challenges for higher education uk

The trends shaping UK higher education in 2023 and beyond

• Education Focused

6 minute read

Forces shaping the UK’s higher education sector and where we’re headed next

Universities are struggling to find growth due to reduced interest in post-graduate degrees, says Kim McLellan, Managing Director at Hunterlodge, who oversees a range of higher education clients.

Universities are struggling to find growth in the UK due to reduced interest in post-graduate (PG) degrees from the home market, says Kim McLellan, Managing Director at Hunterlodge, who oversees a range of higher education clients.

“These challenges go back to 2014-18 when the higher education sector essentially ‘ate its lunch for breakfast,’” says Kim. What I mean by that is, at that time, the undergraduate market was struggling due to population deficits of 18-year-olds, so Higher Education Institutes (HEI’s) began mopping up more and more potential PG students into their Undergraduate (UG) study places.”

“Another big factor impacting PG numbers is that PG study normally tracks the job market. In a buoyant job market, PG goes down. When the job market is tough, PG goes up. Right now, the job market is booming, so universities are facing a hard PG home market. Many businesses are starting to feel the pinch and are sensing that change in the air.”

Kim says he believes this will prove a “short-term blip” and the upward trajectory will return in short order. “For now, HEI’s will need to be more strategic in their approach, work more collaboratively and be more agile in order to pivot and make up revenue losses,” Kim says. “In recent memory, marketing has always been about the 4 Ps – Product, Price, Place, Promotion – and for some reason senior management only listens to marketing about promotion. This is no longer the case.”

“Place has become vital, and many universities have been attempting to fill their PG gap by attracting international students, to middling success, as they experience how volatile international markets can be and the need for international diversification.”

Kim says there are several other higher education trends shaping the UG market too, from the cost-of-living crisis to the rise in online learning. Read on for more.

It’s the Big 4 for a reason

First is the resurgence of the ‘Big 4’ degree subjects – business, psychology, computer science and law – which are seeing disproportionate growth both nationally and internationally, according to Kim. To grow as a university, he says it’s imperative to have a strong provision in at least three of these subjects.

“The smart ones are investing heavily in their product portfolio, but the big problem is that you need to have an equal share of voice between subjects,” Kim says. “You have course leaders saying, what about us? It’s very political. A university can’t act like a business and back the winning horse or horses. Plus, for the sake of their academic and research capabilities, you do need a broad range of subjects. The war is raging between academic prowess and commercial sanity. The point is that those who can manage these forces effectively will come out on top.”

Statistics business Statista found that in the 2020/21 academic year, there were 474,970 enrolments for courses involving business and management studies, making it the most popular subject group in that year, followed by medicine with 339,150 enrolments.

Cost-of-living isn’t going anywhere

Many universities are overlooking the cost-of-living crisis, says Kim, but it’s important that they don’t let the issue slip into the background. A survey by Save the Student, a website that investigates student issues, shows the average student’s maintenance loan falls short of covering their living costs by £439 every month in 2022. He says this is set to get worse.

“My advice to universities would be to discover, what’s their spin?” Kim says. “How does cost-of-living fit with their brand? What are they doing about it for their students? Some universities are smashing it. For example, the University of Northampton is giving free laptops to every student that starts. When students join, they can say, here’s the Wi-Fi, now get on with your studies. It’s simple, smart thinking. In addition, they are dropping accommodation deposits to show their continued support to their students. Others are tapping into their data to better understand whether their students are living at home or looking for private accommodation then altering their advertising.”

Kim wants to see a London university come out as the first to offer free travel cards throughout a student’s study or provide food, heating, accommodation grants – appreciating that it is the most expensive place in the UK to live.

  A resurgence of MOOCs

MOOCs (massive open online courses) have been around for a while and are seeing a significant resurgence, says Kim. To entice prospective students to the top of the funnel, universities are now offering MOOCs for free, with many courses are also being modularized to facilitate the “own place, own pace” trend to huge commercial return. According to Statistics Business Research and Markets, the EdTech market could reach $605 billion in value by 2027, up from $254 billion today.

“MOOCs have been around for years in places such as the Open University, but only a few universities have been smart enough to digitize products, especially when it comes to modular delivery,” Kim says. “You could break down a typical MBA, split it into four components—things like leadership, for example—and charge a premium on that six-to-eight-week course.”

The London School of Economics is one institution that Kim thinks has done this effectively.

The road ahead

  According to Kim, many of these issues will remain for years to come. However, there is good news. Population growth means that the undergraduate market will remain buoyant in the coming years – very shortly becoming tomorrow’s PG market (as soon as 2024). Indeed, the Office for National Statists predicts that the population of the UK will increase from an estimated 67.1 million in mid-2020 to 69.2 million in mid-2030, with England’s population is projected to grow more quickly than the other UK nations.

“Population growth in the home market will continue to be buoyant for the next 10-15 years,” says Kim. “Between 2016 and 2021, the population had a dip, but today the 18-21 market is bouncing back at a huge rate. What you do have is disproportionate growth across the country. And what that means is that London is going to be the hunting ground for students.

“The message for universities is that the population is there, and the market is there, the challenge is working out what part of the market you want to capture,” says Kim. “The UK is also fast becoming the number one destination for international students. While some issues will remain, between the growth in the two markets, the future is looking very, very rosy for any higher education institutions.”

We’ve got our fingers on the pulse, so drop us a line at  [email protected]  and let’s chat.

Want to see what we can do for you?

Is online learning just another HE 'trend'?

5 youth marketing trends for 2023

• Meet the Team
• Education Focussed
• CRM and Automation

Quick Links

• Our Services
• Privacy Overview
• 3rd Party Cookies

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.

This website uses Google Analytics to collect anonymous information such as the number of visitors to the site, and the most popular pages.

Keeping this cookie enabled helps us to improve our website.

Please enable Strictly Necessary Cookies first so that we can save your preferences!

• Teaching, learning and quality

Higher education in facts and figures: 2021

Last updated on Wednesday 14 Jun 2023 at 2:52pm

On this page

About this data.

• Back to top

An overview of the data on students, staff and university finances from our member institutions.

Highlights 

Record proportions of the most disadvantaged students began a full-time undergraduate course in the UK in 2020, across all four nations of the UK.

In 2020, median graduate salaries were £10,000 higher in England than non-graduate salaries.

In 2019−20, 15.8% of undergraduate students and 40.5% of postgraduate students at UUK member institutions were from outside the UK.

In 2019−20, nearly half of total expenditure was spent directly on teaching and research activities.

What data have we used? 

Most data we’ve used refers to just our member institutions. This covers 140 universities and higher education providers in the UK. 

The data we have used for each chart is clearly labelled and mostly comes from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) records, which covers a wider set of providers. The below charts show the proportion of student, staff and finance data within each of the public HESA records that is represented by Universities UK members.

Promoted content

Stay up to date with our work.

Our monthly updates are a great way for you to stay up to date with our work, events, and higher education news.

In 2019−20, there were 2,413,155 students at UUK member institutions; an increase of 3.1% compared to 2018−19. Of these students:

• 79.6% studied full time
• 74.5% were undergraduates
• 5.8% were from EU countries
• 16.3% were from other non-EU countries
• 56.9% were females
• 59.9% were mature students (aged 21 and over)

Students by mode of study and country of institution, 2019–20

The number of students studying full time has increased by 3.1% since 2018–19. Part-time numbers have decreased slightly (down 0.2% on 2018–19). In 2019−20, part-time students accounted for 36.9% of postgraduate students and 14.7% of undergraduate students.

Students by level and mode of study, 2019–20

In 2019–20, four fifths of students were studying full-time. 69.2% of students were studying for a first degree either full or part time, and a quarter (25.5%) were postgraduates. 'Other undergraduates' (which includes those studying for foundation degrees, diplomas in higher education, or Higher National Diplomas among others) were the most likely to be studying part time, followed by postgraduate taught students.

Applicants, acceptances and UK 18-year-old entry rates, 2011 to 2020

For the 2020 cycle, the total number of people applying for UK full-time undergraduate higher education courses increased by 3.2% on 2019, while total acceptances increased by 5.4%. The UK 18-year-old entry rate was also at record levels, with 37.0% of this group starting a full-time undergraduate course.

Entry rates of the most disadvantaged 18-year-olds by domicile, 2011 to 2021

Record proportions of the most disadvantaged students began a full-time undergraduate course in the UK in 2020 across all four nations of the UK. The charts below show the proportion of 18-year-olds from the areas considered to be in the top fifth most disadvantaged areas who began a course.

Students by age and ethnicity, 2019–20

In 2019−20, mature students (aged 21 and over) accounted for 57.5% of the student population at UUK member institutions. This includes 44.3% of students studying for their first undergraduate degree. Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) students accounted for 25.1% of students living permanently in the UK.

Students by sex, subject area and level of study, 2019–20

In 2019−20, undergraduate student numbers were highest in the subjects of business, subjects allied to medicine and social sciences. Postgraduate numbers were highest for business, subjects allied to medicine and education. Psychology had the highest proportion of female students at 81.1% with the lowest found in computing, and engineering and technology at 19.8% each.

Students by domicile and level of study, 2019–20

In 2019−20, 5.5% of undergraduates were from EU countries, while 10.3% were from outside the EU. Percentages for postgraduates were 6.8% and 33.7% respectively.

In 2019-20, UUK members awarded 761,215 qualifications.

• 61% were undergraduate qualifications and 39% were postgraduate
• 80% of graduates were in employment or unpaid work 15 months after graduation
• 19% of graduates were in further study
• Median salaries for graduates were £9,500 higher than non-graduates
• 5.3% of non-graduates were unemployed compared to 3.7% of graduates

Qualifications awarded by level and mode of study, 2019–20

In 2019−20, more than half (53.6%) of qualifications awarded by UUK member institutions were first degrees. 85.8% of qualifications awarded were for full-time study.

Graduate outcomes by activity, 2018–19

In 2019−20, 80% of graduates who responded to HESA's Graduate Outcomes survey were in employment or unpaid work. 19% of survey respondents were in further study, including those who were also in employment.

Unemployment rates and median salaries in England, 2020

In 2020, median salaries for England-domiciled graduates were £9,500 higher than median non-graduate salaries. The graduate unemployment rate was 3.7%, compared to 5.3% for non-graduates, while the high-skill employment rate was 53.9 percentage points higher for postgraduates than non-graduates, and 41.5 percentage points higher for graduates than non-graduates.

In 2019−20, there were 409,055 staff at UUK member institutions, of these:

• 53.0% were academic staff 
• 12.7% were from EU countries
• 9.5% were from non-EU countries
• 54.2% were female
• 30.7% were aged under 35 years old
• 14.4% were Black, Asian and minority ethnic staff.

Staff by nationality and employment function, 2019–20

In 2019−20, over a fifth (22.2%) of staff at UUK member institutions had a non-UK nationality. Half (48.9%) of academic staff with a 'research only' function had a non-UK nationality.

Academic staff by nationality and cost centre, 2019−20

In 2019−20, non-UK staff accounted for nearly half (47.2%) of academic staff in engineering and technology compared to 13.3% in education.

Academic staff by sex, mode of employment and age, 2019–20

In 2019−20, 46.6% of academic staff at UUK member institutions were female, while 34.0% of staff were working part-time. 29.0% were 35 or under.

Professors by sex and ethnicity, 2015–16 to 2019–20

Although the number of Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME), professors has increased by nearly a third (32.2%) since 2015−16, they only accounted for 10.0% of professors in 2019−20. Over half (58.6%) were white males.

In 2019–20, the total reported income of UUK member institutions was £39.8 billion. Just over half of this income (£20.7 billion) was related to teaching, 15% was related to research (£6.1 billion), and 11% was related to knowledge exchange activity (£4.5 billion).

In 2019–20, our members' total expenditure was £36.4 billion. Nearly half (£17.5 billion) was spent on direct teaching and research activity, and over a tenth (£3.8 billion) was spent on libraries, IT and museums.

Income and size of higher education institutions, 2018–19 to 2019–20

In 2019−20, three quarters of UUK members had an annual income of £100 million or more, with a similar proportion having at least 10,000 students.

Income by source, 2019–20

In 2019−20, the total reported income of UK higher education institutions was £39.8 billion. Around half (£20.7 billion) of this income was sourced through tuition fees.

Teaching, research and knowledge exchange income by source, 2019–20

In 2019−20 around a third (32.3%) of teaching income was from international students from outside the EU. A third of research income came from research councils (33.6%), and nearly a quarter (23.3%) came from outside of the UK. In 2019−20, over a third of knowledge exchange income came from collaborative research involving public funding. This includes collaboration with at least one non-academic partner, which can include businesses, the third sector, and the public. The estimated current turnover of spin-off or start-up firms based on providers' intellectual property, or started by staff, students or graduates increased significantly in 2019−20. Businesses associated with UUK members had an estimated turnover of £7.9 billion with the majority coming from staff start-ups (£2.8 billion) and student start-ups (£2.6bn).

International Facts and Figures 2021

International Facts and Figures is our annual snapshot of the international dimensions of UK higher education.

Operating expenditure of UK higher education institutions, 2019–20

In 2019–20, the total reported operating expenditure of UUK member institutions was £36 billion. Nearly half of this was spent directly on teaching and research activities. Other areas of spending include those that support teaching and learning, such as libraries and IT, maintaining campuses, providing financial support to students and student facilities.

Academic employment function

A HESA field relating to staff with academic contracts. Categories are divided according to whether the contract is ‘teaching only’, ‘research only’ (no more than six hours of teaching per week), ‘teaching and research’, and neither teaching nor research. For more information visit HESA's website .

Cost centre

Cost centre is a financial concept which groups staff members to categories of spending. They enable analysis between the student, staff and finance streams. The cost centre groups are separate to the JACS/HESA codes due to the groupings and are therefore non-comparable. The reason they can't be compared and the breadth of the elements in this field is to replicate the way in which resources (including staff) can be split over multiple courses and the differences in the way individual higher education providers allocate them. For more information visit HESA's website .

A student’s permanent country of residence. This differs from nationality (see below).

The number of university entrants divided by the estimated base population.

The Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) is the designated data body for English higher education.

High-skill employment

Occupations at this level are generally termed ‘professional’ or ‘managerial’ positions and are found in corporate enterprises or governments. Occupations include senior government officials, financial managers, scientists, engineers, medical doctors, teachers and accountants.

Knowledge exchange activities

Activities that bring together academic staff, users of research and wider groups and communities to exchange ideas, evidence and expertise. Information on knowledge exchange activities is collected by HESA through their Higher Education Business and Community Interaction (HEBCI) survey. For more information visit HESA's website . 

Level of study

Whether a student studies at undergraduate or postgraduate level. With these groupings, there are other levels such as ‘first degree’, ‘other undergraduate’, ‘postgraduate (research)’ and ‘postgraduate (taught)’. For more information visit HESA's website .

Mode of study

Whether a student studies full or part time.

Nationality

A HESA field that records the legal nationality of staff. For more information visit HESA's website .

Participation of Local Areas (POLAR) is a widening participation measure which classifies local areas or ‘wards’ into five groups, based on the proportion of 18-year-olds who enter higher education aged 18 or 19 years old. These groups range from quintile 1 areas, with the lowest young participation (most disadvantaged), up to quintile 5 areas with the highest rates (most advantaged).

Professorial staff

HESA codes each staff contract. Professor level is defined as ‘senior academic appointments which may carry the title of professor, but which do not have departmental line management responsibilities’. Other senior contracts include leadership and management responsibilities. These contracts may also be held by people who hold the title of professor. It is likely that the methodology undercounts the number of professors because many will fall into more senior levels, eg heads of department.

The Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation for 2016 is a widening participation measure that identifies small areas of multiple deprivation across Scotland and classifies them into five groups. These groups range from quintile 1 – areas identified as the most disadvantaged, to quintile 5 – areas identified as the most advantaged. 

HESA Standard Rounding Methodology

We have applied HESA’s Standard Rounding Methodology to all analysis of HESA data:

• Counts of people are rounded to the nearest multiple of five
• Percentages are not published if they are fractions of a small group of people (fewer than 22.5)
• We have applied the methodology after making calculations, which sometimes means numbers in tables may not sum up to indicated totals

For more information, visit HESA's website . 

HESA sources in this report are copyright Higher Education Statistics Agency Limited. 

Neither the Higher Education Statistics Agency Limited nor HESA Services Limited can accept responsibility for any inferences or conclusions derived by third parties from data or other information obtained from Heidi Plus.

Higher education in numbers

Key facts and figures about UK higher education.

• Challenges Facing Higher Education In The UK

Challenges Facing Higher Education in the UK

The government’s plan to introduce a cap on the number of students studying ‘low-value’ universities degrees raises wider questions about the future of Higher Education in the UK – not just value for money but also the financial state of UK universities, the return to university education and the number of viable HE institutions. Our Deputy Director Professor Adrian Pabst spoke with Professor Peter Dolton, NIESR Research Director who has worked for several decades on the economics of Higher Education in the UK.

Professor Peter Dolton

Professor Adrian Pabst

Related Themes

What is the financial state of uk universities.

Universities are trying to exert pressure on the government to allow higher fees from their £9,250 level. Their argument is that fees have not risen since 2017 and that the costs of university education have all risen approximately in line with inflation by around 26% (They were set at £9,000 in 2012.) Neither the Conservative government nor the Labour opposition seem prepared to let fees rise as they see this as being unpopular with the electorate and hence a vote loser. At the same time neither major political party is prepared to raise the level of teaching funding from central government (which would obviate the need to raise fees.) This central funding of university education has all but disappeared.

Presently, UK university fees are the highest in the world, with the lowest subsidy to potential students. But as it stands it is still the case that it is predominately the children of middle- and upper-class families who go to university. Several prominent papers in the literature have suggested that higher fees would not deter applicants from going to university. But recent work by Li Lin and myself using a more complete econometric model of post-war demand has suggested that higher fees would have small negative impact on demand.

Many years ago, my work together with colleagues suggested that fees should be allowed to vary by subject and university. There are powerful arguments to support this view, but this is unlikely to happen in the present policy vacuum on HE in the UK. The explicit cross- subsidisation of science and medicine by social science and humanities is not efficient.

Presently, most universities that are only financially viable because of their income from overseas postgraduate income. This is income derived from rich families in predominantly poor countries. This is not a morally or ethically viable way to fund UK universities.

What is the return to university education?

The idea that students should fund their own fees (and subsistence) via a loan is predicated on the theory that graduates have invested in their own human capital and that they will reap a return on this investment via higher future earnings in the labour market as highly qualified people. But what is the return to university education?

The literature on the rate of return has variously suggested that the annual rate of return to a degree is between 8-15 per cent. This figure has been estimated using a limited econometric estimation strategy. Recent work by myself and my co-authors suggests that the true figure is much lower at around 6 per cent. Moreover, this return is an estimated average return which is a lot lower for some subjects. Recent work by the IFS has shown a huge variability across subjects and institutions of graduation in how good a return there is to UK Higher Education.

How many universities do we need?

Around 30 per cent of graduates do not end up with up with a graduate job. This has been the case for around 50 years. This ‘over-education’, as I argued already in 2000 together with Anna Vignoles, is predominantly a problem for graduates in arts and humanities subjects from lesser-known universities. This raises the question of how many university places (and hence universities) we actually need? Arguably, with over 160 universities in the UK, we have far too many places at university offering courses that UK industry does not need.

Other countries educate closer to the number of graduates their industries need in far fewer universities. For example, in the Netherlands they have far fewer universities which offer much larger courses provided in a much more efficient way. It is important that we keep the question open of how many universities the country actually needs.  This should be partly determined by the answers to the previous two questions – i.e. how many of our universities are financially viable and what is the rate of return to degree study for individuals?

Related Blog Posts

What Can Be Done To Better Protect Children and Young People From Serious Safeguarding Incidents?

Sophie Kitson

Ekaterina Aleynikova

19 Feb 2024

Putting Increased Pressure on a Fragile System Does Not Help

Claudine Bowyer-Crane

Cecilia Zuniga-Montanez

15 Jan 2024

Safeguarding the Safeguards – more Support Needed, But How?

Lucy Stokes

Johnny Runge

Adrian Pabst

02 May 2023

Can Texting Parents Help Improve Children’s Development?

Ceri Williams

Anneka Dawson

12 May 2022

Related Projects

Evaluation of Talking Time Efficacy Trial

Catch Up Literacy Pilot Study

Impact of Covid-19 on Children’s Language, Education and Socio-Emotional Skills (ICICLES)

Better Start Bradford

Related news.

Press Release: NIESR awarded major grant to study the impact of COVID-19 on children’s educational, language, social & emotional outcomes

17 Jun 2021

Press Release: Targeted home support could be key in children’s early language development

21 Apr 2021

Related Publications

Recruitment and Retention of Senior School Leaders in Wales

Research Report

Domestic Abuse and Schools: Evidence from the Supervision for Designated Safeguarding Leads Evaluations

04 Jul 2023

Supervising Designated Safeguarding Leads in Primary Schools

27 Apr 2023

Supervision for Designated Safeguarding Leads Scale-Up Evaluation

Four major challenges facing Britain’s education system after the pandemic

Associate Pro Vice Chancellor for Student Inclusion and Professor of Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, University of East Anglia

Disclosure statement

Helena Gillespie's research is funded by Erasmus+ and has previously been funded by Advance HE and HEFCE. She is a school governor, multi academy trust member and director of Norfolk Cricket Board.

University of East Anglia provides funding as a member of The Conversation UK.

View all partners

The UK goverment’s Department for Education has some new ministers in charge following the political turmoil surrounding Boris Johnson’s resignation. After resigning only two days into the job of education secretary, Michelle Donelan has been replaced by James Cleverly , MP for Braintree.

Donelan’s former role overseeing higher education has been filled by Andrea Jenkyns, MP for Morley and Outwood, who has been named skills, further and higher education minister . Jenkyns’ credentials as an educational leader were called somewhat into question when she was photographed making a gesture to the public gathered outside Downing Street that would certainly have landed her in detention.

While these appointments can be considered, to some extent, to be caretaker roles pending the appointment of the new prime minister in early September, the new ministers still face significant challenges as they oversee schools, colleges and universities. Here are four issues facing them as they get to work.

Getting exams back to normal

The first hurdle comes next month with the annual round of GCSE and A-level exam results. This will be the first cohort since 2019 to have formally sat their exams. The Department of Education will be hoping that the exam results, which have already been taken and marked, will not cause such headline grabbing disruption this summer as in the two previous years.

In 2020, the first year that exams were cancelled due to the pandemic, results were overturned after it became clear that the algorithm used by the government to standardise grades was penalising students from disadvantaged backgrounds. Pupils could choose to use teacher assessments to decide grades instead.

