My experience as a student curriculum partner

Maryam Abdu, 2nd year Geography student, shares her experience working towards a more inclusive curriculum at UCL.

All too often, as a student, you become caught up in deadlines and learning that’s focused on achieving a particular grade, rather than critically analysing the purpose behind the work or whether you can see yourself reflected in the themes arising. As a student from a mixed heritage, defined as Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME), I am alert to reports (both official and anecdotal) which focus on the disparity between the outcomes and experiences of BAME students, with UCL being no exception. Consequently, as soon as I heard about the opportunity to critically look at the very curriculum that I am studying and be part of making a positive change, I knew that I wanted to contribute to this project. 

The assignment required critically looking back on first year modules and reviewing the content to not only see where improvements could be made, but to also celebrate places where there was evidence of diversity and inclusion ( focused on race). This included relistening and re-reading content from the first year, but this time through the conscious lens of diversity and inclusion. The process required critical analysis, constantly questioning whether the reading lists included a diverse range of authors, where the readings were geographically published and whether we could see people from BAME backgrounds represented in the bibliography. Other angles considered were whether appropriate language and terminology was used, and whether the aims and objectives included prior learning experiences. Looking at familiar content from an entirely different perspective required intense focus and consideration.  It is so easy to accept the status quo without question.

Working alongside other students spanning the department brought me into contact to people I hadn’t met previously. Albeit virtually, we were able to connect based on shared lived experiences and bounce ideas and suggested improvements off each other. The benefit of working alongside others was apparent as I encountered suggestions of  improvements I wouldn’t have initially recognised as problems. A strength to this work was that although we had some shared experiences (as BAME students), there were also inevitable differences which felt healthy and honest. The process was liberating in itself. An example of this is that not everyone enters university knowing how to use a library or being familiar with referencing, depending on previous exposure. Therefore, first year modules which include baseline information on this are more inclusive than those that dont.

Throughout the process, I could see how attempts had been made to include BAME authors and discuss sensitive topics in respectful ways, without avoiding the conversation. I was able to recognise contributions from all around the world, not for a tokenistic reasons, but because their contributions to the discipline were important, and worthy of studying. Throughout the process, I consistently felt empowered as a BAME student, rather than disappointed.  This is not to suggest that the work of those advocating for diversity and inclusion is done, rather the opposite. It is both ongoing and iterative, because even those tasked with reviewing content are on a learning journey. The experience felt like a responsibility and has given me the opportunity to immerse myself within my own discipline and knowing my contributions were valid and listened to, even as a novice! Having my work fed back to world class professors who are willing to listen and learn gives me a sense of pride and optimism that the gap in experiences and outcomes of BAME students can be reduced. I would advocate that UCL does care about its BAME students, and recognises their contribution in informing an institution committed to inclusion.