Abstract

This dissertation investigates the self-segregation of Black British students within higher education. This is a largely under-researched area that is worthy of academic commentary. Reasons for this behaviour are extensively explored, using already existing literature and empirical research to gain a thorough understanding.

Primary, qualitative data from human subjects is collected using semi-structured interviews. The findings highlight that although at first glance, this research topic may appear trivial, it is far from it. Findings uncovering reasons for this segregation include black solidarity, racial identity and discomfort. Furthermore, the sociological concepts this empirical research is grounded in include othering and socialisation. Notions of what it means to be black namely, Black British are also explored.

Table of Contents

Introduction

I recall, during the first semester in my first year of university, my lecturer stated, “If you think the effects of racism are not still present today then look around. Look where all of the black people are seated and look where all of the white people are seated”. I was sat among a group of ethnic minorities, mainly black people, and we occupied the back two rows of the lecture theatre. There was no other black person sat anywhere else. It was then that I became hyperaware of this segregation. As a student, I consistently observed the same pattern throughout my time at university. If the black students were not congregated in a large group, then they were dispersed throughout the hall in smaller clusters. This was a tendency and a unique pattern of behaviour. Like Cowan (2010, p. 49), I question whether the numerical diversity on university campuses reflects the diversity in interactions.

The aim of this study is to gain insight into this pattern of behaviour that most observe, but hardly ever question. The purpose of my research question, ‘Why are all the black people in the lecture hall sitting together?’, is to uncover reasons why black student’s self-segregate within higher education and why it is so prevalent. In exploring this, the extent to which black and white university students have “cross-racial interactions” (Strayhorn and Johnson, 2014, p. 387) will indirectly be uncovered.

Self-segregation is a term used throughout this dissertation, representing the action of physically setting oneself apart from others. Self-segregation is a key theme in this study, alongside race, both of which are systematically explored throughout this research. As a Black British researcher and a student who consistently self-segregated with black peers on my course, I have a unique position. This works to my advantage and provides insight that would not otherwise be gained through academic literature. This is especially the case as my investigation topic is largely under-researched. Often, dialogue surrounding black people and higher education is largely focused on underachievement (Richardson, 2015) and barriers (Brug and Oliver, 2010). How black pupils navigate the communal aspect of university, the impact of their racial identity on decision making and self-segregation is often overlooked. My research investigates this, shedding light upon an element of this experience through the lenses of my research participants.

This study is relevant in contemporary society because it is an ongoing behaviour pattern. As Richardson (2017, p. 35) purports, “race is the big elephant in the room” and is therefore, worthy of analysis. The race discussion is an important one as it impacts decisions made by individuals such as, where to sit in a lecture hall. This study aims to highlight issues such as contemporary racism (Stanfield, 1991, p. 11) and the sense of belonging, which are explored in depth. Another aim is to produce an increased awareness of the Black British university experience and hopefully promote positive change.

Within my literature review this will be discussed in detail, revealing previous studies, and exposing the dearth of research in this field.

Chapter 1: Literature review

This chapter underpins the entire paper and provides the foundation for my research, offering insight into key concepts such as what it means to be ‘black’, as well as direct reasons for the self-segregation. During the research process, gaps in academic literature in this area became apparent. Specifically, there was a lack of research on Black British pupils within higher education in conjunction to this pattern of behaviour. Due to this, relating themes were explored including students’ sense of belonging (Hammond, 2019, p. 3) and intercultural communication (Jackson, 2012, p. 192). They helped to construct the framework for research, subsequently aiding the fulfilment of the primary purpose of my study.

Race

The social race definition underlines all modern uses of the term ‘race’ within social science, therefore this perspective is adopted as this study is grounded in sociological thought. It is believed race is not biologically factual, rather a social construction with physical traits such as skin colour (Gillborn, 1990, p. 4) playing a huge role. Race is an identity trait (Carter, 2007, p. 551) that is visible and thus one reason why black people view themselves in racial terms is because others do (Tatum, 2003, p. 214). Howarth et al’s (2014, p. 83) study supports as her participant mixed with black and white, only felt black when around others, because it is only upon leaving home that he is viewed as black. This reemphasises this label as a social construct that is largely shaped by the interaction with others (Richardson, 2017, p. 34).

In the UK the term ‘black’ is complex as it can either denote people of African-Caribbean, African descent or used to signify ‘political blackness’ (Warmington, 2012, p. 14), which within contemporary society is known as Black Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME). The challenge of using the term ‘black’ is that some of mixed heritage may identify as this (Gillborn, 1990, p. 6) and rightfully. However, to narrow the focus and ensure consistency, this study interprets black individuals as those with both parents of African and/or Caribbean descent.