In 2021, the government again elected to use teacher assessment to decide results, but the approach resulted in many more top grades. The jump in A grades at A-level, from 38% to 44%, meant that there were not enough places at top universities to go around – and universities had to offer prospective students packages of support to persuade them to defer to a 2022 start .

However, it is likely that the return to exams will mean a drop in grades from 2021, and there may be many disappointed students and parents. Weathering grade fluctuations in future years while also closing gaps in attainment for students from disadvantaged backgrounds will be a difficult trick to pull off.

Addressing inequality

In November 2020, the Department of Education launched its flagship initiative to address pandemic learning loss in England, the National Tutoring Programme – which pairs schools with tutors who work with individual students or small groups to help them catch up in core subjects.

However, the House of Commons Education Committee recently reported that the National Tutoring Programme is failing to make an impact in the schools in deprived areas where children are most behind with their education.

Read more: The government's academic catch-up strategy is failing children in England

Problems with the catch-up strategy are just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to endemic inequalities in education in the UK. School buildings in many areas are facing pressure from growing class sizes and wear and tear. A 2021 report by the Department for Education put the backlog of school maintenance in England at a cost of £11.4 billion, an eye watering sum at a time of economic crisis.

It is difficult to see how schools can level up for their pupils in buildings that are falling down. The education secretary must hope for sympathy and support around the new cabinet table to access the funds needed.

Provide support for teachers

The pandemic has had a serious impact on children and young people’s mental health and wellbeing and the problem remains acute. One of the short-term impacts of this is growing pressures on teachers in classrooms. For this reason as well as the rise in the cost of living, teachers are asking for a substantial pay increase .

It seems unlikely that current proposals for pay rises in schools, which sit below the rate of inflation, will stop a ballot on strike action or address teacher shortages caused by so many leaving the profession. If the new minister is to be able to deliver meaningful educational recovery, schools are going to need to be better staffed and better supported by other sector agencies. Achieving this looks both difficult and expensive.

Free speech in higher education

On 27 June 2022, before her promotion to education secretary and subsequent resignation, Michelle Donelan had written to university vice chancellors advising them to consider whether their membership of certain diversity schemes was appropriate given their responsibility to uphold free speech. This was regarded with concern by many in the education sector as a move that blurred the lines between appropriate regulation and university autonomy.

In addition, the controversial Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Bill, which seeks to ensure that free speech is protected on campus by limiting the “no-platforming” of speakers, is currently passing through the House of Lords. However, a recent survey has found that 61% of students think that universities should prioritise protecting students from discrimination rather than permitting unlimited free speech.

The new Department for Education team has much to do to ensure that good decisions are made on behalf of the UK’s children and young people.

This article was amended on July 19 2022 to reflect that the National Tutoring Programme and Condition of School Buildings Survey refer to England.

• UK universities
• Exam results
• Learning loss
• Department for Education

School of Social Sciences – Public Policy and International Relations opportunities

Partner, Senior Talent Acquisition

Deputy Editor - Technology

Sydney Horizon Educators (Identified)

Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic and Student Life)

• +44 (0) 2033 189 380 (UK)
• +880 1407-093812 (Dhaka)
• +447305319797
• [email protected]
• Testimonial
• Work With Us
• Foundation Courses
• Undergraduate Courses
• Postgraduate Courses
• Professional Courses
• Research Programme
• Online Courses
• Universities
• Student Service
• Partner Service
• Accommodation
• Book Appointment

Challenges Facing the UK Higher Education Sector

The UK higher education sector has long been known for its excellence, attracting students from all over the world to study at prestigious institutions. However, in recent years, the sector has faced numerous challenges threatening its continued success. Rising tuition fees, increased competition for international students, and changing regulatory frameworks are just some of the issues that UK higher education institutions must navigate. This essay will explore the challenges facing the UK higher education sector and discuss possible solutions to ensure its continued success.

What Are the Challenges Facing Higher Education in the UK?

Throughout the years, UK universities have reliably positioned among the world’s best. This doesn’t come as a surprise, given the facilities and the quality of teaching. Be that as it may, just like in any other part of the globe, there are various impediments that the UK government must conquer, a large portion of which is a result of the current political atmosphere. The following list is the most noticeable challenges facing UK higher education.

The UK wants to leave the European Union bloc; this has created a lot of uncertainties surrounding the conditions of the country’s departure. With the country’s imminent release, many people expect the freedom of movement within the region to be disturbed.

This, in particular, is a cause for concern for many universities, given that it has previously facilitated exchange programs such as ERASMUS. Also, there is ambiguity over whether academics from the EU bloc will continue practicing in the UK.

As a result of the uncertainties, UK universities may lose their cultural richness and face financial challenges as more international students abstain from pursuing higher education in these institutions.

2. Dwindling International Reputation

It is given that the Brexit discussion will be finished before long. However, the repercussions of such a move are expected to be extensive. Brexit has brought about a few scenarios that adversely impact the UK’s worldwide higher education standing.

For example, the migration guidelines may be unfavorable to UK higher education. Previously, staff in various institutions across the nation was 16% and 12% from the EU and outside the EU. This implies that many of these personnel may leave the nation, denying its much-needed expertise. Besides, research funding vulnerabilities are neutralizing the institutions’ worldwide standing.

Current information shows that the nation’s universities are on a downward trajectory, which has seen Japan supplant the UK as the second most represented country in the global ranking. Regardless of whether the descending pattern remains, it is clear that proactive measures should be taken to turn around the reputation.

3. International Competition

Besides losing its long-standing position to Japan, other countries are gaining ground representing another cause for concern. Apart from Japan, other countries such as China have improved their education levels, thus enhancing their global ranking. Also, the current political climate has allowed students to choose countries in the Oceania region rather than in the UK.

Nevertheless, it is right to point out that some determinants are beyond the reach of the institutions. For instance, the aftermath of the negotiations will profoundly impact the institutions’ global reputations.

4. Fee Challenges Within the Higher Education

Various quotas have been proposed the lower the tuition fee within the country. The change aims to have the universities charge less for all courses deemed cheap to run. However, this move attracted widespread criticism across the country.

Many people argued that by so doing, the government would lock out students from poor backgrounds from pursuing courses that would charge more, especially those that are science-oriented, which is already proving to be a challenge.

5. Shifting Research Funding

When it comes to research funding, UK universities benefit significantly from the kitty received from the EU. For example, between 2007 and 2013, UK universities received five hundred million pounds as research funding. However, this position is jeopardized by the country’s looming departure from the EU bloc, causing anxiety among academics and institutions.

Although the current funding is expected to continue up until this year, there is a lot of uncertainty surrounding the source of financing once the deal is over. Failure to have adequate research funding would have adverse effects on the country’s progress and global ranking.

6. Increased Cost

It takes a great deal of investment for an institution to remain competitive. This has led to many universities dedicating funds to investing in personnel, infrastructure, and the necessary student facilities. This has increased the costs, resulting in increased students’ expectations.

However, according to Deloitte, the sector has reacted positively to this challenge. For example, institutions of higher learning have managed to cut costs, saving more than in previous periods. This said, each institution should have its strategies to help mitigate the effects posed by this challenge.

7. Attracting and Retaining the Best Talent

Higher education institutions must work towards hiring the right personnel to ensure they attain their corporate strategies and priorities. Universities might not be in a position to attract the required talent post-Brexit. This will have further implications for the sector in the long run.

However, the institutions should not shy away from recruiting from the corporate world to help in their management functions. As such, universities should work to align the incentives while also being sensitive to the implications the move may have on the institution’s culture.

8. Student Well-being

The rate of suicide and other mental-related illnesses has been rising among students. Also, issues such as drug abuse and sexual harassment have been reported as some of the problems currently affecting the students. This means the respective institutions of higher learning must devise ways to curb these problems.

However, providing the necessary support might be in jeopardy as it heavily relies on the fund received. This means the universities will be pressured into finding other sources of finances, which might not be easy.

9. Protecting Free Speech

The issue has elicited mixed reactions when it comes to free speech within the universities. Many people think that giving a platform for free speech will increase controversial speakers; however, other quotas believe that not providing such a platform inhibits free speech. This means the universities must balance external pressure on what they believe is permissible in the institutions.

Final Words

In conclusion, the UK higher education sector is facing various challenges, including rising tuition fees, competition for international students, and changing regulations. However, with strategic planning, innovative approaches, and collaboration, these challenges can be overcome, and the sector can continue to thrive and provide quality education to students from all over the world.

Tags: challenges in higher education UK, global challenges in higher education, challenges facing the higher education sector UK, challenges facing higher education, challenges in higher education, uk education system problems, the greatest challenges facing higher education, challenges facing universities, issues facing higher education today, issues facing higher education students, uk higher education system.

Share this post

Leave a reply cancel reply.

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Related Posts

MOI Accepted Universities in UK

Medium of Instruction or MoI certificate is as an official record,... read more

5 Best Universities in USA for International Students in 2024

Looking for top-notch education in the USA? Our blog on "Best... read more

Scholarships For Pakistani Students In Canada

Ever wondered why Canadian education is becoming increasingly appealing to Pakistani... read more

What is Secure English Language Test (SELT)

Are you going to apply for SELT? What is secure english... read more

We Are Hiring

Job Title: Business Development Executive Identify the potential partnership opportunities with local... read more

Best Colleges In Europe in 2024

Although universities and colleges are the two mediums for higher education,... read more

How to Apply Dependent Visa For UK?

A dependent visa in the UK allows immediate family members of... read more

Predicting the Impact of the UK’s Dependents Policy Change on International Students

The UK government's recent policy change to restrict the entry of... read more

Boost Education Service is Rebranding to BHE UNI

Your most trusted university representative, Boost Education Service, which has been... read more

Duolingo Accepted Universities in the UK 2024

Standardized English Language Proficiency score is necessary for higher studies in... read more

[mailerlite_form form_id=1]

Our Student Says

It was a wonderful experience from the BOOST EDUCATION, they helped me a lot in my study program for the University of Roehampton Landon. Boost Education gives me the right counseling, helped me to select a great university, with the right information. Very professional & helpful to the student.

HENRY SMITH, GHANA University of Roehampton (QAHE) - Bsc (Hons) Computing Techinology - September 2018

Boost Education staffs are very professional and expert for the University admission. Also, they are very helpful and friendly

ANNA ANATOLIEVA Roehampton Universtiy London (QAHE) - Bsc(Hons) Business Management - May 2017

Boost Education service helped a lot for my higher education opportunities in the UK, they always provided me correct information and guidance for the University admission and visa processing

MEHEDI HASAN The University of West of Scotland - Doctor of Business Administration (DBA) - July 2018

Extremely efficient and cooperative team

CATALINE LOANA BUCUR Arden University - BA(Hons) in Business - January 2018

4 trends that will shape the future of higher education

Higher education needs to address the problems it faces by moving towards active learning, and teaching skills that will endure in a changing world. Image:  Vasily Koloda for Unsplash

.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo{-webkit-transition:all 0.15s ease-out;transition:all 0.15s ease-out;cursor:pointer;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;outline:none;color:inherit;}.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo:hover,.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo[data-hover]{-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;}.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo:focus,.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo[data-focus]{box-shadow:0 0 0 3px rgba(168,203,251,0.5);} Diana El-Azar

.chakra .wef-9dduvl{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-size:1.25rem;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-9dduvl{font-size:1.125rem;}} Explore and monitor how .chakra .wef-15eoq1r{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-size:1.25rem;color:#F7DB5E;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-15eoq1r{font-size:1.125rem;}} Education is affecting economies, industries and global issues

.chakra .wef-1nk5u5d{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;color:#2846F8;font-size:1.25rem;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-1nk5u5d{font-size:1.125rem;}} Get involved with our crowdsourced digital platform to deliver impact at scale

Stay up to date:.

Listen to the article

• Measures adopted during the pandemic do not address the root causes of the problems facing higher education.
• Institutions need to undertake true reform, moving towards active learning, and teaching skills that will endure in a changing world.
• Formative assessment is more effective than high-stakes exams in equipping students with the skills they need to succeed.

Since the onset of the recent pandemic, schools and universities have been forced to put a lot of their teaching online. On the surface, this seems to have spurred a series of innovations in the education sector. Colleges around the world embraced more flexibility, offering both virtual and physical classrooms. Coding is making its way into more school curricula , and the SAT exam for college admission in the US has recently been shortened and digitized , making it easier to take and less stressful for students.

These changes might give the illusion that education is undergoing some much-needed reform. However, if we look closely, these measures do not address the real problems facing higher education. In most countries, higher education is inaccessible to the socio-economically underprivileged, certifies knowledge rather than nurtures learning, and focuses on easily-outdated knowledge. In brief, it is failing on both counts of quality and access.

Have you read?

Four ways universities can future-proof education, the global education crisis is even worse than we thought. here's what needs to happen, covid-19’s impact on jobs and education: using data to cushion the blow, higher education trends.

In the last year, we have started to see examples of true reform, addressing the root causes of the education challenge. Below are four higher education trends we see taking shape in 2022.

1. Learning from everywhere

There is recognition that as schools and universities all over the world had to abruptly pivot to online teaching, learning outcomes suffered across the education spectrum . However, the experiment with online teaching did force a reexamination of the concepts of time and space in the education world. There were some benefits to students learning at their own pace, and conducting science experiments in their kitchens . Hybrid learning does not just mean combining a virtual and physical classroom, but allowing for truly immersive and experiential learning, enabling students to apply concepts learned in the classroom out in the real world.

So rather than shifting to a “learn from anywhere ” approach (providing flexibility), education institutions should move to a “learn from everywhere ” approach (providing immersion). One of our partners, the European business school, Esade, launched a new bachelor’s degree in 2021, which combines classes conducted on campus in Barcelona, and remotely over a purpose-designed learning platform, with immersive practical experiences working in Berlin and Shanghai, while students create their own social enterprise. This kind of course is a truly hybrid learning experience.

2. Replacing lectures with active learning

Lectures are an efficient way of teaching and an ineffective way of learning. Universities and colleges have been using them for centuries as cost-effective methods for professors to impart their knowledge to students.

However, with digital information being ubiquitous and free, it seems ludicrous to pay thousands of dollars to listen to someone giving you information you can find elsewhere at a much cheaper price. School and college closures have shed light on this as bad lectures made their way into parents’ living rooms, demonstrating their ineffectiveness.

Education institutions need to demonstrate effective learning outcomes, and some are starting to embrace teaching methods that rely on the science of learning. This shows that our brains do not learn by listening, and the little information we learn that way is easily forgotten (as shown by the Ebbinghaus forgetting curve , below). Real learning relies on principles such as spaced learning, emotional learning, and the application of knowledge.

The educational establishment has gradually accepted this method, known as 'fully active learning'. There is evidence that it not only improves learning outcomes but also reduces the education gap with socio-economically disadvantaged students. For example, Paul Quinn College, an HBCU based in Texas, launched an Honors Program using fully active learning in 2020, combined with internships at regional employers. This has given students from traditionally marginalised backgrounds the opportunity to apply the knowledge gained at university in the real world.

3. Teaching skills that remain relevant in a changing world

According to a recent survey, 96% of Chief Academic Officers at universities think they are doing a good job preparing young people for the workforce . Less than half (41%) of college students and only 11% of business leaders shared that view. Universities continue to focus on teaching specific skills involving the latest technologies, even though these skills and the technologies that support them are bound to become obsolete. As a result, universities are forever playing catch up with the skills needed in the future workplace.

What we need to teach are skills that remain relevant in new, changing, and unknown contexts. For example, journalism students might once have been taught how to produce long-form stories that could be published in a newspaper; more recently, they would have been taught how to produce shorter pieces and post content for social media. More enduring skills would be: how to identify and relate to readers, how to compose a written piece; how to choose the right medium for your target readership. These are skills that cross the boundaries of disciplines, applying equally to scientific researchers or lawyers.

San Francisco-based Minerva University, which shares a founder with the Minerva Project, has broken down competencies such as critical thinking or creative thinking into foundational concepts and habits of mind . It teaches these over the four undergraduate years and across disciplines, regardless of the major a student chooses to pursue.

4. Using formative assessment instead of high-stake exams

If you were to sit the final exam of the subject you majored in today, how would you fare? Most of us would fail, as that exam did not measure our learning, but rather what information we retained at that point in time. Equally, many of us hold certifications in subject matters we know little about.

Many people gain admission to higher education based on standardized tests that skew to a certain socio-economic class , rather than measure any real competency level. Universities then try to rectify this bias by imposing admission quotas, rather than dissociating their evaluation of competence from income level. Many US universities are starting to abandon standardized tests, with Harvard leading the charge , and there have been some attempts to replace high-stake exams with other measures that not only assess learning outcomes but actually improve them.

Formative assessment, which entails both formal and informal evaluations through the learning journey, encourages students to actually improve their performance rather than just have it evaluated. The documentation and recording of this assessment includes a range of measures, replacing alphabetical or numerical grades that are uni-dimensional.

The COVID-19 pandemic and recent social and political unrest have created a profound sense of urgency for companies to actively work to tackle inequity.

The Forum's work on Diversity, Equality, Inclusion and Social Justice is driven by the New Economy and Society Platform, which is focused on building prosperous, inclusive and just economies and societies. In addition to its work on economic growth, revival and transformation, work, wages and job creation, and education, skills and learning, the Platform takes an integrated and holistic approach to diversity, equity, inclusion and social justice, and aims to tackle exclusion, bias and discrimination related to race, gender, ability, sexual orientation and all other forms of human diversity.

The Platform produces data, standards and insights, such as the Global Gender Gap Report and the Diversity, Equity and Inclusion 4.0 Toolkit , and drives or supports action initiatives, such as Partnering for Racial Justice in Business , The Valuable 500 – Closing the Disability Inclusion Gap , Hardwiring Gender Parity in the Future of Work , Closing the Gender Gap Country Accelerators , the Partnership for Global LGBTI Equality , the Community of Chief Diversity and Inclusion Officers and the Global Future Council on Equity and Social Justice .

The International School in Geneva just launched its Learner Passport that includes measures of creativity, responsibility and citizenship. In the US, a consortium of schools have launched the Mastery Transcript Consortium that has redesigned the high school transcript to show a more holistic picture of the competencies acquired by students.

Education reform requires looking at the root cause of some of its current problems. We need to look at what is being taught (curriculum), how (pedagogy), when and where (technology and the real world) and whom we are teaching (access and inclusion). Those institutions who are ready to address these fundamental issues will succeed in truly transforming higher education.

Don't miss any update on this topic

Create a free account and access your personalized content collection with our latest publications and analyses.

License and Republishing

World Economic Forum articles may be republished in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public License, and in accordance with our Terms of Use.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and not the World Economic Forum.

Related topics:

The agenda .chakra .wef-n7bacu{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-weight:400;} weekly.

A weekly update of the most important issues driving the global agenda

.chakra .wef-1dtnjt5{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;-webkit-flex-wrap:wrap;-ms-flex-wrap:wrap;flex-wrap:wrap;} More on Education .chakra .wef-nr1rr4{display:-webkit-inline-box;display:-webkit-inline-flex;display:-ms-inline-flexbox;display:inline-flex;white-space:normal;vertical-align:middle;text-transform:uppercase;font-size:0.75rem;border-radius:0.25rem;font-weight:700;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;line-height:1.2;-webkit-letter-spacing:1.25px;-moz-letter-spacing:1.25px;-ms-letter-spacing:1.25px;letter-spacing:1.25px;background:none;padding:0px;color:#B3B3B3;-webkit-box-decoration-break:clone;box-decoration-break:clone;-webkit-box-decoration-break:clone;}@media screen and (min-width:37.5rem){.chakra .wef-nr1rr4{font-size:0.875rem;}}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-nr1rr4{font-size:1rem;}} See all

How universities can use blockchain to transform research

Scott Doughman

March 12, 2024

Empowering women in STEM: How we break barriers from classroom to C-suite

Genesis Elhussein and Julia Hakspiel

March 1, 2024

Why we need education built for peace – especially in times of war

February 28, 2024

These 5 key trends will shape the EdTech market upto 2030

Malvika Bhagwat

February 26, 2024

With Generative AI we can reimagine education — and the sky is the limit

Oguz A. Acar

February 19, 2024

How UNESCO is trying to plug the data gap in global education

February 12, 2024

• International edition
• Australia edition
• Europe edition

Foreign students may be undermining UK higher education, says Cleverly

Home secretary calls for visa review over concern that courses are being used as shortcut to gain work permits

• UK politics – latest updates

The home secretary, James Cleverly , has said international students may be “undermining the integrity and quality of the UK higher education system” by using university courses as a cheap way of getting work visas.

In a letter to the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC), Cleverly asked the body to investigate whether the graduate visa entitlement – allowing international students to work for two or three years after graduating – was failing to attract “the brightest and the best” to the UK.

But university leaders fear that cutting or restricting the graduate visa route will lead to a drastic fall in international recruitment, and provoke a financial crisis for universities that rely on income from international tuition fees.

Cleverly told the MAC that while the government was committed to attracting “talented students from around the world to study in the UK”, it also wanted “to ensure the graduate route is not being abused. In particular, that some of the demand for study visas is not being driven more by a desire for immigration”.

Cleverly said: “An international student can spend relatively little on fees for a one-year course and gain access to two years with no job requirement on the graduate route, followed by four years’ access to a discounted salary threshold on the skilled worker route.

“This means international graduates are able to access the UK labour market with salaries significantly below the requirement imposed on the majority of migrant skilled workers.”

The home secretary instructed the committee, which gives independent advice to the government, to investigate “any evidence of abuse” of the graduate route, “including the route not being fit for purpose”, and to look at which universities were producing graduates who used the route.

He also asked the MAC to analyse “whether the graduate route is undermining the integrity and quality of the UK higher education system, including understanding how the graduate route is or is not, effectively controlling for the quality of international students, such that it is genuinely supporting the UK to attract and retain the brightest and the best, contributing to economic growth and benefiting British higher education”.

Rachel Hewitt, the chief executive of the MillionPlus group of universities, said the government’s review appeared to be deliberately aimed at undermining the success of British higher education.

“It is impossible to imagine the government going out of its way to make Britain less inviting to investment in almost any other sector – and yet every negative headline and policy reform makes Britain less attractive to international students,” Hewitt said.

“The graduate route is a key component of the offer that UK universities can make to international applicants, and its value should be recognised and not eroded.”

Jamie Arrowsmith, the director of Universities UK International, said universities were “deeply concerned” by the short notice given by Cleverly.

after newsletter promotion

“Post-study work matters for many international students, allowing those who have invested in our country the opportunity to find work and contribute to the UK economy​,” said Arrowsmith.

