Decolonization in a higher education STEMM institution – is ‘epistemic fragility’ a barrier?

Abstract

Central to the decolonial debate is how high-income countries (HICs) have systematically negated ways of knowing from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), and yet the paucity of empirical decolonization studies leaves educators relatively unsupported as to whether, and how, to address privilege in higher education. Particularly in science, technology, engineering, mathematics and medicine (STEMM) institutions, there are few published examples of attempts to engage faculty in these debates. In 2018–19, we invited faculty on a master’s in public health course to engage with the decolonization debate by providing: (1) descriptive reading list analyses to all 16 module leads in the master’s programme to invite discussion about the geographic representation of readings; (2) an implicit association test adapted to examine bias towards or against research from LMICs; (3) faculty workshops exploring geographic bias in the curriculum; and (4) interviews to discuss decolonization of curricula and current debates. These initiatives stimulated debate and reflection around the source of readings for the master’s course, a programme with a strong STEMM focus, and the possibility of systemic barriers to the inclusion of literature from universities in LMICs. We propose the notion of epistemic fragility, invoking DiAngelo’s (2011) ‘white fragility’, because some of the responses appeared to result from the challenge to perceived meritocracy, centrality, authority, individuality and objectivity of the HIC episteme that this initiative invites. We posit that the effortful reinstatement of a status quo regarding knowledge hierarchies in the global context, although not a representative reaction, can lead to a significant impact on the initiative in general. Efforts to decolonize curricula require actions at both the individual and organizational levels and, in particular, a managed process of careful engagement so that fragility reactions, if and where they occur, are given the time and space to be navigated in the open. Based on our experiences, we offer recommendations for policy and practice for those engaged in this movement and potential research questions to explore epistemic fragility in higher education.

Missing in action: a scoping review of gender as the overlooked component in decolonial discourses

“…Some of these papers were focused at the level of the individual,58 while others addressed structural and systemic factors driving inequity 59–62. Nine papers reviewed and/or called for changes to global health63 and medical education27 28 61 64 and curricula65–67 and reflected how current educational approaches ‘hold back health equity’ 68…”

The do’s, don’ts and don’t knows of redressing differential attainment related to race/ethnicity in medical schools

“…Some medical schools are actively undertaking work to ensure previously unheard voices (voices that legitimize issues of gender, race and class) within their curricula and to address issues such as ethnic biases in cases and teaching materials [ 34 , 99 , 164 – 167 ]. Future research could examine the processes of strategy implementation [ 168 ] and strategy impact on the learning environment, student experience and differential attainment.…”

I Am A Scientist: Overcoming implicit bias in STEM through explicit representations of diversity in lectures

“…Decolonisation and diversification is an issue for all disciplines, but is often seen as something that is more relevant for arts and humanities than the sciences. Many faculty members actively disagree with diversification efforts within science, seeing science as universal and inherently objective [34]. This mindset fails to acknowledge that science is built on white Western forms of knowledge and thought, and that this bias might be alienating to students of colour [24].…”

“…There are some efforts to provide resources banks to help academics with this in a subject specific context; for example, Project Biodiversify is an emerging collection of case studies and resources of scientists from a variety of different backgrounds [48]. While this is to be encouraged, academics may still be concerned that incorporation of more diverse authors may result in even more content being added to crowded curricula, or result in less coherent summaries of disciplines if key references are removed to accommodate diversity of authorship [34]. A simpler alternative is to better represent the diversity of authors of papers that are already included within existing lecture materials.…”