowe, D. A., Bartholomew, A. L.,
Test, D. W., Fowler, C. H. (2016). What works, when, for whom, and
with whom: A meta-analytic review of predictors of postsecondary success for
students with disabilities. Review of Educational Research, 86(1), 123–162.
Harwood, V., McMahon, S., O’Shea, S., Bodkin-Andrews, G., Priestly,
A. (2015). Recognising aspiration: The AIME program’s effectiveness in
inspiring Indigenous young people’s participation in schooling and opportu-
nities for further education and employment. Australian Educational
Researcher, 42, 217–236.
Henry, F., Dua, E., James, C. E., Kobayashi, A., Li, P., Ramos, R., Smith,
M. S. (2017). The equity myth: Racialization and indigeneity at Canadian uni-
versities. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.
Hess, A. (2018, April 6). New study finds that 36% of college students don’t
have enough to eat. CNBC make it. Retrieved November 2019, from https://
www.cnbc.com/2018/04/06/new-study-finds-that-36-percent-of-college-
students-dont-have-enough-to-eat.html
Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA). (2019a). Figure 4 – HE student
enrolments by personal characteristics 2013/14 to 2017/18. Retrieved November
2019, from https://www.hesa.ac.uk/data-and-analysis/sb252/figure-4
Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA). (2019b). Table 4 – HE academic
staff by ethnicity and academic employment function 2014/15 to 2017/18.
Retrieved November 2019, from https://www.hesa.ac.uk/data-and-analysis/
staff/table-4
Jarboe, N. (2017). Women count: Australian universities 2016. Retrieved
November 2019, from https://womencount.org/portfolio/womencount-
australian-universities-2016
Kelly, P. (2007). The entrepreneurial self and ‘youth at-risk’: Exploring the hori-
zons of identity in the twenty-first century. Journal of Youth Studies,
9(1), 17–32.
G. Crimmins

51. 23
Lolich, L., Lynch, K. (2016). The affective imaginary: Students as affective
consumers of risk. Higher Education Research Development, 35(1), 17–30.
Matthews, D. (2017, September 8). A stunning new study shows that Fox news
is more powerful than we ever imagined. Vox. Retrieved November 2019,
from https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/9/8/16263710/fox-
news-presidential-vote-study
McGee, M. K. (2017). A mixed methods exploration of black presidents appointed
to predominantly white institutions: Assessing their exposure to the glass cliff and
experiences as administrators of color. Doctoral dissertation, College of
Education and Psychology, University of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg,
Mississippi. Retrieved November 2019, from https://aquila.usm.edu/
dissertations/1481
Monroe, K. R., Choi, J., Howell, E., Lampros-Monroe, C., Trejo, C., Perez,
V. (2014). Gender equality in the ivory tower, and how best to achieve it. PS:
Political Science Politics, 47(2), 418–426.
Motta,M.(2018).Thedynamicsandpoliticalimplicationsofanti-­intellectualism
in the United States. American Politics Research, 46(3), 465–498.
National Centre for Vocational Education Research (NCVER). (2018).
Australian vocational education and training statistics: Total VET students and
courses 2017. Adelaide: NCVER.
National Union of Students (NUS). (2018, April 26). Poverty Commission press
release [Press release]. Retrieved November 2019, from https://www.nus.org.
uk/en/news/press-releases/poverty-commission-press-release
Naylor, M., Mifsud, N. (2019). Structural inequality in higher education:
Creating institutional cultures that enable all students. Melbourne: La Trobe
University. Retrieved November 2019, from https://www.ncsehe.edu.au/wp-
content/uploads/2019/09/NaylorMifsud-FINAL.pdf
Norton, A. (2018, February 22). Higher education inequality: How well has
Australia limited differential access levels by socioeconomic status? Equity
and Access/Higher Education Admissions. Retrieved November 2019, from
https://andrewnorton.net.au/2018/02/22/higher-education-
inequality-how-well-has-australia-limited-differential-access-levels-by-socio-
economic-status/
Norton, A., Cherastidtham, I., Mackey, W. (2018). Mapping Australian
higher education 2018. Melbourne: Grattan Institute. Retrieved November
2019, from https://grattan.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/907-Map-
ping-Australian-higher-education-2018.pdf
Oishi, N. (2017). Workforce diversity in higher education: The experiences of Asian
academics in Australian universities. Melbourne: Asia Institute, University of
1 Don’t Throw Out the Baby with the Bathwater…