“Having publicly recommitted to the graduate route on its current terms in May 2023, any further changes would be extremely damaging to our reputation as a welcoming destination for international students, and risks undermining a UK success story that generates more than £20bn a year in export earnings for the economy​.​”

Cleverly said “early data” showed that just 23% of international students using the skilled workers route moved into graduate-level jobs, and that last year only a third moved into jobs paying more than £26,000 a year.

The committee is expected to report back in May, and its findings could come at a difficult time for the higher education sector. So far this year, enrolments from overseas have fallen by 40% compared with 2023.

Vanessa Wilson, chief executive of the University Alliance group, said: “It is important that international students have the opportunity to study at the full range of UK universities so they can select the option that is right for them, and so that all UK students and regions can benefit from their contributions.”

• International students
• Immigration and asylum
• James Cleverly
• University funding
• Universities
• Higher education

More on this story

Home Office asks for emergency £2.6bn after asylum seeker hotels overspend

British students not being ‘squeezed out’ by overseas applicants, say universities

Jimmy Dimly lights our way to the glorious gospel of Rish!

University of York to accept some overseas students with lower grades

Fifth of UK universities’ income comes from overseas students, figures show

Cleverly admits ‘awful’ joke could have distracted from work to tackle spiking

James Cleverly facing calls to resign after joke about date rape drug

English universities warned not to over-rely on fees of students from China

British universities can no longer financially depend on foreign students. They must reform to survive

James Cleverly apologises for ‘appalling’ date rape drug joke at No 10 event

Most viewed.

Major policy issues facing higher education: a plea for nuance

• 2 March 2021
• By Nick Hillman

This is an extract from a speech delivered yesterday by Nick Hillman, HEPI’s Director, to an event in the Mills & Reeve Higher Education Week.

Students as consumers

Five years ago, our host, Gary Attle, told in a HEPI paper  how students had gradually come to be treated more like consumers. He started by recalling how the concept of students-as-consumers had once been entirely alien, using the words of Mr Justice Wills in 1896:

I cannot think of anything more fatal to discipline than the notion that a contractual relationship exists between the college and its undergraduates.

Exactly a century later, in 1996, some students started an HND in historical vehicle restoration a couple of miles down the road from where I live, at Rycotewood College in Thame . The staff and students dismantled a car but, like Humpty Dumpty, they couldn’t put it back together again. A judge later found, ‘ None of the teaching staff had any practical experience at all as professional old car restorers ’.

Unsurprisingly, the students complained. Years later, a court ruled they should get £10,000 compensation each, including £2,500 for mental distress, with more for the student whose car had been taken apart. It was a clear example of students being treated more like consumers.

Since then, the shift towards high fees and loans (in England and Wales) and the growing interest of bodies like the Competition and Markets Authority in higher education have accelerated the trend. The key insight of  the most recent HEPI paper , by Rosie Bennett, a former journalist at  The Times , is that universities have become ‘the ultimate consumer story.’

The disruption caused by COVID means practice is still evolving. On Tuesday, the Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education ( OIAHE ) for England and Wales will publish its next set of case studies on dealing with complaints during the COVID crisis. I urge people to read them.

Higher education institutions have rejected the idea of across-the-board refunds in the current crisis. Such payments could affect the financial sustainability of some institutions and there are three other good reasons why blanket restitution has not been forthcoming.

• First, teaching is still happening, albeit differently from normal. Where there are particularly big challenges, such as with placements and practice-based courses, the  Quality Assurance Agency’s guidance  has outlined what providers should do.
• Secondly, good teaching and good student support services cost a lot of money whether delivered in person or online: no one says schools should get fewer resources in the crisis, as the challenges of teaching children during a pandemic are widely acknowledged. The same arguments apply to higher education.
• Thirdly, there is a mature complaints system at both an institutional and a sector-wide level. This may not be as well understood as it should be, but it can lead to compensation. Students should make use of it when they feel they have a robust case.

There may be an argument, as  Anthony Seldon wrote in a recent HEPI blog , for the Government to compensate students. But an automatic mass refund scheme is more difficult than is often recognised because  over half the costs of the current system are paid by taxpayers  rather than students or graduates, thanks to the progressive repayment system.

In short, the current debate about restitution for students is hard because we have a hybrid model of student funding that trades off different priorities against one another:

• it expects a hefty financial contribution from better-off graduates…
• …but taxpayers willingly pick up the tab for those who earn less…
• …and there are no limits on student places in England – which could prove especially useful with  the expected further bout of grade inflation this summer .

Trade offs in higher education policy

I start this way because the question of whether students are consumers and whether they should receive refunds illustrates a broader truth about current higher education policy debates: we are at risk of treating complex questions as if they are simple. The big issues are often portrayed in monochrome rather than full technicolour.

• On  funding , two years on from the appearance of the Augar report, Ministers have still not ruled out a big cut in tuition fees and  some elements of Whitehall clearly want a university education to be delivered for less . Yet a reduction in funding for teaching could leave universities with a binary choice for stemming their losses: either shutting courses or piling students in as a way of chasing a higher income. However, as the recent row about the subject English at the University of Leicester shows, institutions are under pressure not to close courses and we have also been told the  era of expansion is over .
• On  access , thanks in part to the work of the Office for Students, there is a better understanding than in the past of the benefits of contextualisation in university admissions, whereby applicants’ backgrounds are taken into account. Yet the Office for Students also now want  the background of students at higher education institutions to be deemed irrelevant when judging institutional performance . As we showed in  a paper on non-continuation rates  published in January, unless this is implemented carefully it could risk disincentivising the recruitment of disadvantaged students in the first place.
• On  free speech , headlines have been won for the idea of appointing a new Free Speech and Academic Freedom Champion. We recently ran  a blog supporting the idea  by Arif Ahmed from the University of Cambridge but we have also published  the warnings of Nigel Copsey , a historian of anti-fascism at Teesside University, who says the approach could prove counter-productive if is provides succour to provocateurs posing as advocates of free speech.
• On  raising skills , we have fewer people whose highest qualification is at Levels 4 and 5 (what used to be called ‘sub-degree’) than our competitors. There is a consensus that we need more skills at these Levels, but this is often accompanied by alongside the idea that we have  too many graduates . In fact, the data suggest the reason we have too few people whose highest qualification is at Levels 4 or 5 is that we have too many people whose education topped out too early, at Levels 2 and 3 – it is not because we have too many graduates relative to other developed countries or the needs of the economy.
• Not long ago, the  autonomy of universities was confirmed in the Higher Education and Research Act (2017). Yet some recent political interventions – for example, on admissions – suggest autonomy may be falling out of vogue.  If universities are not entirely free to compile students’ reading lists , autonomy loses meaning.
• The English regulatory model is based on the idea that  student interests should be paramount – that’s why we have an ‘Office for Students’. But the primary official way of capturing the student voice, the National Student Survey (NSS), is having  a ‘radical review’ and will have ‘at most a minimal role’  in judging the future quality of provision. This seems the wrong way around to me: the limitations of the NSS are unlikely to be fixed by slimming it down and making it less meaningful. At the moment, the annual HEPI / Advance HE  Student   Academic Experience Survey  remains the best source of information on a wide range of issues – such as contact hours, workload, class sizes, well-being and value-for-money perceptions – and, frankly, we would welcome some competition.

Rather than acting as if such policy areas are black-and-white, we would do better to expose inherent complexities, reflect upon them and then embed them in policymaking. Voters know instinctively that smart policymaking happens at the crossroads where trade offs occur – the current COVID crisis is all about trade offs, such as when to lock down and when to open up, who should get vaccines first and which sectors of the economy to support the most. The four vice-chancellors that  HEPI and Advance HE brought together last week for a Question Time  were united in believing higher education policymaking should become more nuanced.

My concern that current policy is too one dimensional is not just directed at the UK Government at Westminster. The trade offs in higher education policy are reduced to oversimplistic alternatives in other parts of the UK and by other political parties too.

• When the Official Opposition say their commitment to abolishing tuition fees remains in place, no one explains how this can be adequately funded given the  impending growth in 18-year olds .
• In the run up to the Scottish Parliament election this May, politicians from the SNP to  the Scottish Conservatives  are stressing the progressive features of ‘free’ higher education but without explicitly recognising this has meant the retention of student number controls.
• In some parts of the trades union movement, there has been insufficient recognition of the trade offs between the high costs of employing permanent staff (because of things like  existing pension entitlements ) and the precarious contracts of early career staff.

Such trade offs need to be discussed, not brushed under the carpet. For when you recognise trade offs exist, you have to decide how far to give way on any issue in the interests of other valuable concepts worth protecting. So the question is not how to reject any trade offs; it is how to get the balance right when responding to them.

Share this:

Really interesting. Absolutely agree we need more nuance and honesty. Do you have a data source to back up the statement:

‘the data suggest the reason we have too few people whose highest qualification is at Levels 4 or 5 is that we have too many people whose education topped out too early, at Levels 2 and 3’?

The complexity of HE needs to be recognised and trade offs are inevitable given the restrictions on funding. However, I disagree with any plans to increase funding for Universities. We have too many students / graduates and post graduates for the “needs of the economy “ – ask any employer.

When it comes to trade offs, we have too little investment in education for those below the age of 16. To help those from disadvantaged backgrounds we must start well before the age of 18 to release potential and support inherent talent and those with the energy, ability and determination to succeed and prosper.

The whole of our education system needs to improve its productivity, efficiency and effectiveness while creating a much better understanding of what society is seeking to achieve from educating the population and how we will measure success.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

Notify me of new posts by email.

• Current Affairs

Challenges for UK Higher Education and Research Post Brexit

The UK’s exit from the European Union has presented many challenges for the higher education and research sectors. Major challenges exist through changes to immigration policy, restrictions on access to funding and general lack of clarity or continuity in regulation. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has led with more conciliatory overtones than his immediate predecessors and through the developing Windsor Framework, we are seeing an evolving relationship between the EU and UK on higher education and research.

Challenges facing researchers

Research institutions and Universities are reliant on a continued entry of new undergraduate cohorts. Whilst the total number of foreign domiciled students has continued to increase, with the most notable origin countries being China and India with increases of 41% and over 500% between 2017/18 and 2021//22. Whereas since Brexit there has been a marked decline in EU domiciled students overall. Students have declined from 2017/18  to 2021/22 from selected EU countries.

Contributing to the decline are changes in UK immigration policy, removal of government backed funding and increases in tuition fee rates. Compounding this is the UK’s 2020 choice to leave the Erasmus+ scheme, creating the Turing scheme to replace it. The Turing scheme is open to a wider range of countries and intended to promote students from Commonwealth countries and beyond in place of the EU. EU students and researchers have to apply for a visa, due to the removal of freedom of movement, further contributing to the decline. 

UK Research Environment

UK based research is funded through a mix of private sector and public sector research councils, for example the UKRI challenge fund is made up of £2.6 billion from the UK government and £3 billion from the private sector.. However this varies by technology readiness level, the higher the technology readiness level the greater the mix of private sector funding. 

Public funding is derived through UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) which in turn funds flagship facilities such as the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory (RAL) and Daresbury complex. UKRI also funds research councils which fund the majority of University based research. UKRI funding draws from the two government departments and EU funding, which is due to conclude in 2027.

Whilst the UK government has committed to matching certain prior EU funding levels, this is still not concrete and may affect climate change, biomedical and computer science/AI research. In theory this will allow more fundamental early stage research to take place, however there are concerns over continued sustained private sector funding. UK inward investment has dropped by 35% between 2016 and 2020. This has resulted in a drop from private sector funding both inside and outside the UK. This results from reduced access to the single market, divergent legislation since Brexit and the general economic outlook. Further existent barriers include potential ATAS certification which prevents some collaboration with researchers outside of the UK.

How can the UK attract researchers

The two main barriers to attracting researchers into the UK are the visa regime and total compensation. On leaving the EU, this has required researchers to obtain visas, depending upon their field of research this can be onerous, whereas in STEM fields there is relative ease. Changes to the student visa regime under the Johnson government have eased this by giving students a greater period of time on their student visa, which will naturally support their continued research within the UK.

The UK is also falling behind on researcher’s salaries and stipends in comparison with the wider private sector. This has largely resulted from government and wider civil service pay restraint since 2010. Comparative institutions have not seen the same pay restraint. Given the international competition for skilled researchers, this has increased difficulty in retaining the highly skilled researchers required to keep the UK at the forefront of science. 

Changes in Government Policy

In recent months the UK government has made overtures to science and research, largely focussing on AI and sustainable energy. There has also been a fundamental reorganisation of UK government departments, with the Department of Science, Innovation and Technology rising from the corpse of BEIS (Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy). However beyond this there is still a lack of commitment or substance from the government on how it intends to support UK researchers. 

The government has muted a return to the EU Horizon funding, albeit participating as a third country. However it is clear that further negotiations are required before the UK can rejoin. The Windsor Framework and the work of the Sunak government to resolve the issues left by Johnson and Truss, however further progress and commitment is required. 

Looking to the future

Whilst the UK is home to a number of world leading research centres, there are still challenges facing the sector as a whole. Pay and difficulties concerning immigration tend to be at the forefront, which are directly within the UK government to control however Brexit has certainly dealt a blow to collaboration which is at the heart of research. Only further negotiations on Horizon and the general landscape of the UK and EU post Brexit landscape can resolve this.

RELATED CONTENT

The role of the women leader in Macedonia and Europe

Equality in higher education: statistical reports 2022

The 2022 equality statistical reports published today, cover staff and student data for the academic year 2020-21.

This is the fifteenth year that Advance HE (and previously the Equality Challenge Unit) has published national staff and student equality data to highlight opportunities and challenges regarding the promotion of equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI) in UK higher education.

The two reports present a snapshot of staff and students’ age, disability, ethnicity and sex, as well as a range of intersectional data to show how various identity characteristics interact in their relation to differential outcomes.

The full Students statistical report 2022 and Staff statistical report for 2022 , along with a full set of infographics are available for Advance HE members here

Join our webinar : equality in higher education: insights from the 2020-21 staff and student records, 10:00-11:00, 22 november 22 exploring how these insights can be translated into institutional aims and areas for additional research. .

This year there are data to evidence:

• More staff and students are disclosing as disabled
• The Black, Asian and minority ethnic awarding gap for Firsts and 2:1s is – slowly – starting to close
• For the first time, there are more female postgraduates than male.

Staff statistical report 2022

Headline findings:

Disability disclosure rates among staff working in UK higher education has consistently increased in the last decade. The increase is marked this year, increasing by 7.1% since 2019/20, compared with only a 0.3% increase in the year before. The proportions of staff who disclosed as disabled have consistently been higher among professional and support staff than academic staff: 7.0% of professional and support staff and 5.1% of academic staff disclosed as disabled in 2020/21 – slightly higher than the proportions in 2019/20 but double the proportions in 2009/10 (3.4% and 2.5%, respectively).

Sex This year, for the first time in this report series, the data show that there are more female than male postgraduates. As is evident from this graph, this milestone is not mirrored in their progression to academic posts and professorships, with only marginal changes in the representation of female academic staff (47.0% in 2020/21 compared with 46.7% in 2019/20) and of female professors (28.5% in 2020/21 compared with 27.9% in 2019/20).

Ethnicity   Overall, the representation of Black, Asian and minority ethnic staff has remained relatively stable, though increasing to 16.3% of all staff in 2020/21 compared with 15.5% of all staff in 2019/20. Black staff remained underrepresented among professors (0.6% in 2019/20 (left) and 0.7% in 2020/21 (right)).

The degree of representation was consistent regardless of staff sex. 7.2% and 2.7% of professors were Black, Asian and minority ethnic males and females, respectively, compared with 6.9% and 2.5%, respectively, in 2019/20.

However, there is hope for greater improvement in the representation of Black, Asian and minority staff in senior academic positions in the coming years, as shown in the pipeline of Black, Asian and minority ethnic postgraduate research students, increasing from 18.6% in 2019/20 to 19.9% in 2020/21.

Student statistical report 2022

The awarding gap There is welcome evidence that work addressing the ethnicity degree awarding gap are starting to make a difference with it decreasing from 10.8 percentage points in 2019/20 to 9.0 percentage points in 2020/21. There is still some distance to go as evidenced by UK domiciled Black qualifiers who remained far less likely to be awarded a First or 2:1 than any other ethnic group, though it should be noted that there has been a slight improvement from 66.3% in 2019/20 to 67.2% in 2020/21.

Disability Although this reporting year saw more students who disclosed as disabled, this increase has been with those in the preceding years. Disability disclosure rates among students in UK higher education have nearly doubled since 2010/11, rising from 8.0% to 15.2% in 2020/21. There has been a noticeable rise in disabled students disclosing a mental health condition from 20.5% in 2016/17 to 29.4% in 2020/21. Increased awareness and a decrease in disability stigma may have resulted in a rise in disability disclosure.

There is a significant drop in the proportion of disabled students receiving the Disabled Students Allowance (DSA).

Students accessing DSA funding may also have been affected by changes to DSA allowances, particularly those students funded by Student Finance England (SFE) and the Student Bursaries Unit. 

Changes to the staff and student records

Non-mandatory returns for professional and support staff

In 2019/20, HESA changed the way data were collected for professional and support staff, making returns for this population of staff voluntary for HE providers in England and Northern Ireland.

Despite a growing number of providers being included in the HESA records, the overall population of professional and support staff has continued to fall since this change was implemented. Beyond overall numbers, this change has limited the interpretability of this population of staff – compared with their representation in the 2018/19 staff record (i.e. the last academic year that these data were mandatory to provide), professional and support staff: (i) from Asian and Black ethnic backgrounds; (ii) aged 41 to 60 years’ old; (iii) who disclosed as disabled; and (iv) identified as female, were less likely than their counterparts to be represented in the 2020/21 staff record. What this finding reveals is that by allowing HE providers to choose whether they submit data on their professional and support staff, we lose the ability to interpret changes in this sample in a reliable way.

Mandatory returns on student trans status and sexual orientation

In contrast to the changes seen in the staff record, HESA has increased the amount of information that providers must return on their students, making it compulsory for providers in England, Northern Ireland and Wales to return data on students’ trans status and sexual orientation in the 2020/21 record. This has dramatically improved the reliability of these data, with coverage on students’ trans status increasing from 63.7% of all students in 2019/20 to 85.3% of all students in 2020/21, and from 75.1% to 91.0% of all students in 2020/21 for students’ sexual orientation.

Amanda Aldercotte, Head of Knowledge and Research , said, “These reports provide detailed insights and evidence of the continued and steady progress that we’re making as a sector, as well as the work that we still need to do to create the conditions in which all talents can flourish and where there is the opportunity for all to realise their potential.

“While it’s very encouraging to see the sector’s efforts are starting to make an impact, we all acknowledge that there is still a way to go – particularly for progression and degree outcomes for Black staff and students respectively, for the career progression of female staff to more senior positions, and for those staff and students with disabilities, with the corroboration that mental health is a mounting challenge for the sector.”

New data tables added to the 2022 reports

Two new sets of data tables are included in the 2022 student report, exploring students’ sex and religion and belief in greater detail. For the staff report, we have expanded our coverage of staff sex by including those who selected ‘Other’ where possible. 

To better reflect the student and staff populations, and align with Advance HE’s  guidance on monitoring protected characteristics , a series of new data tables has been added to the online data tables in the ‘Sex’ sections of both the student and staff reports. Specifically, the data is presented in two ways – the first being broken down into ‘Female’ and ‘Male’, as in previous reports (to allow for year-on-year comparisons of the percentages); while the second is unique to the 2022 report, presenting the data for students who selected ‘Other’. Notably, this population of students has doubled since 2018/19, from 0.1% of the student population to 0.2% to in 2020/21, making it important sample of students to begin monitoring in a standardised fashion. Although considerably smaller in numbers, a similar increase in representation of those selecting ‘Other’ was seen in the staff population, jumping from 0.0% in 2018/19 to 0.2% in 2020/21.

For students’ religion and belief, the intersectionality tables presented in section 5 have been expanded to present how this characteristic interacts with students’ age, disability status, ethnicity and sex. Not surprisingly, there was a high degree of overlap between students’ ethnicity and their religious background, with one in six UK domiciled Black, Asian and minority ethnic students describing themselves as having no religion, compared with one in two UK domiciled White students.

We feel it is important for voices to be heard to stimulate debate and share good practice. Blogs on our website are the views of the author and don’t necessarily represent those of Advance HE.

Keep up to date - Sign up to Advance HE communications

Our monthly newsletter contains the latest news from Advance HE, updates from around the sector, links to articles sharing knowledge and best practice and information on our services and upcoming events. Don't miss out, sign up to our newsletter now.

©Advance HE 2020. Company limited by guarantee registered in England and Wales no. 04931031 | Company limited by guarantee registered in Ireland no. 703150 | Registered charity, England and Wales 1101607 | Registered charity, Scotland SC043946 | VAT Registered number GB 152 1219 50. Registered UK Address: Advance HE, Innovation Way, York Science Park, Heslington, York, YO10 5BR, United Kingdom | Registered Ireland Address: Advance HE, First Floor, Penrose 1, Penrose Dock, Cork, T23 Kw81, Ireland.

Towards decolonising higher education: a case study from a UK university

• Open access
• Published: 29 December 2023

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Nancy Tamimi   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-7812-815X 1 ,
• Hala Khalawi 2 ,
• Mariama A. Jallow 1 ,
• Omar Gabriel Torres Valencia   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9290-5784 1 &
• Emediong Jumbo   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-9840-9186 1  

1288 Accesses

9 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

This article presents initiatives undertaken by the Department of Global Health and Social Medicine (GHSM) at King’s College London (KCL), exploring avenues to decolonise higher education institutions (HEI). HEI must integrate anti-racism agendas, challenge the European-centric academic knowledge domination, and dismantle power asymmetries. During the academic year 2021, GHSM executed (1) a gap analysis of undergraduate modules, (2) a course on decolonising research methods taught by global scholars to 40 Global South and North university students who completed pre- and post-course surveys, and (3) semi-structured interviews with 11 academics, and a focus group with four students exploring decolonising HEI; findings were thematically analysed. (1) Gap analysis revealed a tokenistic use of Black and minority ethnic and women authors across modules’ readings. (2) The post-course survey showed that 68% strongly agreed the course enhanced their decolonisation knowledge. (3) The thematic analysis identified themes: (1) Decolonisation is about challenging colonial legacies, racism, and knowledge production norms. (2) Decolonisation is about care, inclusivity, and compensation. (3) A decolonised curriculum should embed an anti-racism agenda, reflexive pedagogies, and life experiences involving students and communities. (4) HEI are colonial, exclusionary constructs that should shift to transformative and collaborative ways of thinking and knowing. (5) To decolonise research, we must rethink the hierarchy of knowledge production and dissemination and the politics of North-South research collaborations. Decolonising HEI must be placed within a human rights framework. HEI should integrate anti-racism agendas, give prominence to indigenous and marginalised histories and ways of knowing, and create a non-hierarchical educational environment, with students leading the decolonisation process.