The term diaspora denotes national groups residing outside their native homeland, with identity being transmitted via generations (Baubock, 2010, p. 37). To be a member of a diaspora is a unique identity and the reality for many Black Britons. It is the culmination of more than one national identity, however, can leave many feeling as if they do not belong. Furthermore, it can result in those individuals being viewed as outsiders, also known as othering. This is a “process of differentiation and demarcation, by which the line is drawn between ‘us’ and ‘them’… through which social distance is established and maintained” (Jensen, 2011, p. 65). This study adopts this definition especially as the purpose of my study is to uncover reasons why black students socially distance themselves from non-black students.

Issues of race although complex, are not always interracial but can be intra-racial. This study adopts the definition that these are matters within a racial group of people. A study investigating ‘Why are all the black kids sitting together in the cafeteria?’ found the black girls at the table (the ‘black table’) could be judgemental of those of the same race who were not. Such as ‘outsiders’ who hung out with white kids. One girl was labelled an ‘Oreo cookie’ defined as black on the outside and white on the inside (Tatum, 2003, p. 221). Labels like these are assigned by black people to other black individuals whose behaviour is regarded as not black enough. Due to the black identity being a social construct (Howarth et al, 2014, p. 83) individuals can define what is deemed as acceptable and within the parameters of blackness. A bounty or coconut are other labels connoting an individual is not fully black because they do not uphold ‘black traits’, which are mainly stereotypes. This impacts the personal identity of those assigned this label because it is an insult, an allegation of betrayal and within the context of “generations-deep racial inequality, what worse crime for a black person than to identify with their white oppressors?” (Boakye, 2019, p. 302).

Blackness goes beyond the skin (Boakye, 2019, p. 300), it aids in moulding one’s identity through interacting with group members, and its significant historical and cultural ties. This study will also adopt this perspective, as well as acknowledge the negative implications of this identity, which encapsulates misunderstood communication styles. Buttny (1999, p. 249) found that little contact with those from another race resulted in misreading communication. Specifically, some white participants viewed blacks as aggressive, argumentative, and hostile when communicating with others. Buttny’s study was based upon racial self-segregation on America campuses and is one of many academics discussing this topic within America, however there is a gap in British literature regarding this research area. Furthermore, African Americans and Black Britons are similar in the sense that they are the minority in a white majority society (Walsh, 2001, p. 176), providing a reason why some American based literature is used throughout this research.

Critical race theorists identify race as a major form of oppression within society and “an inequality so deep rooted and so large that… it is practically inevitable feature of the education system.” (Cole, 2009, p. 112). Additionally, research into higher education often fails to investigate white racism, dilemmas and barriers for black students (Vera & Imani, 1996, p. 7), highlighting gaps in literature. My study aims to filter through exploring the normalised behaviour pattern of self-segregation among black students, which raises the question - is this a coping mechanism to negative racial experiences?

Coping mechanism

Some black students perceive white learning environments as hostile, with some coping by forming formal or informal counter spaces to buffer negative experiences (Carter, 2007, p. 543). Within the context of my study, these self-segregating groups function as the counter spaces. Furthermore, within predominately white institutions (PWIs) black students struggle to adjust, experiencing unique challenges such as culture shock and discrimination (Shahid et al, 2018, p. 3). In Vera and Imani’s (1996, p. 7) study of black students at white universities, they found these students felt out of place. African American students, in comparison to white students, did not adjust as well psychologically. Lewis’ (2012, p. 270) research supports this as she found minority ethnic student’s social energy was drained because of ‘unwelcoming campus culture’. Additionally, in the study, black students describe campus and its students as unfriendly which “probably contributes to higher levels of self-segregation” (2012, p. 284). This leaves little social energy left for interracial social interaction, thus making groups more racially segregated. This is a concept British academics have yet to investigate, highlighting a gap in literature.

“British universities need to accept that racism is endemic in higher education and can no longer be ignored”, including microaggressions which can invoke distress leading to isolation (Sian, 2017, p. 23). This is a form of strategic invisibility which is a method of avoiding negative experiences within the institution. Where participants felt discriminated against or marginalised, they disengaged but remained engaged in academic work (Settles et al, 2018, p. 72). This parallels my study, investigating black students who physically detached from the white majority, whilst engaging in education through attending lectures. Research by Lewis also uncovered ‘intra-school segregation’ (2012, p. 271) and its underlying causes. This uncovering could provide the knowledge to improve conditions for particular cohort of students, as a result of investigating the extent to which black students feel a sense of belonging on campus (Strayhorn and Johnson, 2014, p. 387). Feelings of being an outsider could stem from the curriculum. Students are taught the Eurocentric education (Vera and Imani, 1996, p. 13) and this lack of representation could leave individuals seeking familiarity. Likewise, they may view themselves as ‘space invaders’ in this traditionally white space (Bhopal and Jackson, 2013, p. 2), heightening feelings of not belonging.

