Year Zero is fast approaching at Aberdeen University. The Scottish institution’s education committee has issued a document titled ‘Decolonising the Curriculum – Timelines and Approval Processes’, which sets out plans to “embed a bold, progressive and sustained programme of antiracist curricular reform”. The Spectator‘s Stephen Daisley, who has obtained a copy of the edict, has more.
All courses will be given three years to ‘decolonise’. Academics are required to “review their reading lists” and provide “additional perspectives on the course subject”. New courses must explain “how the curriculum will address the principle of decolonisation”. This will be “a constant process… not a linear project with a definite end”. Meanwhile, the library has already set up a system for reporting “problematic language in catalogue records” and produced “a guide to decolonising reading lists’” to be published at the start of the next academic year.
The reason for the purge is Aberdeen’s belief that “all British universities, all disciplines taught and researched in them have been historically influenced by Eurocentric colonialism and its cultural concept of race”. So everything will be scrutinised for any suggestion that “particular perspectives, values and ideologies” are “universal, superior, dominant, and complete”. This way of thinking, the document says, “renders invisible the historical and current role of racialised people” in “the production of knowledge”. At the centre will be “students and staff with lived experience and from backgrounds historically affected by colonialism”.
What might this look like? Consider how the ideology is practised in other universities. Keele warns that “the emphasis on empirics”’ is a “Euro-centric thought” and a “pervasive characteristic” in nursing. Manchester Metropolitan cautions science lecturers against “predominantly white, middle-class teaching methods”. Warwick tells academics to engage students on “how colonialism, coloniality and race affect the discipline/topics they are studying”. “The course covered the French revolution (which may not be a very interesting topic for African students),” its toolkit notes at one point.
Aberdeen’s internal briefing says that its efforts are being made as part of its “decision to apply for the Race Equality Charter award”. The REC’s stamp of approval requires a university to sign up to statements such as: “Racism is an everyday facet of U.K. society and racial inequalities manifest themselves in everyday situations, processes and behaviours.” Efforts to decolonise are also driven by “the need to address the degree awarding gap for our Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) students”. In short, Aberdeen has been captured by the dismal intellectual progeny of critical race theory.
The document makes no mention of the impact on academic freedom. Lecturers who value their autonomy may well be troubled by the prescriptive nature of these new demands. Even those who agree with the decolonising might pause to ponder the effect on their already burdensome workloads. Overthrowing liberal universalism is jolly revolutionary, but probably doesn’t leave much time for marking essays.
It seems almost churlish to ask how this exciting plan will improve the quality of teaching or research. The proposals don’t appear terribly exercised about educational outcomes beyond their grisly interest in attainment by students of specific ethnic backgrounds. The implication of a supposed “awarding gap” is that performance is (or should be) connected to skin colour. That’s why it is important to distinguish “anti-racism” from commonly understood opposition to racial hatred and discrimination. In “antiracism”, the first four letters are silent.
With the takeover of elite institutions by racialised woke ideology proceeding apace, the question is what can be done about it? Does the Equality Act need tweaking to make it easier for people to sue institutions which indulge in such blatantly racist behaviour as identifying all kinds of problems with ‘whiteness’ and European culture and heritage? Is other legislation required? This is becoming a serious issue which the sensible, non-woke majority need to address via robust solutions, not just assume it will go away by itself.
Stephen Daisley’s piece is worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.