Similar content being viewed by others

Decolonial insights for transforming the higher education curriculum in South Africa

Logan Govender & Devika Naidoo

Rethinking Power and the Complexities Between Critical Disability Studies and Decoloniality in Higher Education

Embracing the Global South: Educators’ Understanding on the Role of Global Citizenship Education in Brazil, South Africa, and Ghana

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

The twenty-first century has seen resurgent and insurgent decolonisation at a global level. Movements such as “Why is my curriculum so White” (Peters, 2018 ), “Rhodes must fall” (Chaudhuri, 2016 ), and “Black lives matter” (Francis & Wright-Rigueur, 2021 ) ignited calls for decolonising higher education institutions (HEI) and “intellectual decolonisation” by challenging the colonial legacy within academia including curricula, pedagogies, classrooms, research methods, and knowledge production (Bhambra et al., 2020 ; Gopal, 2021 ; Hlatshwayo, 2021 ; Moosavi, 2020 , p. 332; Peters, 2018 ; Phoenix, 2020 ; Tuck & Yang, 2021 ).

In this article, we seek to contribute to broader decolonisation projects across the globe by discussing our efforts towards a decolonised HEI. We first reflect on the contested term decolonisation, followed by an overview of the decolonisation efforts in HEI in the United Kingdom (UK). We then present a few of our decolonisation initiatives in the Department of Global Health and Social Medicine (GHSM) at King’s College London (KCL) in the UK. Our initiatives include (1) a gap analysis exercise of undergraduate core modules, (2) a pilot course on decolonising research methods, (3) interviews with academics and a focus group with GHSM students on decolonising HEI, (4) a workshop with GHSM students and academics on decolonising curriculum and research methods, and (5) a public symposium on decolonising knowledge production. Due to the limited word count, this article focuses on the first three initiatives. The projects were funded by KCL and conducted by members of the GHSM Anti-racism Steering Group (ARSG), founded in 2020 following students’ request to recognise racism and address the Black and Minority Ethnic (BME ) Footnote 1 student attainment gap.

Positionality statement

This article is written from the position and experience of academics and students affiliated with universities primarily in the Global North, except for HK, an Arab Muslim woman who studied in the USA and UK and currently resides in the occupied Palestinian territory. NT is a Palestinian-British Muslim woman. EJ is a Black British Nigerian woman. MAJ is a Black African woman. OGTV is a multi-ethnic Mexican gay man.

It is vital to highlight that reflexivity has been at the core of our work; we acknowledge that our desire to decolonise risks compliance or maintenance of colonial, neo-colonial, and post-colonial monolithic global discursive asymmetry of power structure (Abdelnour & Abu Moghli, 2021 ; Chakraborty et al., 2017 ). While we feel uncomfortable using the divisive Global North (GN) and South (GS) terminology, we aim to show that we actively reach out to voices missing from our curriculum. We endeavour to challenge our unconscious biases and confront the West colonial past and “how its legacy continues to create inequities and injustices in the world we live in today” (Wong et al., 2020 , p. 3).

Our work is informed by critical race theory (CRT), an analytical framework that addresses racial inequities in societies. CRT’s five tenets are (1) counter-storytelling that “legitimizes the racial and subordinate experiences of marginalized groups”; (2) the permanence of racism, where “racism controls the political, social, and economic realms of society”; (3) whiteness where whites have the right of usage, enjoyment, disposition, and exclusion; (4) interest conversion where whites are the main beneficiaries of civil rights legislations; and (5) the critique of liberalism linked to “colour blindness, the neutrality of the law, and equal opportunity for all” (Hiraldo, 2010 , p. 54). CRT helps to understand the systemic racism that embeds in our societies and “the manner in which supposedly race-neutral institutions, systems, policies, and practices maintain white supremacy” (Crenshaw et al.,  1995 in Kelly et al., 2020 , p. 1372).

The roots of decolonising higher education

“Decolonisation” is a contested term that has a multiplicity of heterogeneous definitions, interpretations, aims, perspectives, and approaches, encapsulating different political, economic, cultural, philosophical, and epistemic dimensions, tracing 500 years of history (Adefila et al., 2022 ; Bhambra et al., 2018 ; Hayes et al., 2021 ; Bhambra et al., 2020 ; Pete, 2018 ; Von Bismarck, 2012 ).

It is essential first to understand colonisation and its legacies, characterisations, forms, and practices (Adefila et al., 2022 ). The Peruvian thinker Aníbal Quijano developed the concepts of “coloniality of power” and “coloniality of knowledge” and defined “Eurocentered colonialism” as the direct colonial domination Europeans practised over the political, social, and cultural dimensions of the conquered across the globe (Quijano, 2007 , p. 168). Quijano described four interrelated domains forming the “colonial matrix of power,” where Eurocentered colonialism controlled (a) colonies’ economy through land appropriation, exploitation of labour, and control of natural resources; (b) authority through institutions and army; (c) gender and sexuality by dominating family and education; and (d) subjectivity and knowledge by dictating epistemology and formation of subjectivity (Mignolo, 2007 ; Quijano, 2000 , 2007 ).

While direct political colonialism diminished, the specific colonial structure of power created systems of social discrimination, where colonisers were ranked at the top of social and economic structures, impeding the cultural production of the dominated by repressing “modes of knowing, of producing knowledge, of producing perspectives, images, and systems of images, symbols, modes of signification, over the resources, patterns, and instruments of formalized and objectivised expression, intellectual or visual” (Quijano, 2007 , p. 169).

There is no consensus on defining decolonisation and what it entails (Gopal, 2021 ; Von Bismarck, 2012 ). Mignolo, for example, argues that “the major and vital move is to delink from the “colonial matrix of power” (Mignolo, 2018 ; Nanibush, 2018 ). While Fanon sees decolonisation as a violent process where the colonised liberate themselves politically and psychically (Fanon, 1971 in Etherington, 2016 ), Adébísí, in turn, asserts the vitality of understanding the contextual-based evolutions of decolonisation’s theories and sees that decolonisation “seeks the abolition of the ongoing and evolving structures of violent exploitation including the epistemologies that keep them in place” ( 2023 , p. 15).

The varied discourses of decolonisation were rooted in colonised countries challenging imperialism during the colonial era (Mignolo, 2011 ; Zembylas, 2018 ). Although “intellectual decolonisation” gained prominence in the GN since 2014/15 (Moosavi, 2020 , p. 332), decolonising movements emerged in the early twentieth century when Black and Asian anti-colonial and liberation scholars in India and Africa called for intellectual resistance for freedom and independence from British rule, to challenge the domination of Euro-centric thoughts (Arday and Mirza, 2018 ). Scholars from across the globe have significantly contributed to decolonial thinking, such as the French West Indian psychiatrist Franz Fanon (1925–1961), the Jamaican British feminist Una Marson (1905–1960), the Malaysian intellectual Syed Hussein Alatas (1928–2007), the Nigerian intellectual Claude Ake (1939–1996), and the Palestinian-American Edward Said (1935–2003).

Decolonising higher education

Neo-liberalised HEI are considered spaces that intensify “the logics and rationalities of coloniality,” built upon a “violent monologue” denying and violating the “knowing-be-ing” of other races (Motta, 2018 , p. 25). Decolonising HEI requires “confronting the white occupation of academic knowledge and unsettling its grip over mundane as well as high stakes decisions” (Zeus Leonardo in Arday and Mirza, 2018 , p. 3), besides the need for “congruent social processes that support human rights and inclusive knowledge generation” (Kennedy et al., 2023 , p.1). Oppression and marginalisation practices, such as sexism, racism, and Islamophobia, are reproduced through educational processes (Osler, 2016 ). Therefore, decolonising HEI must embed human rights principles, including universality, indivisibility, equality and non-discrimination, participation, and accountability (UN Sustainable Development Group, 2023 ). Adébísí ( 2023 , p. 33) asserts that “[D]iversifying the face of coercive power is not the same as dismantling it,” confirming the need to interrogate the “entanglement between knowledge and power, across space–time, as well as the evolution of resistance to this entanglement.” While there is no consensus on how a decolonised HEI looks, GN and GS HEI started movements to decolonise curricula, pedagogic practices, and institutional cultures.

HEI increasingly recognise they are key sites where coloniality occurs and Western knowledge is “produced, consecrated, institutionalised and naturalised” (Bhambra et al., 2018 , p. 5). Discussions around curriculum involve three levels: explicit, hidden, and null curriculum (Le Grange, 2016 ). The explicit curriculum is what is presented to students, such as reading lists, assessments, and modules’ frameworks. The hidden curriculum is the underlying “unspoken or implicit values, behaviors, and norms” that shape the dominant university culture (Alsubaie, 2015 , p. 125). The null curriculum is what is missing from the curriculum (Le Grange, 2016 ). It is essential for decolonising initiatives to address all curriculum levels.

Scholars also highlighted three concepts to consider when designing decolonised curricula and pedagogic practice: (1) epistemic silences that marginalise indigenous/local cultures, (2) negation that excludes non-Western theories and impose Western ideals, and (3) grand erasure that erase the experiences of most people around the world (Gaio et al., 2023 , p. 4). Centring voices of the sufferers of inequity in curricula improves the learning experiences and strengthens the epistemological power of Black, indigenous, and GS students (Ahmed-Landeryou, 2023 , p. 4).

Several UK HEI embarked on efforts to decolonise curricula, for example, SOAS ( 2018 ) “Decolonisation Toolkit,” UCL ( 2018 ) “Inclusive Curriculum Health Check,” Kingston University London ( 2020 ) “Inclusive Curriculum Framework,” and the University of Brighton ( 2019 ) “Decolonising the Curriculum: Teaching and Learning about Race Equality.” Most of these efforts do not explicitly explain how they developed their frameworks from evidence; hence, Ahmed-Landeryou ( 2023 ) conducted a scoping review to guide decolonising curricula. Ahmed-Landeryou introduced an evidence-informed framework highlighting key themes, such as the need to teach and learn about race inequality, introduce innovative assessments, secure leadership commitment and investment, make structural changes, involve students in change-making, and create meaningful outcome measures.

Although decolonisation is not exclusively about diversifying reading lists (i.e., the explicit curriculum), it is often the first step HEI employ. Evaluating reading lists often focuses on who are the dominant voices in disciplines, which voices are (intentionally) excluded, and what counts as legitimate knowledge. For instance, an evaluation by Schucan Bird and Pitman ( 2020 ) found an equal proportion of women and men authors within social science-based reading lists in one UK university. However, over 90% of authors were identified as “non-BME,” and 99% were affiliated with GN institutions. On the science-based reading lists, 70% of authors were men, 65% were identified as White, and 90% were based in GN.

Barriers to diversifying reading lists and decolonising curriculum efforts are contextual and structural, including rigid institutional policies, lack of leadership support, lack of access to resources including knowledge, funding and personnel, difficulty in identifying pure local or indigenous knowledge, academics feeling overwhelmed, overworked, and underpaid, and lack of recognising power dynamics around issues of gender, race, immigration status, and class (Loyola-Hernández & Gosal, 2022 ; Shahjahan et al., 2022 ). Laakso and Hallberg Adu ( 2023 ) presented specific challenges linked to decolonising curricula in Botswana, Ghana, Kenya, and Zimbabwe, including resources scarcity for research, lack of opportunities to publish research, difficulties in finding and producing textbooks with locally relevant perspectives, bureaucratic obstacles to accepting new course content, “the prevailing hegemonic structures of global academia and the subordinate position of African universities” (p. 13). Other scholars further highlighted limitations of “intellectual decolonisation,” such as ignoring GS decolonial theories, “reducing intellectual decolonisation to a simple task; essentialising and appropriating the GS; overlooking the multifaceted nature of marginalisation in academia; nativism; and tokenism” (Moosavi, 2020 , p. 332).

Regarding decolonising research methods, indigenous scholar Smith describes conducting research with indigenous communities, placing their voices and epistemologies at the centre. Scholars argue for (re) gaining control over indigenous ways of knowing and being, critiquing traditional research approaches to indigenous life that historically addressed the concerns and interests of non-indigenous scholars, marginalised, oppressed, and dismissed non-Western knowledge production, and for creating new approaches of equal collaboration and participatory research, where power is located within the indigenous practices (Bishop, 2005 ; Datta, 2018 ; Denzin et al., 2008b ; Keikelame & Swartz, 2019 ; Smith, 2021 ).

Our projects contribute to the literature and ongoing efforts toward decolonising curriculum and research methods. Next, we present our initiatives and findings. We conclude with the discussion and our outlook.

During the academic year 2021, GHSM embarked on several decolonisation initiatives:

A gap analysis exercise of all GHSM undergraduate (UG) core modules for 2020/2021. Footnote 2 We recruited three UG student research assistants who evaluated seven core modules, supervised by NT and another lecturer. The weekly reading list containing both core and recommended readings was exported to an Excel sheet, extracting the following information: the study location, author's ethnicity, gender, and institutional affiliation.

A 3-day intensive hybrid course on decolonising research methods, advertising the course on KCL social media platforms and across our global networks, including social media, and inviting experts on decolonisation from KCL and GN and GS institutions to teach the course. The lecturers were paid £100 honorarium. They came from Cape Town, Latin America, Colombia, The occupied Palestinian territory, Australia, New Zealand, and the UK. The course was led by NT and two research assistants, OGTV and HK. The team developed, implemented, and evaluated the course. A handbook was developed with the invited speakers (Supplementary Material 1 ). The invited speakers engaged in person and virtually with the attendees using different techniques to encourage interaction. Attendees had access to the recorded lectures (by speakers’ authorisation). The funded course was open to GHSM and partner universities’ students. Forty students attended the course: 23 from KCL, 12 from GS universities, five from GN universities, and three from GS non-government organisations. Sixteen participants completed the baseline questionnaire collecting demographic data, baseline knowledge, and course expectations. Twenty-five completed a post-course evaluation.

Semi-structured interviews discussing decolonising HEI with 11 academics and a focus group with four students (sample characteristics, Table 1 ). Interview participants included symposium and course presenters and GHSM academics who were approached via email. Focus group participants included GHSM students who were invited to partake by email and social media platforms. Although we invited all students, only four third year, non-white students joined the focus group. On reflection, we must increase the awareness of the colonisation’s effect on HEI among our students to encourage their engagement. Open-ended questions for interviews and the focus group explored motivations to join the research, the meaning of decolonisation, the vision of a decolonised HEI, decolonising the curriculum and research methods, and barriers to decolonisation (Topic guide, Supplementary Material 2 ). Interviews and the focus group were audio recorded and transcribed by MJ. NT applied thematic analysis, as Braun and Clarke ( 2006 ) described, while HK reviewed the codes and themes to increase validity. To strengthen validity and reflect decolonisation values, we invited participants to provide feedback on this article before submission.

One participant asked to be identified, but we must adhere to the ethical approval requirement of anonymity. Ethical approval was obtained through KCL minimal risk process. We were aware that some participants might have experienced kinds of oppression, such as racism or sexism. Hence, the participation was voluntary and anonymised; participants knew they could stop the interview if they felt uncomfortable. Interviewing the HEI management group would have enriched our findings. However, we were interested in exploring students’ and academic perspectives before conducting a future study with the management.

The findings

The findings of the undergraduate core module gap analysis

To explore the diversity and global representation in our reading materials, we addressed the following questions:

Who are we learning from?

How central are different gender and ethnic perspectives to our curriculum?

Which places are we learning about?

Who constitutes our experts?

Our review highlighted four critical areas of concern. (1) A tokenistic use of BME, women, and declared non-binary authors across the modules’ readings. In the first year modules, there were 599 authors. 39% were women, 59% were men, and 2% declared non-binary. BME authors did not constitute above 30% of the total readings. In the second and third year modules, there were 546 authors. 41% were women, 56% were men, and 3% declared non-binary. (2) Most of the perspectives originated from men and non-BME authors. In the first year modules, 22% of authors were identified as BME and 78% as white. In the second and third year modules, 18% were identified as BME. Women only appeared as first authors in 36% of first year modules and 39% in the second and third years. Most of them were in recommended readings. Similarly, BME authors only appeared as first authors 21% of the time, mainly as authors of recommended readings. (3) Most learnings were about GN or GS from GN perspectives. In the first year modules, 64% of study locations were from North America or Europe, 2% were from Oceania, and 3% from South America. In the second and third years, 68% of study locations were from GS regions, 6% were from Europe, and less than 1% were from Oceania. (4) Authors were mainly from GN. For example, in the first year, 270 were from the USA, 118 were from the UK, 17 were from South Africa, and six were from India. In the second and third years, 220 were from the USA, 187 were from the UK, 37 were from India, and 15 were from South Africa (Figs. 1 and 2 ).

First-year core module gap analysis

Second- and third-year core module gap analyses

There were challenges while executing the gap exercise. Some decisions might have impacted the findings. For example, when recording the geographical locations of independent scholars versus those with institutional affiliations, we classified independent scholars according to their current geographical location (country and continent). Also, we acknowledge that delving into modules might give a different perspective than the reading list suggests. However, this was beyond the scope of the mapping exercise.

The findings of Decolonising Research Methods in Global Health and Social Medicine course

From 7th–9th of June 2022, 40 participants from diverse ethnic backgrounds Footnote 3 joined the course from 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. GMT. It aimed to bring various decolonising efforts and ongoing initiatives into the conversation to explore the limits of mainstream Western research methodologies and learn about indigenous research practices and methods. The lecturers presented qualitative and quantitative research case studies. Using the decolonisation lens, they discussed epistemologies of health, ethical research practices, reflexive research, and lessons learned from indigenous practices. OGTV simultaneously translated one lecture from Spanish to English. Four key themes emerged to promote an equitable research process: Recognising power dynamics, fostering collaborative research with indigenous researchers and participants, challenging dominant knowledge paradigms and embracing South-to-South epistemologies, and including indigenous concepts within ethical frameworks.

The pre-course survey compared to the post-course survey : 16 respondents completed the pre-course survey on SURVEY MONKEY. 75% showed unfamiliarity with indigenous or non-Western research methodology. Almost 88% have not received training in decolonising research methods, and their confidence in their knowledge was either not or a little confident. Respondents wanted to enhance their knowledge and skills in decolonising and conducting research more relevant to local communities. Twenty-five respondents completed the post-course survey. All respondents either agreed or strongly agreed the course was well delivered, the topics were comprehensive and clearly presented, and the supporting materials were helpful. 68% strongly agreed, and 28% agreed the course enhanced their decolonising research knowledge. 52% strongly agreed, and 40% agreed their understanding of the subjective experience of research participants increased. 64% strongly agreed, and 36% agreed they developed an awareness of the risks of using Western research methods when researching indigenous communities. All participants strongly agreed or agreed that the course made them aware of potential biases, risks, and oppression practices while conducting research, understand what emotional safety for researchers is, and be more aware of research ethics related to university settings. The majority strongly agreed or agreed that they developed more awareness of participatory and collaborative research, positionality as a researcher, and methodologies to redesign colonial space and create more ethical research.

In the post-course qualitative part of the survey, respondents mentioned the course widened their perspectives and provided new insights. One noted, “It made me more aware of the degree to which current research methodologies and approaches do not reflect the vast different types of communities and cultures.” Participants reflected on current research practices. One respondent said, “It sheds light on many ways research methodologies are colonised/../ and ways to decolonise them. It also highlighted/../ a hierarchy of knowledge, things I used to take for granted but are so unfair and unjust.” Another respondent wrote, “Throughout my undergraduate course, I was taught Western-style pedagogy. I had no idea about the indigenous perspective or ‘the researched’ perspectives. This course, however, helped me to unlearn this aspect”. One respondent mentioned that getting exposed to decolonising research provoked frustration. However, the course provided tools and possible action plans and clarified their position as researchers.

Participants considered the emphasis on diversity and the variable backgrounds of lecturers, participants, and topics a key strength. The course was described as a safe, collaborative, and engaging space that was eye-opening to participants. One respondent wrote: “This course enabled me to learn explicitly about positionality, critical reflexivity, reciprocity, respect and power relation/../. I am thankful to the organisers.” Another respondent wrote, “It was an amazing experience. This diversity makes me think critically. It gives light and confidence to us (GS) that we have also strong resources to do research. We are not dependent on the West at all.”

We faced a few challenges during the course. First, while the hybrid provision enhanced accessibility allowing participation from outside the UK, there were a few technical issues related to the Internet connection. Second, while lecturers endeavoured to encourage interaction, online participants were less interactive than in person. Third, while we intended this introductory pilot course to be intensive, participants preferred a longer duration. Finally, we acknowledge that using English as the primary communication language and enrolling English-fluent students is an exclusionary practice that does not fit the decolonial vision. We recognise that using native languages increases the sense of belonging in the classroom and student success (Wawrzynski & Garton, 2023 ). For future courses, we would foster student communication using indigenous languages, which effectively removes structures that perpetuate inequities (Schreiber & Yu, 2016 ).

The findings of semi-structured interviews and the focus group

We identified the following five themes and subthemes.

Decolonisation is about challenging colonial legacies, racism, and knowledge production norms . Participants were aware of the heterogeneity and ambiguity of the meaning of decolonisation; however, they agreed decolonisation entails challenging colonial legacies, racism, and knowledge production norms. Student B questioned using the term decolonisation as they saw it as a way for “Western countries to enforce their ideologies” to avoid facing racism; the student thinks that “using the term decolonisation/../is steering away from the word racism.” Similarly, interviewee 9 described the language of decolonising as “ambiguous” and questioned how it relates to the anti-racism project, “we have power imbalances too, between junior and senior researchers, we have power imbalances between genders, and sometimes the colonial lens doesn’t help us address that problem/…/the legacies are there, and I see them, and it’s important to trace them through and to make them visible. But then there are a lot of power problems and silencing mechanisms that cannot be captured in the colonial terms that I still want to get at.” For interviewee 6, “There is somehow lines blur between anti-racism and decolonising and I'm not sure to what extent they're separate, overlap or the same.” Participants acknowledged histories of white domination and underscored that decolonisation is about challenging white supremacy through structural changes. Interviewee 2 asserted the need to “subvert the dominance of white culture and power.” Interviewee 8 confirmed the necessity to “dismantle the colonial gaze while simultaneously elevating the local systems, institutions, and processes.” Interviewee 11 emphasised the need for a “structural shift” by acknowledging “historiographical, residual, and also emergent complexities that we have to deal with” and “a strive towards translation and exchange of ideas and be mindful of kind of genealogies of these ideas and comparative relations that they come to generate,” and, as Interviewee 7 mentioned, by striving “towards translation and exchange of ideas.” Interviewee 8 discussed structural changes, such as publishing within the African publishing system to “decentralise knowledge production, [and] move from Eurocentric domains.”