In this way, students may create their own safe space such as in a study that found where black students exclusively communed on the stairs within PWIs, it bonded them. Claiming this space away from the white majority, reduced otherness felt. One student praised the group for providing cultural, psychological, social support as well as, a “visibility needed to cope with the alienation… he often feels in his classes where he is one of a few or the only Black student” (Carter, 2007, p. 548). Being the minority, both racially and numerically can be unsettling. Similarly, my research aims to uncover reasons for the communing together of black students within educational institutions.

In an investigation into the self-segregation of Asian students in a British school, it was first believed by teachers that they were excluding themselves, but they were in fact marginalised (Crozier and Davies, 2008, p. 298). This reveals the observation that many make that ethnic minority pupils often form sub-groups, but it is not widely investigated why, and my study aims to do this. Whilst searching for literature, it became evident there were studies focusing on ethnic minorities and higher education, Asian pupils and self-segregation, but an emphasis on black students and this pattern of behaviour was absent.

In a study of British universities, it was found that working class participants had reconstructed and deconstructed identities. Some were able to create multiple versions of themselves, differing at home and university (Crozier et al, 2019, p. 934). This could be applied to black students, some of whom also have hybrid identities. Settles et al (2018, p. 64) would agree with this explaining that minority groups experience identity-related stressors including discrimination, prejudice and rejection resulting in feeling a need to conceal part of their identity. In an American based study investigating the self-segregation of racial groups on campus, some labelled the separation as problematic, but following an explanation, branded it understandable (Buttny, 1999, p. 263). The increase in knowledge resulting in an informed opinion being formulated is what I aim for readers to achieve following reading this research paper.

Self-segregation can be contested especially within the context of university, “interacting with a diverse group of students is still regarded as essential for a well-rounded university education” (Lewis, 2012, p. 271). Racial mixing reflects wider society, particularly the working world, which university prepares its students for. On the contrary, academics such as Buttny (1999, p. 248) would agree that although public, working life is integrated; private, social life is in fact racially segregated. This is reflected on campus which mirrors broader patterns of social segregation.

Intergroup relations theory comment that racial distancing is due to outsiders to the group being viewed as too different to influence interactions with them. The perceived difference can result in anxiety and uncertainty, creating another reason to avoid communication. This is increasingly likely if groups have a history of conflict (Buttny, 1999, p. 248). Black and non-black peoples have a racial history rooted in conflict therefore, student’s decisions to maintain distance could be rooted in unconscious attitudes and even socialisation.

Cultural preservation

A cohort of black students who regularly sit together can be branded a social group. This is defined as a compilation of individuals who view themselves as belonging to the same social category with common emotional experiences. It includes self-evaluation of members of the group, also providing social identification (Jost and Sidanius, 2004, p. 283). Social groups reaffirm identities and for a group of black students, their cultural and racial identity can be constructed and maintained through group inclusion. Moreover, the more secure and positive an individual feels in their own racial identity, the more time spent in the company of those of the same race (Walsh, 2001, p. 185). Furthermore, research has shown that there is a considerable link between black racial identity, self-esteem and preference for a same-race tutor (Walsh, 2001, p. 173). This reemphasises the need for representation and displays how it is wrongly “assumed that segregation or integrating only with members of the same group to which one belongs is problematic” (Strayhorn and Johnson, 2014, p. 386).

The psychologist, Tatum (2003, p. 214) found that children of colour are more likely to actively engage in exploring their race (Tatum, 2003 p. 214). This could manifest as seeking out individuals who are physically and culturally similar. Minority students report that it is easier to form friendships with a homogeneous group of the same race, because less social energy is used as there are no cultural differences to overcome (Lewis, 2012, p. 281). Therefore, it is not uncommon to see same race social groups on campus (Buttny, 1999, p. 247). Cose’s (1997, p. 88) study supports this with 65% of respondents stating it is ‘natural’ to spend the most time with one’s own racial group. BAME students attempt “to fuse their ‘habitus of origin’, trying to make the ‘space’ their own” (Crozier, 2019, p. 933), in effort to stay true to their identity whilst being a member of a predominately white institution.