Decolonisation is about care, inclusivity, and compensation . Some participants saw decolonisation as a form of social justice to care for others and be inclusive to all humanity. Interviewee 4 clarified, “It [decolonising] is embedded in a true sense of care.” Participants explained the importance of diversifying knowledge and the inclusion of indigenous voices. Interviewee 1 explained, “Decolonising by default requires us to include the voices of indigenous people and for them to be real people, not just in books and in our curriculum. It requires us to link up with the rest of the world differently.” Inclusivity involves conversation, as interviewee 11 emphasised that “decolonisation is about conversation/../it’s not about silencing; just putting something that has been silenced in the foreground and then silencing what has been in the foreground, putting that in the background, I think that’s a dead end.” For Student D, inclusivity means taking away all forms of “discrimination, racial discrimination, segregation, and division.” For others, decolonisation is about empowering, recompense, compensation, giving back land, and reparation. As Interviewee 6 said, decolonisation is about giving back “land,” “authority,” “sovereignty,” “history,” “artefacts,” and “money” and “paying reparations.” Similarly, Student A said, “I think we’ve gone past the point of giving people a seat at the table, and we would need to build a whole new table and replace the ones that we/../as in colonial institutions and powers have broken and taken away.”

A decolonised curriculum should embed an anti-racism agenda, reflexive pedagogies, and life experiences involving students and communities. When discussing decolonising the curriculum, five subthemes were recognised:

Embed anti-racism agenda

Participants highlighted the importance of having an anti-racism lens embedded within the curriculum. Interviewee 2 stated that decolonising curriculum should be about “consciousness-raising” and thinking about power structures. Interviewee 6 believed that “anti-racist agenda/../feeds into the decolonising agenda.” Interviewee 1 wanted to allow students to critique authors’ writings “from a racialised perspective,” acknowledging the source of our knowledge and emphasising that one way “in which colonisation exists is through the presentation of knowledge from the GS as if it has been derived solely from the GN.” Student A wanted the teaching about race to be compulsory, highlighting a lack of white students’ presence in modules addressing racism, “we only have one white person in our class now, so it's good because it’s a safe space, but it's bad because it’s just preaching to the choir, the people who should be learning about all of the history and context behind racism and especially its intersections with health are not there.”

Diversify perspectives

Participants confirmed the necessity to include diverse knowledge and perspectives when teaching the curriculum, emphasising that decolonisation efforts should not only focus on the tokenistic act of diversifying the reading list but also reflect on the content and history of knowledge. Interviewee 7 confirmed that “geographical diversity of reading material is a cop-out answer.” Interviewee 3 highlighted that when designing a curriculum, we need to think “about who writes it and whose perspective is it” and clarify to students the rationale of having a specific reading list. Student D believed that decolonisation should look at “what kind of knowledge is shared” and learn about the colonial past to be “more truthful, more accurate, and more representative of the history.” Student C confirmed the need for “diverse readings that are, for example, by authors from more diverse backgrounds and academics who are probably not from like the West.” Interviewee 11 asserted that all knowledge is valuable and warned against demolishing the current curriculum: “Just because something of political or historical context has been overlooked and oppressed doesn't mean that paper is suddenly not valuable.”

Embrace reflexivity

Participants confirmed that reflexivity must be at the core of curriculum decolonisation, where students and staff reflect on their positionalities, biases, and histories, paving the way for including all kinds of knowledge. Interviewee 7 called for “commitment to critically reflect on how colonialism continues to pervade the global health field,” including our disciplines, research, teaching, and higher education. Interviewee 9 believed that reflexivity through “pointing out your own limitations and constraints and failings is actually the road of creating spaces for others to speak.” Interviewee 4 suggested reflecting on the reasons for teaching particular subjects, their relevance to the local community, and responsiveness to multicultural students. Interviewee 6 reflected on extracting indigenous methods to decolonise curriculum: “To what extent are we just extracting methods that really fit very nicely our sort of modernisation of the curriculum? They just fit very nicely into what we're trying to do anyway. How practical that we can now take it again from the GS and extract and apply it here in order to improve our own sort of pedagogical practice.” Positionality was a key concept to participants, as Interviewee 6 confirmed the need to “acknowledge where we are from and the privileges that this brings [and] the limitations.” Interviewee 5 asserted that students and staff must embrace reflexivity “to think about their own positionality, their own power, their own practice.” Interviewee 10 said, “I always say at the beginning of my class, it’s uncomfortable for me /../ We don’t have someone to teach you this who is Black, who has that experience. So, I have a choice of not teaching you/../ or doing so as a white man.”

Incorporate life experiences and communities

Participants highlighted that the curriculum should link to life experiences and communities (Interviewees 2, 3, 4, 5). Interviewee 2 pointed to including pedagogies with a “real-world element to it,” leading to an action embedded within communities and mutual learning between students and academics. Interviewee 3 highlighted the usefulness of connecting to indigenous movements to guide the decolonising process. Interviewee 5 mentioned that students must speak to communities and indigenous people and learn from them, “It could be really amazing to have people who are much more embodied and community practice-oriented talking about decolonising /../ breaking the structures we’re in, the patriarchal colonial imperial structure as they understand it and reconfiguring ourselves as humans.” Interviewee 4 asserted that community should be at the heart of a decolonised HEI where community members sit on university boards to understand “what an ordinary man/../ understands about decolonising.”

Engage students

Participants confirmed students’ role is vital in decolonising the curriculum as they should reflect on the curriculum and their learning experience and be active agents of change. Interviewee 8 wanted students to reflect on the colonial legacies and “be able /../ to name our own intersections, our position, where we come from.” Interviewee 6 asserted the need to teach the history of our disciplines “to make students fully aware that they are entering into a colonial system/../ they are becoming part of it /../ it is their responsibility how they carry that knowledge.” Interviewee 9 encourages students to reflect and be proactive: “I would invite the students to actually create spaces where they can challenge my way of knowing, where they can bring their own interests and priorities to say what we should be talking about.” Interviewee 6 highlighted the need to learn from GS students about their countries, histories, challenges, social structures, and norms.

Higher education institutions are colonial, exclusionary constructs that should shift to transformative and collaborative ways of thinking and knowing

When discussing barriers and vision to decolonise HEI, we identified five subthemes:

HEI are colonial, exclusionary constructs

Participants agreed that the most significant barrier to decolonising HEI is their colonial structures and rigid ways of knowing dominated by white Eurocentric thoughts. Interviewee 1 described the education system as a “capitalist model,” part of the “racism agenda,” that adopts “masculinist norms” building on “patriarchal controlling structures /../ with a very narrowly defined concept of knowing/../ which doesn't create that many opportunities for new ideas.” Interviewee 7 said most university disciplines “have their foundations in very white Eurocentric scholarly traditions.” Student C also said that “these institutions being formed on colonial bases is something that really hinders the [decolonisation] process.” Interviewee 2 believed that some HEI structures are “oppressive/../rooted in colonising practices/.. and linked to prioritising certain people’s knowledge” while excluding others. Interviewee 2 also mentioned barriers such as “universities being a business,” “the university hierarchy,” and “the race pay gap.” Interviewee 6 talked about the nationalistic nature of HEI and the “bureaucratic political hurdles” that hinder decolonisation and enmeshment with GS institutions, “We work in highly structured institutions that have been developed during colonial times, and we’re only able to function the way they functioned because of these sorts of colonial ties, right? This is how we gained global knowledge. This is how disciplines like anthropology emerged/../. it’s along these colonial trajectories. This is how we came to know the world. Of course, there’s history before that, but still. And so, I think our institutions don’t really permit enmeshment because they’re very nationalistic.”

Attitudes towards decolonisation

Several attitudes were identified as barriers, such as shallow engagement with the decolonisation discourse, fear of change, and lack of time and funds. Student A highlighted the need to move from creating “a buzzword” or, as the Notetaker Student said, “a tick box exercise” where universities measure their diversity by the number of BME-hired people. Others talked about the apprehension and resistance to change, which Student C described as “a major hindrance.” Interviewee 1 talked about resistance to change: “We’re at the mercy of people at the political level who have a vested interest in maintaining the hegemony that has been established because if we were to get radical transformation, it would also mean that the people in power are no longer in power.” Interviewee 2 talked about some academics working on decolonisation to build careers rather than making a change. Interviewee 7 mentioned “the lack of rewarding.” Interviewee 1 pointed to insufficient time available to staff to work on decolonisation, the lack of funds, and “defaulting on the racialized people to do the hard craft,” primarily women, as Interviewee 5 indicated.

Collaboration with global south

Participants discussed the unequal nature of working with GS institutions; they envisioned a decolonised HEI with equal collaborative opportunities. Interviewee 11 said that we are an “elite institution” in a “powerful country” and must engage with GS institutions “on a much more equal ground.” Interviewee 9 talked about practising the concept of “mutuality” in partnerships and institutionalising humility by creating a “space of mutuality /../ where you have equity and equitable relationships at the bottom of everything/../ the fact that you’re not the expert while being fully aware that you have the resources, the funding, the building, the branding power.” Interviewee 6 wanted institutions to provide fellowships and exchange with GS scholars “but according to the terms of those ones needing and wanting to extract whatever it is that they want to extract. That has to be financed by us as a form of reparation and trying to make good in terms of what we have done so horribly wrong in the past.” Interviewee 5 wanted to see more GN and GS staff exchanges to learn from others.

Academics’ diversity

Academics’ diversity and making space for talented people of colour were mentioned as essential steps towards decolonising HEI. Interviewee 7 explained that the high fee is a barrier for BME students to join universities, hence the lack of BME scholars. Interviewee 6 highlighted, “Right now, we’re looking like the snowy white tops/../it becomes very white on top/../ that needs to change.” For Interviewee 10, a decolonised HEI “would have more Black and minority ethnic people in positions of power and authority.” Students also recognised the lack of diversity in HEI. Student B questioned, “Where do most of our lecturers come from? Where do they get their degrees, who can get into those institutions, and what hinders other people from getting into those institutions or getting to that level of education? Is it socioeconomic factors? Is it their location?” Similarly, student A also commented on the lack of academic diversity, “we’re going to an institution with a large colonial history, a very capitalist outlook on the world, and the professors, especially the older ones, have the same outlook so obviously they’re going to have their biases as they teach which will anyone would, but it would be nice to have a diverse amount of biases when teaching rather than the status quo.”

Fostering decolonisation

Participants acknowledged the importance of forwarding the decolonisation agenda within universities. They suggested creating informal spaces for debate and discussions. Interviewee 1 suggested having “sufficient pockets” in every university focusing on decolonisation and “to incrementally reduce some of the fear [of change].” Interviewee 4 confirmed the difficulty in changing existing attitudes and behaviours but recommended that a debate on decolonising should be fostered everywhere, “We need to talk about it more and exchange ideas and understand ourselves.” Similarly, Interviewee 8 envisioned conversations about decoloniality to be open and taken seriously by HEI. Interviewee 9 talked about creating safe spaces to challenge systems of oppression: “brave spaces/../where it’s about how can I safely challenge what’s around me. So how can I find the courage to call out the things that need to be called out?” Interviewee 2 called for free access to learning opportunities on decolonisation. Finally, participants praised some efforts on decolonisation in UK HEI, such as courses, students’ movements, collaborative projects, and inviting GS guest lecturers.

To decolonise research, we must rethink the hierarchy of knowledge production and dissemination and the politics of North-South research collaborations

When discussing decolonising research, we identified the following seven subthemes:

Research as a colonial construct

Participants shared their views on the colonial roots of current research practices and criticised the assumption that global health should focus on GS. They acknowledged the colonial history of disciplines like Anthropology. Two interviewees (5,7) shared their concerns as white researchers conducting research in GS and wanted to see GS researchers doing this kind of research. Interviewee 7 said, “There is something inherently problematic about me as a white researcher based in a UK-based university, to go to places like Uganda trying to understand people and practices in these contexts/../ I would wish that there were Ugandan researchers who, if they think these are important projects or important things to look at, would be the ones doing that kind of research.” Others viewed research as a collaborative endeavour. Interviewee 6 believed that research is “a global convention” and a collaborative process where researchers across the globe have contributed to and shaped over time through “engaging in a global discourse by refining them [research techniques].” Interviewee 11 said that “there are things that should be dismantled and things that should be left to be improved” and explained that indigenous approaches and “modern scientific tradition” should be “genuinely collaborative.”

The knowledge we value

Participants highlighted the lack of value research communities hold for indigenous knowledge and the need to address the knowledge hierarchy. Interviewee 1 highlighted the link between racism and sickness, explaining that while for many years people of colour indicated racism made them sick, it was not until researchers from GN confirmed this link, “We now kind of place more value on it/../we need to/../be open to reviewing what we consider to be the hierarchy in the gold standard and why and actually what is excluded in that process.” Interviewee 4 called for the “need to look at different methods and how we incorporate those African or indigenous methods in our research.” She criticised the Eurocentric review mechanism for not valuing non-Western methods and mentioned “storytelling” as an indigenous method that could be used in research. Interviewee 10 called to rethink what “valuable knowledge is” and criticised “the dominance of English in academia.” Interviewee 4 highlighted issues with journal reviewers regarding the marginalisation of non-English languages and the domination of the English language: “Why should it only be English, if a person writes in Arabic that can be translated in English and then put the other one you know in the bracket so that the person who understands that can read that in context and understand what the person was saying.” Interviewee 7 highlighted authorship problems and the need to support and fund GS researchers, mentioning that 80% of research articles are produced in GN.

New ways of dissemination

Participants acknowledged the limitations of current research dissemination practices and suggested new ways to communicate research to communities. Interviewee 2 suggested that “decolonised research should be outside journals because a journal does not feel like an accessible way to get knowledge.” He wanted to see research that is not only written in English and that “happens outside of the universities, in the context of community organisations /../ through a collaboration with other parts of the world.” Similarly, Interviewee 3 saw new ways of dissemination outside universities, like exhibitions, where researchers present “findings to the public, inviting local people” and showing the research benefits to society. Interviewee 4 discussed using community channels to disseminate research findings, such as “community radio stations,” drama, music, stories and arts. Interviewee 8 wanted participants to present research and tell their stories.

Reflexivity

Participants placed reflexivity at the core of decolonising research practices, promoting reflection on who is doing the research, their biases, motivations, and backgrounds. Interviewee 1 talked about identifying the “hegemony” when conducting research and the impact of who is doing the research, “what do we privilege, what do we study, who do we have as researchers and to actually understand the conscious and unconscious processes that occur in the research practice.” Interviewee 7 confirmed the need to “critically reflect on our own knowledge production and how we know what we know and allow ourselves to be challenged.” Interviewee 11 believed that “there is value in multiplicity” and that the inherited research practices are not necessarily perpetuating coloniality; the interviewee emphasised that when conducting empirical research, “the question to ask is what potentially could be colonial through this research and what should be avoided to become decolonised.”

Equitable South-North collaboration

Participants confirmed that equal South-North collaboration is key to decolonising research with emphasis on recognising that funders influence and limit models of collecting information. Interviewee 3 highlighted that Western funders would keep dominating the research agenda unless the GS governments have the financial independence to do research. “The finance one is a huge one/../ [it] has to change because a lot of these studies are funded by the United States. So, it’s very difficult. So, unless the governments themselves are going to be, I want to run my study, I want to do this by myself. But then you have to have the financial independence to do that.” Interviewee 6 spoke about the imbalance of power dynamics due to funding “often comes with strings attached” where GN researchers lead research, money is not handed directly to GS researchers, research reflects GN interests, and is not co-designed with GS researchers. Interviewee 6 continued, “If these power dynamics are not changed and /../dismantled, we cannot have any form of equitable research.” Interviewee 8 also discussed global power discourses regarding knowledge production and spoke about the importance of equal pay, equal relationships between GN and GS researchers, and the need to support GS researchers. Interviewee 10 believed big institutions in wealthy, predominantly white countries should support researchers in GS countries rather than doing research with them or on them. Interviewee 6 also talked about researchers’ exchange: “I feel increasingly uncomfortable that researchers from the GN think that they should be the ones exploring life in the GS. Although I would have to say I would find it quite interesting if more researchers from the GS would come to the GN and actually study us and hold a mirror up. That hasn’t happened to the same degree. So, there is a big knowledge gap.”

Partnership with the researched

Participants highlighted the importance of shifting control over data and partnering with the researched. Interviewee 3 confirmed the need to partner with people “by investigating critical issues that indigenous people identify and giving them more control over the data/../ who has access to the data and what they choose to do with it.” Similarly, Interviewee 4 called for involving people in research “so that people must understand the research is/../ about working together /../ to address their issue of concern, not the issue of the researcher.” Interviewee 5 spoke about the need to be “humble” and “critical of our research” and “what you owe to people when you do research.” Interviewee 6 also asserted that researchers need to engage with communities “to understand how it is that they generate knowledge /../ and the question is also who has the right to extract that knowledge and for what purpose.” For Interviewee 8, a decolonised research “speaks to local systems and processes. It is research that responds to realities, and I understand that makes it difficult because we are obsessed with coming up with standards and systems and processes/../But I think when you are doing research in spaces that are different in terms of culture, ethnicity and geography, everything. I think what should define your research is the expectations of that culture, that system or that process and how things are done in that space.”

New approach to ethics

Participants wanted to see less rigid, Western-informed ethical procedures and more reflexive, collaborative, ethical processes responsive to communities’ needs and norms. Interviewee 4 wanted to have community members on the ethics review boards. Interviewee 5 envisioned a less formal ethical process with constant reflexivity and collective conversation among researchers. Interviewee 8 called for rethinking the ethical research norms by reflecting on ethical dilemmas, such as compensating research participants for their time by paying them, as he believed that “taking them away from their income [is] unethical in itself.” Interviewee 5 highlighted the importance of engaging with the researched and exploring “whether they see any of those processes within their own frameworks.” Interviewee 6 discussed co-producing research knowledge and ownership: “Ownership of the data needs to be shared, moving away from the extraction model.” While acknowledging the need to avoid harm, she, for example, questioned the value of anonymising participants: “If you anonymise everything and your data sets and then aggregate and disaggregate, the individual’s story gets lost. So, it’s difficult for the person to know what part of that study they actually owned. So, there is something to be said about anonymity.”

Decolonising initiatives must question how Euro-centric knowledge is embedded in HEI and its hegemony over knowledge production compared to non-Western indigenous knowledge systems. This article presented our GHSM decolonising initiatives: (1) a gap analysis exercise of UG core modules, (2) a pilot course on decolonising research methods, and (3) interviews with academics and a focus group with students on decolonising HEI. Our initiatives contribute to the knowledge and efforts to decolonise HEI (Chaudhuri, 2016 ; Francis & Wright-Rigueur, 2021 ; Peters, 2018 ).

First, like Schucan Bird and Pitman’s ( 2020 ), our gap analysis exercise exposed our mainly white, biased curriculum towards GN scholars and research. Second, the pilot course expanded the horizons of our participants’ knowledge of decolonisation and indigenous research approaches. Finally, we identified the following themes by analysing our interviews and focus group: (1) Decolonisation is about challenging colonial legacies, racism, and knowledge production norms. (2) Decolonisation is about care, inclusivity, and compensation. (3) A decolonised curriculum should embrace anti-racisms agenda, reflexive pedagogies, and life experiences involving students and communities. (4) Higher education institutions are colonial, exclusionary constructs and should shift to transformative and collaborative ways of thinking and knowing. (5) To decolonise research, we must rethink the hierarchy of knowledge production and dissemination and the politics of North–South research collaborations.

Our research identified contextual and structural barriers to decolonise the curriculum: the colonial, exclusionary nature of the university’s construct, the colonial root of some disciplines; the apprehension and fear of, or resistance to change exhibited by some university staff; the lack of mechanisms to face power asymmetry and create equal collaboration opportunities between GN and GS institutions, the lack of academics’ diversity, and shortage of fund, time, space, and avenues to foster decolonisation in universities. These findings agree with other studies (Loyola-Hernández & Gosal, 2022 ; Shahjahan et al., 2022 ).

To decolonise the curriculum, our participants highlighted that an anti-racist agenda must be at the core of the HEI vision. This includes changing structures and policies to ensure diversity of staff; creating equal opportunities for people from different backgrounds; addressing the power imbalance at all levels, i.e., staff to staff, staff to students, students to students, and GN to GS; adopting reflexive pedagogies where colonial legacies are problematised and challenged; creating spaces for silenced voices to be heard and for indigenous and non-Western knowledge to be acknowledged and incorporated in learning; connecting learning to diverse communities and histories and ways of knowledge; and empowering students to lead the HEI decolonisation. Our findings reflect the themes proposed by Ahmed-Landeryou’s scoping review ( 2023 ) to guide decolonising curricula. Participants talked about explicitly diversifying reading lists. They criticised a university culture shaped by colonial practices. They pointed to missing voices, marginalisation of groups, domination of Western ideals and structures, and the grand erasure of non-Western experiences. Hence, reflecting the three curriculum levels (Le Grange, 2016 ) and Gaio et al.’s ( 2023 ) concepts in designing curriculum.

To decolonise research, our participants expressed a struggle with the inherited disciplinary practices rooted in colonial systems. They suggested steps to shift to a decolonised research through (1) rethinking the knowledge production and dissemination hierarchy, such as supporting publishing in non-Western journals in native languages; (2) changing the politics of North-South research collaborations by creating funded opportunities for GS researchers to conduct research in the GN; (3) partnership with people, so more participatory research and power shifting to the researched rather than the researchers and funding bodies; and (4) be reflexive of positionality and what Western ethical bodies consider ethical research practices versus what is relevant to different cultures and communities. These findings agree with the decolonising research literature (Bishop, 2005 ; Datta, 2018 ; Denzin et al., 2008a , b ; Keikelame & Swartz, 2019 ; Smith, 2021 ).

Our findings concur with scholars calling for a decolonised HEI to confront the domination of white academic knowledge and power asymmetry (Adébísí, 2023 ; Zeus Leonardo in Arday and Mirza, 2018 ), placing the process within a human rights framework (Kennedy et al., 2023 ; Osler, 2016 ). Our findings speak to the tenets of CRT (Hiraldo, 2010 ): our participants envision a decolonised HEI where (1) experiences of marginalised groups are foregrounded, (2) an anti-racist agenda is adopted across all levels, (3) exclusionary white practices are challenged, (4) legislations are changed to benefit all people from all backgrounds, and (5) spaces are created to challenge colonial legacies.

Moving forward, we endeavour to be guided by our findings and others in the field. Addressing the identified limitations of “intellectual decolonisation” (Moosavi, 2020 , p. 332), we plan to (1) incorporate decolonial theories and ways of knowing from the GS in our curricula. This is achieved through funding we gained from KCL to recruit a GHSM student to assist in creating a publicly accessible online archive. We have embarked on building the archive with GS collaborators and input from students and educators to help global health scholars in their decolonising efforts; (2) move away from a ticking box exercise to a process of continuous evaluation and reflection on curriculum, pedagogies, research practices, and positionality; this is achieved through an open dialogue with students and staff and one to one support to educators and researchers; (3) address marginalisation in academia through our efforts in the ARSG in collaboration with the Equality Diversity Inclusion Committee and other initiatives at KCL to foster spaces for conversation about race and inequity among staff and students, across all levels; and (4) actively seek funding to equally collaborate with GS researchers.

We agree with scholars that “Decolonization is not a metonym for social justice” (Tuck & Yang, 2021 , p. 21) and “certainly not a substitute for material reparations” (Gopal, 2021 , p. 880). We, however, believe that to understand race-based hierarchies embedded within HEI and to achieve social justice and racial equity in HEI, we must reveal the harm created by constructing white as a supreme race and document the “intellectual decolonisation” efforts to dismantle the power asymmetry and challenge the domination of Euro-centric thoughts. Hence, we document our efforts on decolonisation. We do not claim to be experts in decolonising HEI. However, by writing about our initiatives, we seek to build our knowledge and provide examples for others on the same journey. In the pursuit of decolonisation, it is essential that future curricula illuminate historical injustices where indigenous people are generators of knowledge and not just subjects for research and foster a more inclusive, ethically informed and just education. We acknowledge that systematic, structural colonial legacies are ingrained in our societies and that the journey to make changes is difficult. We also know our limitations in securing funding to continue our work and gain the institution’s full support. However, we believe collective efforts and determination to evolve would improve race inequities among future generations.

HEI must adopt strategies that are transformative, representative of, and responsive to the needs of their students’ cohorts and communities. Decolonising HEI must be placed within a human rights framework. A decolonised HEI would integrate anti-racism agendas; dismantle power asymmetries; challenge the European-centric academic knowledge domination; give prominence to indigenous and marginalised histories, theories, worldviews, and ways of knowing; foster multi-directional learning; create a non-hierarchical educational environment; and, most importantly, equip and allow students to lead the decolonisation process.

Data availability

The online archive that we mentioned in the conclusion has been designed and launched: https://globalhealtharchive2.wordpress.com/

We follow King’s College London guidelines which define ethnicity through the category of ‘BME’, encompassing six ethnic categories (White, Chinese, Black, Asian, other and mixed, unknown).

The modules that were analysed: Introduction to Social Medicine, Introduction to Global Health, Foundations in Social Science Theory, Research Practice and Design Studio. Key Concepts in Social Medicine, Key Concepts in Global Health, and Contemporary Crisis in Global Health and Social Medicine.

The countries represented at the course (in alphabetical order) were Argentina, Australia, Bangladesh, Belgium, Bermuda, Brazil, Canada, China, Colombia, Czech Republic, Ethiopia, Ghana, Greece, India, Indonesia, Lebanon, Malaysia, Mexico, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, the occupied Palestinian territory, Philippines, Rwanda, South Africa, Spain, Tanzania, United Kingdom, United States, and Zimbabwe.

Abdelnour, S., & Abu Moghli, M. (2021). Researching violent contexts: A call for political reflexivity.  Organization , 13505084211030646. https://doi.org/10.1177/13505084211030

Adébísí, F. (2023). Theories of decolonisation; or, to break all the tables and create the world necessary for us all to survive.  Decolonisation and Legal Knowledge: Reflections on Power and Possibility , 14. https://doi.org/10.51952/9781529219401.ch001

Adefila, A., Teixeira, R. V., Morini, L., Garcia, M. L. T., Delboni, T. M. Z. G. F., Spolander, G., & Khalil-Babatunde, M. (2022). Higher education decolonisation: Whose voices and their geographical locations? Globalisation, Societies and Education, 20 (3), 262–276. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767724.2021.1887724

Article   Google Scholar  

Ahmed-Landeryou, M. (2023). Developing an evidence-Informed decolonising curriculum wheel—A reflective piece.  Equity in Education & Society , 27526461231154014. https://doi.org/10.1177/27526461231154014

Alsubaie, M. A. (2015). Hidden curriculum as one of current issue of curriculum. Journal of Education and Practice, 6 (33), 125–128.

Google Scholar  

Arday, J., & Mirza, H. S. (Eds.). (2018).  Dismantling race in higher education: Racism, whiteness and decolonising the academy . London: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60261-5

Bhambra, G. K., Nişancıoğlu, K., & Gebrial, D. (2020). Decolonising the university in 2020. Identities, 27 (4), 509–516. https://doi.org/10.1080/1070289X.2020.1753415

Bhambra, G. K., Gebrial, D., & Nişancıoğlu, K. (2018). Decolinising the university (p. 5). PlutoPress.

Bishop, R. (2005). Freeing ourselves from neo-colonial domination in research: A Kaupapa Māori approach to creating knowledge. In N. K. Denzin, ed. & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of Qualitative Research (3rd ed., pp. 109–138). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3 (2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Chakraborty, K., Saha, B., & Jammulamadaka, N. (2017). Where silence speaks-insights from Third World NGOs. Critical Perspectives on International Business, 13 (1), 38–53. https://doi.org/10.1108/cpoib-03-2015-0012

Chaudhuri, A. (2016). The real meaning of Rhodes must fall. The Guardian, 16 , 16.

Crenshaw, K., Gotanda, N., & Peller, G. (1995). Critical race theory: The key writings that formed the movement . The New Press.

Datta, R. (2018). Decolonizing both researcher and research and its effectiveness in Indigenous research. Research Ethics, 14 (2), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747016117733296

Denzin, N. K., Lincoln, Y. S., & Smith, L. T. (Eds.). (2008a).  Handbook of critical and indigenous methodologies . Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483385686

Denzin, N. K., Lincoln, Y. S., & Smith, L. T. (2008b). Introduction: Critical methodologies and indigenous inquiry. Handbook of critical and indigenous methodologies , 1–20. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483385686

Etherington, B. (2016). An answer to the question: What is decolonization? Frantz Fanon’s the wretched of the earth and Jean-Paul Sartre’s critique of dialectical reason. Modern Intellectual History, 13 (1), 151–178. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1479244314000523

Fanon, F. (1971). The Wretched of the Earth [1961], trans. Constance Farrington .

Francis, M. M., & Wright-Rigueur, L. (2021). Black Lives Matter in historical perspective. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 17 , 441–458. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-122120-100052

Gaio, A., Joffe, A., Hernández-Acosta, J. J., & Dragićević Šešić, M. (2023). Decolonising the cultural policy and management curriculum–reflections from practice.  Cultural Trends , 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/09548963.2023.2168515

Gopal, P. (2021). On decolonisation and the university. Textual Practice, 35 (6), 873–899. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950236X.2021.1929561

Hayes, A., Luckett, K., & Misiaszek, G. (2021). Possibilities and complexities of decolonising higher education: Critical perspectives on praxis. Teaching in Higher Education, 26 (7–8), 887–901. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2021.1971384

Hiraldo, P. (2010). The role of critical race theory in higher education. The vermont connection , 31 (1), 7. https://scholarworks.uvm.edu/tvc/vol31/iss1/7 . Accessed 20 May 2022

Hlatshwayo, M. N. (2021). The ruptures in our rainbow: Reflections on teaching and learning during# RhodesMustFall. Critical Studies in Teaching and Learning (CriSTaL), 9 (2), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.14426/cristal.v9i2.492

Keikelame, M. J., & Swartz, L. (2019). Decolonising research methodologies: Lessons from a qualitative research project, cape town, South Africa. Global Health Action, 12 (1), 1561175. https://doi.org/10.1080/16549716.2018.1561175

Kelly, S., Jérémie-Brink, G., Chambers, A. L., & Smith-Bynum, M. A. (2020). The Black Lives Matter movement: A call to action for couple and family therapists. Family Process, 59 (4), 1374–1388. https://doi.org/10.1111/famp.12614

Kennedy, A., McGowan, K., & El-Hussein, M. (2023). Indigenous elders’ wisdom and dominionization in higher education: Barriers and facilitators to decolonisation and reconciliation. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 27 (1), 89–106.

Kingston University London. (2020). Equality, diversity and inclusion. Inclusive Curriculum Framework , UK. Kingston University London. Available at. https://www.kingston.ac.uk/aboutkingstonuniversity/equality-diversity-and-inclusion/our-inclusive-curriculum/inclusive-curriculum-framework/ . Accessed 10 Oct 2023.

Laakso, L., & Hallberg Adu, K. (2023). ‘The unofficial curriculum is where the real teaching takes place’: Faculty experiences of decolonising the curriculum in Africa.  Higher Education , 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-023-01000-4

Le Grange, L. (2016). Decolonising the university curriculum. South African Journal of Higher Education, 30 (2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.20853/30-2-709

Loyola-Hernández, L., & Gosal, A. (2022)  Impact of decolonising initiatives and practices in the Faculty of Environment.  Report. University of Leeds. https://doi.org/10.48785/100/103

Mignolo, W. (2007). Introduction: Coloniality of power and de-colonial thinking. Cultural Studies, 21 (2/3), 155–167. https://doi.org/10.1080/09502380601162498

Mignolo, W. D. (2011). The Global South and world dis/order. Journal of Anthropological Research, 67 (2), 165–188.

Mignolo, W. (2018). What does it mean to decolonize? In C. E. Walsh, & W. D. Mignolo (Eds.), On decoloniality: Concepts, analytics, praxis (1st ed., pp. 105–134). Duke University Press.

Moosavi, L. (2020). The decolonial bandwagon and the dangers of intellectual decolonisation. International Review of Sociology, 30 (2), 332–354. https://doi.org/10.1080/03906701.2020.1776919

Motta, S. C. (2018). Feminizing and decolonizing higher education: Pedagogies of dignity in Colombia and Australia. In S. de Jong, R. Icaza, & O. U. Rutazibwa (Eds.), In  Decolonization and feminisms in global teaching and learning  (1st ed., pp. 25–42). Routledge.

Nanibush, W. (2018). Thinking and engaging with the decolonial: A conversation between Walter D. Mignolo and Wanda Nanibush. Afterall Journal, Retrieved April 2, 2023, from. https://www.afterall.org/article/thinking-and-engaging-with-the-decolonial-a-conversation-between-walterd-mignolo-and-wanda-nanibush . Accessed 2 Apr 2023

Osler, A. (2016). Human rights and schooling: An ethical framework for teaching for social justice . Teachers College Press.

Pete, S. (2018). Meschachakanis, a coyote narrative: Decolonising higher education. In G. K. Bhambra, D. Gebrial, & K. Nişancıoğlu (Eds.), Decolonising the university , (1st ed., pp. 173–189). Pluto Press.

Peters, M. A. (2018). Why is my curriculum white? A brief genealogy of resistance. In J. Arday, & H. S. Mirza (Eds.), Dismantling race in higher education, (1st ed., pp. 253–270.). Palgrave Macmillan.

Phoenix, A. (2020). ‘When black lives matter all lives will matter’ — A teacher and three students discuss the BLM movement. London Review of Education, 18 (3), 519–523. https://doi.org/10.14324/LRE.18.3.14

Quijano, A. (2007). Coloniality and modernity/rationality. Cultural Studies, 21 (2/3), 168–178. https://doi.org/10.1080/09502380601164353

Quijano, A. (2000). Power, eurocentrism, and Latin America.  Nepantla: Views from South ,  1 (3), 533–580. https://doi.org/10.1177/0268580900015002005

Schreiber, B., & Yu, D. (2016). Exploring student engagement practices at a South African university: Student engagement as reliable predictor of academic performance. South African Journal of Higher Education, 30 (5), 157–175. https://doi.org/10.20853/30-5-593

Schucan Bird, K., & Pitman, L. (2020). How diverse is your reading list? Exploring issues of representation and decolonisation in the UK. Higher Education, 79 (5), 903–920. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-019-00446-9

Shahjahan, R. A., Estera, A. L., Surla, K. L., & Edwards, K. T. (2022). “Decolonizing” curriculum and pedagogy: A comparative review across disciplines and global higher education contexts. Review of Educational Research, 92 (1), 73–113. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543211042423

Smith, L. T. (2021).  Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples . Bloomsbury Publishing.

SOAS. (2018). Decolonising SOAS learning and teaching toolkit for programme and module convenors . London: SOAS. Available at:  https://blogs.soas.ac.uk/decolonisingsoas/files/2018/10/Decolonising-SOAS-Learning-and-Teaching-Toolkit-AB.pdf . Accessed 12 Oct 2023

Tuck, E., & Yang, K. W. (2021). Decolonization is not a metaphor. Tabula Rasa , (38), 61–111. https://doi.org/10.25058/20112742.n38.04

UCL. (2018).  Inclusive curriculum healthcheck . London, UK: UCL. Available at:  https://www.ucl.ac.uk/teaching-learning/sites/teaching_learning/files/ucl_inclusive_curriculum_healthcheck_2018.pdf . Accessed 12 Oct 2023

UN Sustainable Development Group. (2023). Human rights-based approach. universal values principle one: Human rights-based approach . Available at: https://unsdg.un.org/2030-agenda/universal-values/human-rights-based-approach#:~:text=HRBA%20requires%20human%20rights%20principles,holders'%20to%20claim%20their%20rights . Accessed 9 Oct 2023

University of Brighton. (2019). Decolonising the curriculum: Teaching and learning about race equality. Available at: https://research.brighton.ac.uk/en/publications/decolonising-the-curriculum-teaching-and-learning-about-race-equa . Accessed 9 Oct 2023

Von Bismarck, H. (2012). Defining decolonization. The British Scholar Society , 27 - 28. https://www.helenevonbismarck.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Defining-Decolonization.pdf

Wawrzynski, M. R., & Garton, P. (2023). Language and the cocurriculum: The need for decolonizing out-of-classroom experiences.  Higher Education , 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-023-01016-w

Wong, S., Plowman, T., Nwibe, I., Hope, C., & Puri, D. (2020) decolonising-the-medical-curriculum-reading-list-2020. Retrieved May 3, 2023. From. https://decolonisingthemedicalcurriculum.wordpress.com/dtmc-reading-list/ . Accessed 20 May 2022

Zembylas, M. (2018). Affect, race, and white discomfort in schooling: Decolonial strategies for ‘pedagogies of discomfort.’ Ethics and Education, 13 (1), 86–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449642.2018.1428714

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the course participants for sharing their insights, experience, and valuable feedback on the course. We thank scholars who taught on the course; the research assistants who worked on the gap analysis, the pilot course, the symposium and the online Archive, all our interviewees, Prof. Hanna Kienzler for guiding our initiatives and her feedback on the article, and our Head of Department, prof. Anne Pollock, for supporting our initiatives.

Funding was received from King’s College London via

1. The Global Health and Social Medicine Department to conduct the gap analysis

2. The Faculty Education Fund 2022 for piloting a certificate course on ‘Decolonising Research Methods in Global Health and Social Medicine’.

3. Race Equity and Inclusive Education Fund (REIEF) Education and Students 2022 to conduct the gap analysis, the interviews, and focus group.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Global Health & Social Medicine, School of Global Affairs/Faculty of Social Science and Public Policy, King’s College London, London, WC2B 4BG, UK

Nancy Tamimi, Mariama A. Jallow, Omar Gabriel Torres Valencia & Emediong Jumbo

Department of Social Sciences, Bethlehem University, Bethlehem, Palestine

Hala Khalawi

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nancy Tamimi .

Ethics declarations

Ethical standards.

Ethical approval was obtained through KCL minimal risk process: Project ID: 28355.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

The funders have no role in the design of the study and collection, analysis and interpretation of data, and in writing the manuscript.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (PDF 593 KB)

Supplementary file2 (docx 24 kb), rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Tamimi, N., Khalawi, H., Jallow, M.A. et al. Towards decolonising higher education: a case study from a UK university. High Educ (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-023-01144-3

Download citation

Accepted : 15 November 2023

Published : 29 December 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-023-01144-3

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Anti-racism
• Decolonisation
• Research methods
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Four of the biggest problems facing education—and four trends that could make a difference

Eduardo velez bustillo, harry a. patrinos.

In 2022, we published, Lessons for the education sector from the COVID-19 pandemic , which was a follow up to,  Four Education Trends that Countries Everywhere Should Know About , which summarized views of education experts around the world on how to handle the most pressing issues facing the education sector then. We focused on neuroscience, the role of the private sector, education technology, inequality, and pedagogy.

Unfortunately, we think the four biggest problems facing education today in developing countries are the same ones we have identified in the last decades .

1. The learning crisis was made worse by COVID-19 school closures

Low quality instruction is a major constraint and prior to COVID-19, the learning poverty rate in low- and middle-income countries was 57% (6 out of 10 children could not read and understand basic texts by age 10). More dramatic is the case of Sub-Saharan Africa with a rate even higher at 86%. Several analyses show that the impact of the pandemic on student learning was significant, leaving students in low- and middle-income countries way behind in mathematics, reading and other subjects.  Some argue that learning poverty may be close to 70% after the pandemic , with a substantial long-term negative effect in future earnings. This generation could lose around $21 trillion in future salaries, with the vulnerable students affected the most.

2. Countries are not paying enough attention to early childhood care and education (ECCE)

At the pre-school level about two-thirds of countries do not have a proper legal framework to provide free and compulsory pre-primary education. According to UNESCO, only a minority of countries, mostly high-income, were making timely progress towards SDG4 benchmarks on early childhood indicators prior to the onset of COVID-19. And remember that ECCE is not only preparation for primary school. It can be the foundation for emotional wellbeing and learning throughout life; one of the best investments a country can make.

3. There is an inadequate supply of high-quality teachers

Low quality teaching is a huge problem and getting worse in many low- and middle-income countries.  In Sub-Saharan Africa, for example, the percentage of trained teachers fell from 84% in 2000 to 69% in 2019 . In addition, in many countries teachers are formally trained and as such qualified, but do not have the minimum pedagogical training. Globally, teachers for science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) subjects are the biggest shortfalls.

4. Decision-makers are not implementing evidence-based or pro-equity policies that guarantee solid foundations

It is difficult to understand the continued focus on non-evidence-based policies when there is so much that we know now about what works. Two factors contribute to this problem. One is the short tenure that top officials have when leading education systems. Examples of countries where ministers last less than one year on average are plentiful. The second and more worrisome deals with the fact that there is little attention given to empirical evidence when designing education policies.

To help improve on these four fronts, we see four supporting trends:

1. Neuroscience should be integrated into education policies

Policies considering neuroscience can help ensure that students get proper attention early to support brain development in the first 2-3 years of life. It can also help ensure that children learn to read at the proper age so that they will be able to acquire foundational skills to learn during the primary education cycle and from there on. Inputs like micronutrients, early child stimulation for gross and fine motor skills, speech and language and playing with other children before the age of three are cost-effective ways to get proper development. Early grade reading, using the pedagogical suggestion by the Early Grade Reading Assessment model, has improved learning outcomes in many low- and middle-income countries. We now have the tools to incorporate these advances into the teaching and learning system with AI , ChatGPT , MOOCs and online tutoring.

2. Reversing learning losses at home and at school

There is a real need to address the remaining and lingering losses due to school closures because of COVID-19.  Most students living in households with incomes under the poverty line in the developing world, roughly the bottom 80% in low-income countries and the bottom 50% in middle-income countries, do not have the minimum conditions to learn at home . These students do not have access to the internet, and, often, their parents or guardians do not have the necessary schooling level or the time to help them in their learning process. Connectivity for poor households is a priority. But learning continuity also requires the presence of an adult as a facilitator—a parent, guardian, instructor, or community worker assisting the student during the learning process while schools are closed or e-learning is used.

To recover from the negative impact of the pandemic, the school system will need to develop at the student level: (i) active and reflective learning; (ii) analytical and applied skills; (iii) strong self-esteem; (iv) attitudes supportive of cooperation and solidarity; and (v) a good knowledge of the curriculum areas. At the teacher (instructor, facilitator, parent) level, the system should aim to develop a new disposition toward the role of teacher as a guide and facilitator. And finally, the system also needs to increase parental involvement in the education of their children and be active part in the solution of the children’s problems. The Escuela Nueva Learning Circles or the Pratham Teaching at the Right Level (TaRL) are models that can be used.

3. Use of evidence to improve teaching and learning

We now know more about what works at scale to address the learning crisis. To help countries improve teaching and learning and make teaching an attractive profession, based on available empirical world-wide evidence , we need to improve its status, compensation policies and career progression structures; ensure pre-service education includes a strong practicum component so teachers are well equipped to transition and perform effectively in the classroom; and provide high-quality in-service professional development to ensure they keep teaching in an effective way. We also have the tools to address learning issues cost-effectively. The returns to schooling are high and increasing post-pandemic. But we also have the cost-benefit tools to make good decisions, and these suggest that structured pedagogy, teaching according to learning levels (with and without technology use) are proven effective and cost-effective .

4. The role of the private sector

When properly regulated the private sector can be an effective education provider, and it can help address the specific needs of countries. Most of the pedagogical models that have received international recognition come from the private sector. For example, the recipients of the Yidan Prize on education development are from the non-state sector experiences (Escuela Nueva, BRAC, edX, Pratham, CAMFED and New Education Initiative). In the context of the Artificial Intelligence movement, most of the tools that will revolutionize teaching and learning come from the private sector (i.e., big data, machine learning, electronic pedagogies like OER-Open Educational Resources, MOOCs, etc.). Around the world education technology start-ups are developing AI tools that may have a good potential to help improve quality of education .

After decades asking the same questions on how to improve the education systems of countries, we, finally, are finding answers that are very promising.  Governments need to be aware of this fact.

To receive weekly articles,  sign-up here  

Consultant, Education Sector, World Bank

Senior Adviser, Education

Join the Conversation

• Share on mail
• comments added

Sponsored by

Global perspectives: Navigating challenges in higher education across borders

Embracing new technological solutions will enable institutions to cater to the diverse needs of learners and stay agile in the face of rapid change

• More on this topic

Anthology provides data-informed education technology experiences to enable and empower the global education community

The higher education sector around the world is experiencing widespread and continuous change. Challenges caused by technological advances such as generative AI, shifting student expectations and volatile job markets are some of the issues institutions are grappling with.

Embracing technology can empower universities to create dynamic and career-orientated student experiences. This white paper, produced by THE in partnership with Anthology, discusses how higher education institutions can use technology to adapt to and explore innovative solutions to modern challenges.

In the white paper, you can learn more about:

• The evolution of higher education sectors around the world
• How institutions can embrace AI to enhance education outcomes
• Holistic digital transformation strategies to improve student success
• Establishing quality frameworks for microcredentials in Asia
• How technology is transforming India's higher education sector

The white paper features insights from leaders at Anthology on the evolving global higher education landscape and the role of technology in helping institutions adapt.

Download the whitepaper now

By submitting this form, you agree to have your contact information, including email, passed on to the sponsors of this [event/asset/webinar/report] for the purpose of following up on your interests.

You may also like

How to help young women see themselves as coders

Libraries’ role in digital education: content is still king, emotions and learning: what role do emotions play in how and why students learn, on the neurodivergent campus, language matters, artificial intelligence and academic integrity: striking a balance, contextual learning: linking learning to the real world, addressing the generative ai literacy gap in he, a diy guide to starting your own journal, decolonising the curriculum – how do i get started, the importance of black spaces in white academia.

Register for free

and unlock a host of features on the THE site

Blog The Education Hub

https://educationhub.blog.gov.uk/2024/03/14/how-supporting-university-students-mental-health/

How we’re supporting university students with their mental health

Going to university is a fun and exciting time for most students – but it comes with unique challenges and stresses. We believe that all students’ mental health and wellbeing should be properly supported during their time at university.

There is a range of mental health support available to students, from online mental health and wellbeing platform Student Space to counselling and one-to-one support. Here’s what you need to know.

What action are you taking to support students’ mental health?

Students struggling with their mental health can access  Student Space , a mental health and wellbeing hub supporting students.

Funded by £3.6 million from the Office for Students (OfS), Student Space provides dedicated one-to-one text and web chat support services. It’s also an online platform providing vital mental health and wellbeing resources.

This service is part of the £15 million we have asked the OfS to allocate towards student mental health in 2023/2024. This funding will also be used to give additional support for those making the transition from school or college to university, in particular through counselling services.

It will also be used to address any challenges that students may face in accessing local support services through their university, by establishing better partnerships between universities and local NHS services.

To ensure all the information is readily available for students and young people, we have put together some useful links and sources of mental health support so that everyone can get the advice and help they need. This information is available  here .

We are also asking universities to take a whole university approach to mental health by setting a target for all universities to sign up to the  University Mental Health Charter Programme by September 2024.

To support this target t he Office for Students ( OfS ) is providing £400,000 additional funding to Student Minds to support expansion of the Programme . You can read more about it on the OfS website . 

What is the University Mental Health Charter Programme? 

Universities that are part of the University Mental Health Charter programme will be supported to make cultural change so that all aspects of university life promote and support mental health.

Both students and staff will benefit from better support for their mental health and wellbeing as a result.

The Charter Award is given to the universities that are part of the Programme members which demonstrate excellent practice in supporting student mental health.

What is the Department doing to reduce suicides at universities?

Every student death is a tragedy and preventing suicide and self-harm in our student populations is a key priority.

So that students are better protected we have asked universities to fully implement best practice including the  Suicide Safer Universities  guidance, led by Universities UUK and Papyrus.

This includes guidance for universities on sharing information with family and friends in the event of a mental health crisis and practical advice on compassionate, confident, and timely support when a tragedy occurs.

Understanding student suicide data and risk factors is central to informing preventative action, which is why we have worked with the Office for National Statistics, which has published updated  data and analysis .

We appointed Professor Edward Peck as Higher Education Student Support Champion in May 2022 for a two-year term and extended the appointment for another year until 31 May 2025 . Professor Peck has been speaking to bereaved parents to understand where improvements can be made.    

To deliver better practice in mental health support across the higher education sector Professor Peck is chairing a Higher Education Mental Health Implementation Taskforce, which will include bereaved parents, students, mental health experts, charities and sector representatives.

It has been asked to deliver a report with a plan for better early identification of students at risk, a University Student Commitment on dealing with students sensitively on disciplinary issues, and a set of clear targets for improvements in practice by providers.

Its first stage report has been published outlining progress so far and setting out new areas of focus, including improving join up between higher education and NHS mental health services. It is due to publish a second stage report by July 2024.

We have also appointed the National Confidential Inquiry into Suicide and Safety in Mental Health (NCISH) to carry out a National Review of Higher Education Suicides.

This will ensure that valuable lessons from past tragedies can be learnt to help us better protect students in future. Its findings report will be published by Spring 2025 outlining good practice and areas for improvement around suicide prevention in higher education.

Providers’ participation in the National Review of HE Suicides will be supported by the additional one-off £10m funding we have asked the OfS to allocate on mental health and hardship, which comes top of the £15 million already distributed this year on HE student mental health.

What should I do if I’m worried about a friend or family member at university?

We understand that helping a friend or family member with mental health issues can be difficult. It is important that students feel supported at this difficult time. There is support in place and people who are available to listen.

If for any reason you have cause to believe that someone you know is struggling with mental health and wellbeing issues at university, we recommend following NHS guidance .

Universities have support services in place for their students which can be accessed via their website, or by looking up your university on the  Student Space support pages .

You may also be interested in:

• Mental health resources for children, students, parents, carers and school/college staff
• What we are doing to improve the mental health of children and young people
• Five things you didn’t know about mental health support in schools

Tags: Mental health , mental health resources , Office for Students , Pupil mental health , Universities UK , University , Wellbeing

Sharing and comments

Share this page, related content and links, about the education hub.

The Education Hub is a site for parents, pupils, education professionals and the media that captures all you need to know about the education system. You’ll find accessible, straightforward information on popular topics, Q&As, interviews, case studies, and more.

Please note that for media enquiries, journalists should call our central Newsdesk on 020 7783 8300. This media-only line operates from Monday to Friday, 8am to 7pm. Outside of these hours the number will divert to the duty media officer.

Members of the public should call our general enquiries line on 0370 000 2288.

Sign up and manage updates

Follow us on social media, search by date, comments and moderation policy.

Major challenges for education in Wales

• Luke Sibieta

Published on 21 March 2024

This report examines the major challenges for education in Wales, including low outcomes across a range of measures and high levels of inequality.

• Education and skills
• Poverty, inequality and social mobility
• Education spending
• Human capital

Download the report 

PDF | 583.29 KB

The author gratefully acknowledges the support of the Economic and Social Research Council via the ESRC Centre for the Microeconomic Analysis of Public Policy. This report also draws heavily on analysis and knowledge gained by the author in his work as a Research Fellow at the Education Policy Institute. 

Executive summary

Last December, the OECD published the latest round of PISA tests in reading, maths and science skills. These international comparisons always prompt public debate. Most countries saw declining scores, reflecting the effects of the pandemic. In Wales, the declines were particularly large, erasing all the progress seen since 2012. This report argues that low scores in Wales are a major concern and challenge for the new First Minister. Low educational outcomes are not likely to be a reflection of higher poverty in Wales, a different ethnic mix of pupils, statistical biases or differences in resources. They are more likely to reflect differences in policy and approach. We recommend that policymakers and educators in Wales pause, and in some cases rethink, past and ongoing reforms in the following areas:

• The new Curriculum for Wales should place greater emphasis on specific knowledge.
• Reforms to GCSEs should be delayed to give proper time to consider their effects on long-term outcomes, teacher workload and inequalities.
• More data on pupil skill levels and the degree of inequality in attainment are needed and should be published regularly.
• A move towards school report cards, alongside existing school inspections, could be an effective way to provide greater information for parents without a return to league tables.

Related content

Sliding education results and high inequalities should prompt big rethink in welsh education policy, key findings.

• PISA scores declined by more in Wales than in most other countries in 2022, with scores declining by about 20 points (equivalent to about 20% of a standard deviation, which is a big decline). This brought scores in Wales to their lowest ever level, significantly below the average across OECD countries and significantly below those seen across the rest of the UK. Scotland and Northern Ireland also saw declines in PISA scores in 2022, whilst scores were relatively stable in England.
• Lower scores in Wales cannot be explained by higher levels of poverty. In PISA, disadvantaged children in England score about 30 points higher, on average, than disadvantaged children in Wales. This is a large gap and equivalent to about 30% of a standard deviation. Even more remarkably, the performance of disadvantaged children in England is either above or similar to the average for all children in Wales.
• These differences extend to GCSE results. In England, the gap in GCSE results between disadvantaged and other pupils was equivalent to 18 months of educational progress, which is already substantial, in 2019 before the pandemic. In Wales, it was even larger at 22–23 months in 2019 and has hardly changed since 2009. The picture is worse at a local level. Across England and Wales, the local areas with the lowest performance for disadvantaged pupils are practically all in Wales. There are many areas of England with higher or similar levels of poverty to local areas in Wales, but which achieve significantly higher GCSE results for disadvantaged pupils, e.g. Liverpool, Gateshead and Barnsley.
• A larger share of pupils in England are from minority ethnic or immigrant backgrounds than in Wales. Such pupils tend to show higher levels of performance. However, even this cannot explain lower scores in Wales, as second-generation immigrants also tend to show lower levels of performance in Wales than in England.
• The differences in educational performance between England and Wales are unlikely to be explained by differences in resources and spending. Spending per pupil is similar in the two countries, in terms of current levels, recent cuts and recent trends over time.
• There are worse post-16 educational outcomes in Wales, with a higher share of young people not in education, employment or training than in the rest of the UK (11% compared with 5–9%), lower levels of participation in higher education (particularly amongst boys) and lower levels of employment and earnings for those from disadvantaged backgrounds.
• The explanation for lower educational performance is much more likely to reflect longstanding differences in policy and approach, such as lower levels of external accountability and less use of data.
• There are important lessons for policymakers in Wales from across the UK. The new Curriculum for Wales is partly based on the Scottish Curriculum for Excellence, with both having noble aims to broaden the curriculum, improve well-being and focus on skills. However, there is now evidence arguing that these quite general skills-based curricula might not be effective ways to develop those skills. New GCSEs are due to be taught in Wales from 2025, including greater use of assessment, a broader range of subjects and the removal of triple science as an option. These reforms run the risk of widening inequalities, increasing teacher workload and limiting future education opportunities. There is much greater use of data to understand differences in outcomes and inequalities in England. This could easily be emulated in Wales without a return to school league tables.

1. Introduction

In December 2023, the OECD published the latest round of PISA scores (OECD, 2023). These international comparisons of reading, maths and science skills always prompt significant public debate, particularly in countries seeing declining scores. The latest tests were taken in 2022. Most countries saw declining scores, reflecting the effects of school closures during the pandemic.

In Wales, scores declined significantly, with the lowest test scores across the four nations of the UK. This erased all the increases seen in Wales since 2012 , when low PISA test scores last prompted soul-searching in the Welsh education system. This time, concern about low scores within Wales has been relatively brief, with the Minister emphasising ongoing reforms (Miles, 2023). This contrasts with the picture elsewhere in the UK. In Scotland , low and declining scores have prompted significant public debate and have led the Minister to promise improvements to the system (Gilruth, 2023). In England , ministers have claimed credit for relatively high scores and an improvement in relative scores compared with other countries. There were also declines in Northern Ireland, though public debate has been mostly focused on the restoration of the Northern Ireland Executive.

This short report argues that low education outcomes, high levels of inequality and their consequences for children’s life chances represent a major challenge for the new First Minister of Wales. Improving this situation should be an urgent priority for his new government.

2. Overall performance and inequalities in Wales

This section sets out the overall performance of pupils in Wales in PISA tests over time, overall levels of inequality and how this compares with the rest of the UK.

Large declines in reading, maths and science skills in Wales

Starting with the overall picture, Figure 1 shows that PISA test scores in Wales fell significantly in maths, reading and science in 2022. To some extent, this matches the decline seen across other OECD countries following the global pandemic. However, there was a steeper fall in Wales in reading and science. Scores in Wales are also now lower than in any previous PISA cycle. The declines in Wales represented about 20 PISA points, on average. This is equivalent to about 20% of a standard deviation, which is a substantial decline.

Figure 1. PISA scores across UK nations over time

Source: Based on figures 7.13–7.15 in Sizmur et al. (2019); OECD (2023).

We also saw large falls over time in maths and science in Scotland and Northern Ireland. Across both nations, there were smaller falls in reading scores, which remain above the OECD average.

In England, we see a different picture. Reading and maths skills were increasing gradually between 2006 and 2018. There was then a relatively small decline in both reading and maths scores in 2022, taking them back to the same levels as around 2012/2015. Given the scale of disruption to education during the pandemic and the declines seen across other OECD countries, a small decline and general stable pattern over the last 10 years is likely to be a positive sign of resilience in England.

Whilst there were declines in science scores in England in 2022, Jerrim (2024) argues that this decline is seen across most OECD countries and may reflect methodological changes in the survey over time. Science scores in England also remain well above the OECD average.

Larger inequalities in Wales

Equally concerning are the level of performance of disadvantaged pupils and the state of educational inequalities in Wales, which are visible in both PISA and GCSE results. Figure 2 shows the mean PISA scores in each nation and subject for those in the most and least disadvantaged groups (bottom and top quartiles of the OECD’s index of economic, social and cultural status, ESCS), together with the mean scores for all children, in 2022.

Figure 2. Average PISA scores for most disadvantaged, least disadvantaged and all by nation and subject area in 2022

Source: Department for Education, 2023.

The gaps in performance between the most and least disadvantaged groups are broadly similar across England, Wales and Northern Ireland, and are perhaps a little larger for Scotland in reading and maths. However, the difference in levels between England and other nations of the UK by level of disadvantage is very stark. For the least disadvantaged group, we see that scores in England are about 25–30 PISA points higher than in the other nations of the UK, on average. Some of this is likely to be explained by higher incomes at the top end of the spectrum in England. However, it is notable that scores for the least disadvantaged 25% of children in Wales are only barely above the average for all children in England.

At the other end of the distribution, disadvantaged children in Wales have the lowest scores across all four nations for reading and science (and the second-lowest for maths, just above the very low maths scores for disadvantaged children in Scotland). Disadvantaged children in England score about 30 points higher, on average, than disadvantaged children in Wales. This is a large gap and equivalent to about 30% of a standard deviation. Indeed, the performance of disadvantaged children in England is either above or similar to the average for all children in Wales.

Why we should care about the reasons for low PISA scores

Before thinking about the factors driving low PISA scores in Wales and policy implications, it is important to ask whether PISA scores actually matter. There are no prizes for a high PISA ranking, except kudos, and there are no immediate consequences, except pressure on policymakers. It is also important to focus on the actual scores, rather than rankings or relative performance. Education is not a zero-sum game. If all countries saw an equally large rise in scores, we are all likely to be better off.

PISA scores matter because they are a valuable and comparable indicator of young people’s skills in reading, numeracy and science. These are fundamental skills for accessing the rest of the curriculum and for achieving education qualifications. There is an enormous body of evidence that shows how skills and educational qualifications lead to greater chances of employment, higher earnings, higher productivity, improved health outcomes, lower crime, and the list goes on as evidence improves (Hanushek et al., 2015; Psacharopoulos and Patrinos, 2018).

Furthermore, there is a great deal of evidence showing that Welsh young people experience worse educational and labour market outcomes after leaving school than young people in the rest of the UK. A recent EPI/SKOPE report shows that young people in Wales have the lowest participation in higher education across the UK, with Welsh boys seeing particularly poor trends over the last 15 years (Robson et al., 2024). We also see that the share of young people who are not in education, employment or training (NEET) is higher in Wales than in the rest of the UK. In 2022–23 , 11% of 16- to 18-year-olds in Wales were NEET, as compared with 5–9% across the rest of the UK. A similar picture emerges for 19- to 24-year-olds. In the labour market, we also see that Welsh young people from working-class backgrounds have lower earnings and lower employment levels than working-class young people from other UK nations.

The inescapable truth is that disadvantaged pupils in Wales have low skill levels and low levels of educational attainment. This drives a high disadvantage gap, reduces opportunities in the labour market and perpetuates inequalities. This will act as a drag on growth and living standards.

3. Explanations for lower performance in Wales

In this section, we gradually examine the potential explanations for lower levels of educational performance in Wales, including the statistical biases and the roles of poverty, ethnic mix, resources, the curriculum, accountability and assessments.

Statistical concerns and biases

To what extent do lower PISA scores in Wales reflect statistical concerns and biases? Some caution is always needed when interpreting exact changes across countries over time, particularly as PISA scores are based on a sample of children in each nation across each cycle. There are also sources of potential bias specific to the UK and Wales, with the OECD warning that low response rates could be creating biases within the UK this year. Jerrim (2023) has written about the curious issue of the implausibly low scores of pupils taking the test in Welsh, which could be biasing Welsh scores downwards. However, such biases are likely to be modest (less than 10 points) and have been known to affect previous years (Jerrim, Lopez-Agudo and Marcenaro-Gutierrez, 2022).

In general, one should focus on the general trends and levels over time. For Wales, this is a picture of low test scores across all three subject areas, below the OECD average and lower than the rest of the UK. Furthermore, as shown below, the fact that we see higher GCSE inequalities and worse post-16 educational and labour market outcomes in Wales strongly suggests that PISA is capturing a real issue in the Welsh education system.

Higher poverty is not the explanation

There will be differences between disadvantaged children in Wales and England that explain some of these differences in skill levels. However, there is likely to be a high degree of socio-economic similarity between the disadvantaged groups across England and Wales (we look at differences by ethnic background below). These groups are mainly made up of families reliant on means-tested benefits or on minimum wage levels, which will be very similar across the two nations. As of January 2019, the share of children eligible for free school meals was about 18% in Wales , which is only slightly larger than the 15% in England . Furthermore, about 8–9% of pupils were persistently eligible for free school meals (FSM) across both nations, suggesting similar levels of persistent poverty (Cardim-Dias and Sibieta, 2022). Transitional protections under universal credit make it difficult to present more recent statistics in a comparable way.

Differences in GCSE specifications between England and Wales make it difficult to compare absolute or raw results. However, Cardim-Dias and Sibieta (2022) show that one can produce reliable comparisons of inequalities in GCSE results, and the gap in performance between disadvantaged and other pupils. This analysis presents the disadvantage gap in terms of months of educational progress, where 11 months would be the expected difference in performance between a child born in September and one born in August.

As shown in Figure 3, Cardim-Dias and Sibieta (2022) show higher inequalities in GCSE results in Wales than in England. Before the pandemic, disadvantaged pupils in Wales were the equivalent of 22–23 months of educational progress behind their peers, compared with a gap of 18 months in England.

Figure 3.Disadvantage gap in GCSE results in Wales and England over time (months of educational progress; disadvantaged defined as ever eligible for FSM in past six years)

Note: Core subjects are English/Welsh, maths and science.

Source: Reproduced from Cardim-Dias and Sibieta (2022) with kind permission.

The results are even more stark at a local level, as shown in Figure 4. Across England and Wales, the local authorities with the worst performance for disadvantaged pupils are practically all in Wales. Before the pandemic, there were seven local authorities in Wales where disadvantaged pupils were at least 25 months behind their peers at the national level: Torfaen, Wrexham, Blaenau Gwent, Merthyr Tydfil, Neath Port Talbot, Rhondda Cynon Taf and Pembrokeshire. In England, this was only the case for Blackpool. Furthermore, there are many local authorities in England with similar levels of deprivation and demographics to deprived areas in Wales, but which manage to achieve a lower disadvantage gap – for example, Salford, Gateshead and Portsmouth. There are also places with much higher levels of persistent disadvantage that achieve lower disadvantage gaps, such as Liverpool and Newcastle. The low performance of disadvantaged pupils in Wales is simply not an inevitable result of high levels of deprivation.

Figure 4. Relationship between persistent disadvantage and the disadvantage gap across local authorities in Wales and England

Note: Pupils are classed as persistently disadvantaged if they were eligible for free school meals for 80% of their time in school. Disadvantage gap is measured in terms of GCSE results.

To be clear, the overall level of the disadvantage gap and educational inequalities in England are substantial, with a national disadvantage gap of 18 months before the pandemic and much evidence to suggest that this has been getting even worse over recent years (Babbini et al., 2023). But the picture in Wales looks even worse than this. This greater disadvantage gap cannot be explained by higher levels of disadvantage in Wales. Areas of England with similar or higher levels of disadvantage manage to achieve lower levels of educational inequality. The explanation must lie elsewhere.

Role of immigrants and ethnic make-up

Perhaps the most significant difference is the ethnic make-up of each nation. Over 30% of pupils in England are from minority ethnic backgrounds, compared with about 10% in Wales . Over 20% of 15-year-olds in England were from first- or second-generation immigrant backgrounds in 2022, compared with 10% in Wales (OECD, 2023). This matters, as the evidence clearly shows that ethnic minorities and those from immigrant backgrounds generally perform very well in England (Wilson, Burgess and Briggs, 2011; OECD, 2023). These differences seem likely to be accentuated amongst the disadvantaged group, and may explain some of the lower performance in Wales. However, there are reasons to doubt that this explains a large element of lower skill levels in Wales.

According to PISA, non-immigrants in England score about 30 PISA points higher in maths than non-immigrants in Wales. We also see that immigrants score about 20 PISA points higher in England than in Wales. Immigrants and non-immigrants alike have higher levels of performance in England. Indeed, the high performance of immigrants is an under-appreciated success of the English education system. As Freedman (2024) has pointed out, England is the only European country where second-generation immigrants outperform non-immigrants in PISA. If second-generation immigrants in England were a country, they would have similar maths scores to high-performing countries such as Canada and Estonia, and be not far behind Korea and Japan.

How much do resources matter?

Resources and spending also differ across the UK (Sibieta, 2023). In Scotland, spending per pupil has long been higher and class sizes lower than in the rest of the UK (Jerrim and Sibieta, 2021). Following a further boost since 2018, spending per pupil in Scotland is at least 18% or £1,300 higher than elsewhere in the UK. Spending levels and trends are more similar in Wales, England and Northern Ireland. There were real-terms cuts to spending per pupil between 2010 and 2019, which are now being gradually reversed (Sibieta, 2023).

With England showing higher levels of skills than high-spending Scotland, one naturally asks whether school spending matters all that much. The answer is still yes. Correlations of spending across time and countries provide little information on the true effects of higher spending on educational outcomes. We have excellent evidence showing increasing levels of school spending does improve educational outcomes, and probably more so for disadvantaged students (Jackson and Mackevicius, 2024). This remains relevant and can help us interpret differences across nations.

In Scotland, we see historical levels of higher spending and recent large increases. An entirely plausible explanation is that higher levels of skills in Scotland in the past could be partly explained by greater resources. Recent declines could be explained by negative effects of reforms outweighing the effects of extra spending, and potentially by reforms reducing the bang-for-buck from extra resources.

In England, we see stable scores at a time of reduced spending per pupil and resilience in the face of a global pandemic. A very plausible explanation is that reforms to the system, such as the knowledge-rich curriculum and focus on basic literacy and numeracy, could have had positive effects, which may have been slightly diminished by reduced spending. This has the additional implication that the current English system may well be characterised by high bang-for-buck from extra spending.

This has some important lessons for policymakers in Wales considering the role of extra resources. How much you spend and how you spend it are often seen as competing factors. This is an entirely false trade-off. They both matter in complementary ways. A well-functioning and high-performing system is likely to generate large gains from extra spending. Throwing money at a poorly-performing system will likely produce disappointing results.

Curriculum changes: knowledge versus skills

One of the biggest school policy differences across the four nations of the UK has been curriculum reform. Scotland (from 2010) and Northern Ireland (from 2007) have already implemented skills-based curricula, which focus on the development of skills and competencies. The new Curriculum for Wales , implemented from 2022 onwards, takes a similar approach and is partly modelled on the Scottish Curriculum for Excellence. The National Curriculum in England is very different. The most recent version was implemented from 2014 onwards and focuses on whether pupils have specific elements of knowledge.

The Curriculum for Wales aims to develop general skills and defines four key purposes:

• ambitious, capable learners, ready to learn throughout their lives;
• enterprising, creative contributors, ready to play a full part in life and work;
• ethical, informed citizens of Wales and the world;
• healthy, confident individuals, ready to lead fulfilling lives as valued members of society.

Learning is organised into six different areas of learning (combining many traditional subject domains). A high emphasis is also placed on health and well-being. Schools then have significant autonomy to define the specific elements of their own curriculum as long as they are progressing towards the general definitions of skills. This is intended to achieve a broad and balanced curriculum.

These are of course very noble and sensible aims. The trouble is that defining the curriculum in terms of general skills might not actually be a good way to develop those skills in the first place. Whilst many of the skills seem like good long-term goals for an education system, Christodoulou (2023) argues that it is more effective to break those skills down into the teaching of specific elements of knowledge. Assessing generic skills is also incredibly difficult. As a result, skill-based curricula can lead to significant inequalities in the curriculum content that pupils are exposed to, and in the ways in which they are assessed. Indeed, based on pilots of the new curriculum, education researchers in Wales have already warned that the new curriculum risks exacerbating existing inequalities without external accountability on curriculum design and assessment, and extra investment (Power, Newton and Taylor, 2020).

Paterson (2023) also argues that the reduction in science and maths scores in Scotland and Northern Ireland, alongside stable reading scores, is the pattern one might expect following the introduction of skills-based curricula. Reading is a relatively general skill that parents can assist with. Maths and science require more specific knowledge that parents might find harder to impart. This seems like a reasonable conclusion. However, it would be near impossible to definitively conclude that it is the adoption of skills-based curricula that has led to lower scores in Scotland and Northern Ireland, and that a knowledge-based curriculum has improved scores in England. Correlation is not causation. Furthermore, the improvements in reading in England appear longstanding, dating back to 2006 at least, and might not just be about the adoption of the new National Curriculum. The improvements may reflect the widespread adoption of synthetic phonics following the Rose Report in 2006, which has been shown to have had positive effects (Machin, McNally and Viarengo, 2018).

The trouble is, as argued by Crehan (2023), declines have happened in essentially every country that has adopted such skills-based curricula – for example, France, Finland, Australia and New Zealand, with the last thinking about ways to introduce specific knowledge elements into its curriculum.

Lastly, there is also no evidence to suggest that policymakers in Wales have been successful in achieving the broader aim of maximising pupil well-being. The 2022 PISA report for Wales (Ingram et al., 2023) shows that pupils in Wales report a lower score for overall life satisfaction than the OECD average and that a lower-than-average share of pupils felt like they belonged in school. Pupils reporting higher levels of life satisfaction and belonging tended to be those achieving higher scores on PISA tests.

At the very least, all this must leave us wary about the introduction of the skills-based Curriculum for Wales. Maybe Wales will totally buck the international trend. However, there is no good evidence showing that a skills-based curriculum will be able to turn around low scores and high inequalities seen in Wales.

Accountability and assessment: not measuring up

Another key difference across the four nations has been approaches to accountability and assessment. In England, there has long been a focus on high-stakes accountability, either through league tables, school-by-school data comparisons or Ofsted inspections with single-word judgements (often with high consequences for schools and their leadership teams). This can have benefits, in terms of high levels of accountability, but can also create perverse incentives to teach to the test, and the problems associated with high-pressured school inspections are now well known.

Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland abolished league tables long ago. Some evidence suggests this had a small negative effect in Wales (Burgess, Wilson and Worth, 2013), and a more general school categorisation system was introduced about 10 years ago. This has since been abolished and replaced by a system of self-evaluation by schools.

Since 2013, pupils aged 7–14 have sat literacy and numeracy tests of one form or another in Wales. However, the results from these have rarely been published in ways that allow us to track average skills levels or inequalities over time. For England, we have significant data on pupil skill levels from tests such as the phonics check and Key Stage 2 tests , and there are clear metrics comparing school performance with national and low benchmarks at pretty much every stage of education. Historically, such test scores have been used as part of school league tables. However, more important are the ways in which the data are used to track overall performance over time, to understand inequalities across pupils and areas, and for schools to compare their own levels with those of others. This approach to data on school comparisons was briefly part of the Welsh school system, but is not really encouraged any more. The Welsh Government has recently published data showing falling numeracy and reading levels since the pandemic, and it plans to publish more on inequalities in Spring 2024. This should ideally become a regular and systematic overview of skills levels and inequalities across time and place and enable schools to do comparisons to aid their understanding.

Accountability through school inspections occurs throughout Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. However, the immediate consequences from poor school inspection outcomes are less severe in Wales, except in the case of very poor inspection reports which can result in special measures. Single-word summary judgements have also been abolished, making it quite hard to discern the overall quality of schools from inspection reports. To be fair, policy and debate in England are also moving away from narrow, single-word judgements towards more holistic school report cards. It would be entirely feasible and sensible for Wales to adopt such an approach. It could include summaries from different parts of inspection reports, data on pupil attainment and inequalities, and wider aspects about the school environment and pupil well-being.

Assessments and exams have also been moving in different directions across the four nations of the UK. In Wales, the key developments have been retaining A*–G grades (instead of the numbers used in England), maintaining AS levels and creating GCSE specifications specific to Wales. This makes it harder, but not impossible, to undertake comparisons across the UK. New GCSEs in Wales will be taught from September 2025. These will be available in more vocational subjects and make more use of continuous assessments (e.g. coursework), and it will no longer be possible to study triple-science subjects of biology, chemistry and physics. These changes are being undertaken to broaden the set of available subjects and to align with the aims of the new curriculum. However, there are also clear risks with this approach. The benefits and returns to vocational GCSEs in England in the 2000s were pretty weak (see the 2011 Wolf Report), high levels of continuous assessment can increase inequalities (Kelly, 2023) and create more workload for teachers, and removing triple-science subjects risks capping the future educational opportunities of Welsh learners in science, medical and technological subjects.

4. Conclusions

The overwhelming conclusion is that the overall level of educational performance in Wales is low, and inequalities are high and persistent. Policymakers should be doing more to address the underlying reasons driving this disappointing set of results. At present, the most prominent education policies of the Welsh Government are the new Curriculum for Wales, free school meals in primary schools and a potential change in the school year. However, there is very little evidence that any of these policies will improve educational attainment or narrow inequalities.

The picture on schools in England appears rosier. However, it is important not to treat England as a perfect benchmark. There are also real problems in England. Inequalities are wide (and probably widening), there are significant problems recruiting and retaining teachers, there is huge pressure on the special educational needs system and there are also obvious concerns about a narrowing of the curriculum. This being said, there are still important lessons for policymakers in Wales.

Whilst it is important that policymakers in Wales make changes, it is also important that they do not panic. Now is the time for policymakers and educators to pause and in some cases rethink past and ongoing reforms to Welsh education in the following areas:

• The Curriculum for Wales should place greater emphasis on specific knowledge than it does now.
• The reform to GCSEs should be delayed to give proper time to consider how its aims and the evidence base fit with addressing poor performance and wide inequalities.
• A move towards school report cards, alongside the existing school inspections, could be an effective way to provide greater information for parents without a return to league tables.

Conversations on changes to the curriculum should happen with policymakers, teachers and schools inside and outside Wales. Rather than repeat mistakes, it is crucial to learn lessons from the Curriculum for Excellence alongside the Scottish Government. Much can be learnt from the current rethink in New Zealand, as well as other countries that are thinking about rowing back from skills-based curricula. There is also much that can be learnt from individual teachers and schools in England who have been at the forefront of the knowledge-rich curriculum.

The planned reforms to GCSEs in Wales are significant, with the introduction of more continuous assessment and changes to subjects. Key questions to ask include whether there is strong evidence that increased use of continuous assessment for GCSEs will improve educational performance and narrow gaping inequalities. Or will it increase workloads and inequalities? Are there better ways to achieve improvements? An open and evidence-based conversation will ultimately point to the right directions.

Policymakers should also publish better and more regular data on overall skills levels across young people in Wales at different ages, and the levels of inequality across pupils from different backgrounds and areas. Schools should be able and encouraged to compare themselves with other schools, as used to be the case. If this is not possible within the existing ways that literacy and numeracy test results are collected, then this should be changed to make it possible. Given the relatively low reading scores in Wales, a phonics check for children in Year 1 or Year 2 might be a very sensible addition too.

The movement towards school report cards in England also seems like a positive step that Wales could lead on. They could be incorporated into existing school inspections to provide parents with a clear summary of the performance and well-being of their children.

Publishing more data does not have to mean a return to school league tables, which have mostly been superseded by better and more sophisticated ways of using data. It is instead a confirmation for schools, parents and taxpayers that pupils are mastering key skills that are required to access the rest of the curriculum and wider education opportunities. One objection to focusing on tests in literacy and numeracy is that it narrows the curriculum, and there has been clear criticism in England of the way the English Baccalaureate has narrowed the curriculum (see Long and Danechi (2019)). However, this is not an inevitable consequence. Done right, skill tests and comparisons can ensure that pupils acquire foundational skills that enable them to access a wider curriculum and set of qualifications. Without basic skills and knowledge, a wider curriculum is a pipe dream.

Fundamentally, if you do not like the surprises from PISA every three years, then fill the void with better annual data so that PISA just ends up confirming what you already know. Ideally, this would be a picture of improving skills, lower inequalities and pupils accessing a wider curriculum. However, without reform or good data, there could be an even nastier surprise for Welsh policymakers when the next PISA results are published three years from now.

Babbini, N., Hunt, E., Robinson, D. and Tuckett, S., 2023. EPI Annual Report 2023. Education Policy Institute, https://epi.org.uk/publications-and-research/annual-report-2023/ .

Burgess, S., Wilson, D. and Worth, J., 2013. A natural experiment in school accountability: the impact of school performance information on pupil progress. Journal of Public Economics , 106, 57–67, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0047272713001291 .

Cardim-Dias, J. and Sibieta, L., 2022. Inequalities in GCSE results across England and Wales. Education Policy Institute, https://epi.org.uk/publications-and-research/inequalities-in-gcse-results-across-england-and-wales/ .

Christodoulou, D., 2023. Skills vs knowledge, 13 years on. No More Marking blog, https://substack.nomoremarking.com/p/skills-vs-knowledge-13-years-on .

Crehan, L., 2023. https://twitter.com/lucy_crehan/status/1732038894336847942 .

Department for Education, 2023. PISA 2022: national report for England, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/pisa-2022-national-report-for-england .

Freedman, S., 2024. The truth about integration. Comment is Freed blog, https://samf.substack.com/p/the-truth-about-integration .

Gilruth, J., 2023. Literacy and numeracy: Education Secretary statement. Scottish Government, https://www.gov.scot/publications/ministerial-statement-literacy-numeracy/ .

Hanushek, E., Schwerdt, G., Wiederhold, S. and Woessmann, L., 2015. Returns to skills around the world: evidence from PIAAC. European Economic Review , 73, 103–30, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2014.10.006 .

Ingram, J., Stiff, J., Cadwallader, S., Lee, G. and Kayton, H., 2023. PISA 2022: National Report for Wales. Welsh Government, https://www.gov.wales/sites/default/files/statistics-and-research/2023-12/pisa-2022-national-report-wales-059.pdf .

Jackson, C.K. and Mackevicius, C.L., 2024, What impacts can we expect from school spending policy? Evidence from evaluations in the United States. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics , 16(1), 412–46, https://doi.org/10.1257/app.20220279 .

Jerrim, J., 2023. Were PISA reading scores in Wales as bad as they first seemed? FFT Education Datalab, https://ffteducationdatalab.org.uk/2023/12/were-pisa-reading-scores-in-wales-as-bad-as-they-first-seemed/ .

Jerrim, J., 2024. How concerned should we be about England’s declining PISA science scores? Schools Week , 18 March, https://schoolsweek.co.uk/how-concerned-should-we-be-about-englands-declining-pisa-science-scores/ .

Jerrim, J., Lopez-Agudo, L.A. and Marcenaro-Gutierrez, O.D., 2022. The impact of test language on PISA scores. New evidence from Wales. British Educational Research Journal , 48(3), 420–45, https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3774 .

Jerrim, J. and Sibieta, L., 2021. A comparison of school institutions and policies across the UK, Education Policy Institute, https://epi.org.uk/publications-and-research/a-comparison-of-school-institutions-and-policies-across-the-uk/ .

Kelly, D.P., 2023. Retain external examination as the primary means of assessment. Centre for Education Policy and Equalising Opportunities blog, https://blogs.ucl.ac.uk/cepeo/2023/06/22/retain-external-examination-as-the-primary-means-of-assessment/ .

Long, R. and Danechi, S., 2019. English Baccalaureate. House of Commons Library Briefing Paper 06045, https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN06045/SN06045.pdf .

Machin, S., McNally, S. and Viarengo, M., 2018. Changing how literacy is taught: evidence on synthetic phonics. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy , 10(2), 217–41, https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/pol.20160514 .

Miles, J., 2023. Written statement: PISA 2022: National Report for Wales. Welsh Government, https://www.gov.wales/written-statement-pisa-2022-national-report-wales .

OECD, 2023. PISA 2022 Results: The State of Learning and Equity in Education . https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/53f23881-en/index.html?itemId=/content/publication/53f23881-en .

Paterson, L., 2023. PISA 2022 in Scotland: declining attainment and growing social inequality. Reform Scotland, https://reformscotland.com/2023/12/pisa-2022-in-scotland-declining-attainment-and-growing-social-inequality-lindsay-paterson/ .

Power, S., Newton, N. and Taylor, C., 2020. ‘Successful futures’ for all in Wales? The challenges of curriculum reform for addressing educational inequalities. The Curriculum Journal , 31(2), 317–33, https://doi.org/10.1002/curj.39 .

Psacharopoulos, G. and Patrinos, H.A., 2018. Returns to investment in education: a decennial review of the global literature. Education Economics , 26(5), 445–58, https://doi.org/10.1080/09645292.2018.1484426 .

Robson, J., Sibieta, L., Khandekar, S., Neagu, M., Robinson, D. and James Relly, S., 2024. Comparing policies, participation and inequalities across UK post-16 Education and Training landscapes. Education Policy Institute, https://epi.org.uk/publications-and-research/uk-nations-education-and-training/ .

Rose, J., 2006. Independent review of the teaching of early reading. Department for Education and Skills, https://dera.ioe.ac.uk/id/eprint/5551/2/report.pdf .

Sibieta, L., 2023. How does school spending per pupil differ across the UK? IFS Report R256, https://ifs.org.uk/publications/how-does-school-spending-pupil-differ-across-uk .

Sizmur, J., Ager, R., Bradshaw, J., Classick, R., Galvis, M., Packer, J., Thomas, D. and Wheater, R., 2019. Achievement of 15-year-olds in England: PISA 2018 results. Department for Education, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/904420/PISA_2018_England_national_report_accessible.pdf .

Wilson, D., Burgess, S. and Briggs, A., 2011. The dynamics of school attainment of England’s ethnic minorities. Journal of Population Economics , 24, 681–700, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00148-009-0269-0 .

Wolf, A., 2011. Review of vocational education: the Wolf Report. Department for Education and Department for Business, Innovation & Skills, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/review-of-vocational-education-the-wolf-report .

Research Fellow

Luke is a Research Fellow at the IFS and his general research interests include education policy, political economy and poverty and inequality.

Report details

Suggested citation.

Sibieta, L. (2024). Major challenges for education in Wales . London: Institute for Fiscal Studies. Available at: https://ifs.org.uk/publications/major-challenges-education-wales (accessed: 23 March 2024).

More from IFS

Understand this issue.

Social mobility and wealth

12 December 2023

Cutting inheritance tax isn’t quite as simple as its proponents suggest

20 November 2023

How important is the Bank of Mum and Dad?

15 December 2023

Policy analysis

21 March 2024

The latest picture on school funding and costs in England

1 March 2024

Living standards since the last election

Academic research.

Diversity and discrimination in the classroom

12 February 2024

Willingness to pay for improved public education and public healthcare systems: the role of income mobility prospects

14 March 2024

Measuring wellbeing growth and convergence in multivariate ordered categorical worlds: Has there been any levelling up in the United Kingdom?

21 December 2023

• Infosys share price
• 1,508.85 -2.98%
• Tata Steel share price
• 151.95 1.27%
• Bharti Airtel share price
• 1,237.85 1.31%
• Power Grid Corporation Of India share price
• 275.70 0.71%
• ITC share price
• 428.45 1.71%

202 higher educational institutes to use CUET-UG scores this year, says UGC chief

University Grants Commission (UGC) Chairman M Jagadesh Kumar Wednesday said approximately 202 higher educational institutes including 46 Central Universities have registered for using CUET-UG 2024 scores for their admission in UG programmes and more are joining

University Grants Commission Chairman M Jagadesh Kumar on Wednesday said that approximately 202 higher educational institutes including 46 Central Universities have registered for using CUET-UG 2024 scores for their admission in UG programmes and more are joining.

The UGC chairman posted on X (formerly Twitter), “So far, 46 Central Universities, 32 State Universities, 20 Deemed-to-be-Universities, 98 Private Universities and 6 Government Institutions have registered for using CUET-UG scores for their admission in UG programmes . More are joining...."

Earlier in the day, the UGC chairman outlined the initiatives taken by the higher education regulator in the country for conducting the Common University Entrance Test for Undergraduates (CUET UG) 2024.

Kumar said to improve the overall testing experience for candidates appearing in CUET UG 2024, the difficulty level of the entrance exam has been reduced to moderate, accessibility enhanced, and logistical challenges have been reduced to make the test stress-free for the candidates, reported ANI .

Detailing the steps taken by the National Testing Agency--responsible for conducting the CUET— Kumar told ANI that the NTA has planned more test centres, hybrid mode examinations, timely availability of admit cards, and breaks between exams held on the same day to make the same more convenient and stress-free for the aspirants.

"Gap/breaks will provide students a mental and physical break, allowing them to transition between subjects and reduce stress," he said.

"Since this time, NTA is conducting CUET-UG in hybrid mode, we will have more centres in cities, and students will get the centres of their choice. For security reasons, students can download admit cards a few days before the test," ANI quoted the UGC chairman as saying.

Kumar further said the third edition of the Common University Entrance Test for Undergraduate (CUET UG) 2024 will be conducted between May 15 and May 31, 2024. The date sheet of the same will be released after the registration process is completed on March 26.

Earlier, Kumar had said there would be no change in the schedule of the entrance exam view of the Lok Sabha elections.

“NTA will conduct CUET-UG, as announced earlier, between May 15 and May 31, 2024. In this period, two dates overlap with the election dates on 20 and 25 May."

"This year instead of attempting 10 papers, students will be permitted to write a maximum of six papers," the UGC chairman told ANI.

"The rationale behind this decision is that only a tiny percentage of students have opted for ten papers in the last year's test. However, the scheduling of papers becomes very complex, leading to conducting the test over several days," Kumar added.

Speaking about the difficulty level of questions, the UGC chairman said,"We want to keep the difficulty level of questions in CUET-UG moderate because students are more likely to perceive it as a fair and manageable challenge. Answering such reasonable difficulty level questions can improve students' intrinsic motivation and self-efficacy, as they believe in their ability to prepare for and perform well on the test without undue external help. This positive feeling experienced by the students diffuses from one batch to another and reduces their dependency on coaching."

The UGC chairman also informed the measures planned to prevent cheating during the entrance examination including rigorous identity verification processes, including photo identification and biometric scans to prevent impersonation.

"Seating will be arranged in a way that minimizes communication between students. A sufficient number of invigilators will be assigned to monitor the entire examination hall. While Random spot checks will be conducted during the exam," the UGC chief added.

Milestone Alert! Livemint tops charts as the fastest growing news website in the world 🌏 Click here to know more.

Unlock a world of Benefits! From insightful newsletters to real-time stock tracking, breaking news and a personalized newsfeed – it's all here, just a click away! Login Now!

Swiss knife to Lucknow diaries: Four women executives on guilt and success

On the gender scale, business schools still don’t measure up

For B-school grads, a fancy MBA may not be enough. You also need work experience

The ubiquity of India's 'coaching culture', in charts

How to explain the budget to an engineer

Germany, Japan or Korea? Indian students look beyond Canada

Why India's runaway coaching centres need regulating

Mint Explainer: Why Indian schools continue to fail rural teens

Coaching centres may challenge new guidelines

How AR Rahman’s orchestra is tuning lives

Wait for it…

Log in to our website to save your bookmarks. It'll just take a moment.

You are just one step away from creating your watchlist!

Oops! Looks like you have exceeded the limit to bookmark the image. Remove some to bookmark this image.

Your session has expired, please login again.

Congratulations!

You are now subscribed to our newsletters. In case you can’t find any email from our side, please check the spam folder.

Subscribe to continue

This is a subscriber only feature Subscribe Now to get daily updates on WhatsApp

• Work & Careers
• Life & Arts

Become an FT subscriber

Limited time offer save up to 40% on standard digital.

• Global news & analysis
• Expert opinion
• Special features
• FirstFT newsletter
• Videos & Podcasts
• Android & iOS app
• FT Edit app
• 10 gift articles per month

Explore more offers.

Standard digital.

• FT Digital Edition

Premium Digital

Print + premium digital.

Then $75 per month. Complete digital access to quality FT journalism on any device. Cancel anytime during your trial.

• 10 additional gift articles per month
• Global news & analysis
• Exclusive FT analysis
• Videos & Podcasts
• FT App on Android & iOS
• Everything in Standard Digital
• Premium newsletters
• Weekday Print Edition

Complete digital access to quality FT journalism with expert analysis from industry leaders. Pay a year upfront and save 20%.

• Everything in Print
• Everything in Premium Digital

The new FT Digital Edition: today’s FT, cover to cover on any device. This subscription does not include access to ft.com or the FT App.

Terms & Conditions apply

Explore our full range of subscriptions.

Why the ft.

See why over a million readers pay to read the Financial Times.

International Edition