According to the social support model, blacks at university need support of their own race to succeed in the environment (Buttny, 1999, p. 247). It forms relationships based upon a shared culture, which breeds understanding, comfort, and encouragement. Furthermore, it allows individuals to “shed their classroom mask” (Carter, 2007, p. 549), behaving in ways that are true to themselves which may be viewed negatively in conjunction with their race such as talking loudly. Black students are othered, but the margins provide relief and a way to express identity (Crozier and Davies, 2008, p. 298), which can also be done through cultural maintenance of the group. This is the “desire to maintain the group’s culture and identity” (Howarth et al, 2014, p. 84), due to the benefits it provides its members. It is vital as a researcher to highlight these groups, not only uncovering the reasons why they form but the subsequent impacts they have upon members. Additionally, for interracial interaction there is a “code of expectations and actions” that are unique and are also socially draining (Lewis, 2012, p. 273). In attempt to preserve social energy and maintain groups cultural identity these interactions are sometimes minimized.

Chapter 2: Methodology

Although the literature review explored a few reasons why black students chose to self-segregate, there were gaps in literature. It lacked a focus on Black British students and reasons why they self-segregate within higher education. This chapter explores the research process when investigating this, the method and techniques used, with reflexive justifications.

Qualitative research methods

Qualitative research methods are characterized by the identification, collection, analysis and understanding of social behaviour (Guest, 2014, p. 4). This is complementary to my study especially since it attempts to grasp the meanings of social reality to individuals (Flick, 2011, p. 2). However, it can be critiqued as running the risk of limiting its generalizability. Bryman (2016, p. 399) would agree with this as he states with this methodology, as participants are producing data left to the researcher to decide, it is restrictive as well as subjective. Researcher’s decide what is important and are heavily reliant upon their own ingenuity, thus making it challenging to replicate. A benefit however is it allows understanding of the subject itself rather than the researcher’s projection of a structure onto what is being studied (Flick, 2011, p. 13), thus creating a ‘factual’ insight into reality.

Theoretical underpinnings

Social constructionism is an ontological stance that implies social phenomena are produced through social interaction, and the researcher’s own perception of the world is a construction (Bryman, 2016, p. 29). This recognises that researcher’s play an active role (Denzin & Lincoln, 2008, p. 4) Furthermore, this ontological standpoint acknowledges that social realities are subject to change as a result of gained knowledge from the constructors, humans (Guba & Lincoln, 1994, p. 111). In this way, this theoretical framework recognises social phenomena and the study of them is inherently shaped by the constructors. In my study they are the participants, hence why I am interviewing them. They are the orchestrators of the reality which I observed as a black student and subsequently chose to investigate as a researcher.

Semi-structured interviews

I interviewed four, second year, University of Nottingham students using semi-structured interviews. The same set of questions were asked to all participants, although dependant on responses, follow-up questions were asked. Semi-structured interviews are a widely used qualitative method (Flick, 2011, p. 10) that is suitable for uncovering reasons for the self-segregation of black students because, they make participants reflect upon life which results in insight being gained (Flick, 2011, p. 7-10). This is due to the informal aspect which allows researchers to probe and develop a rapport, resulting in participants sharing experiences of life around them and understandings of themselves, which is undoubtedly, “the richest source of knowledge” (Wellington & Szcerbinski, 2007, p. 65). However, it is important to note that, for some researchers, there is a challenge in meeting strangers and having an open, honest conversation centred on a sensitive topic (Flick, 2011, p. 4). To combat this, once participants had shared their experience of first year and secondary school, I sometimes followed it up by briefly sharing my own experience. However, I made sure to keep the topic light to ensure not to lead participants or introduce bias. I would do this when I felt the conversation was becoming formal or one sided. This is the benefit of semi-structured interviews; it allows for flexibility. Questions can be asked in any order, allowing for a naturally flowing conversation (Cassell & Symon, 2004, p. 17) as well as probing being left to the researcher’s discretion.

During the interview, participants were presented with two images of two different lecture halls, each with a different racial makeup of students. In the first image there was a section occupied by a group of black, white and Asian students, labelled the ‘racially mixed’ group. There was also a section occupied by a group of white students and another by a group of black students. In image two the racially mixed group and white group remained the same. However, instead of there being a group of black students there was only one black student seated alone, with an unoccupied seat beside them. This is referred to within the findings and the images can be located in Appendix 2.

Semi-structured interviews succeed because they are an excellent way of gaining access to information (Maher and Dertadian, 2017, p. 170). What cannot be overlooked however, is the issue if the researcher’s acceptance of personal experience as factual for all who meet the specific focus of the study (Wellington and Szcerbinski, 2007, p. 65). Rather, information should be taken as personal narrative, especially if the response is emotionally charged, which is likely in my study which is rooted in the sensitive topic of race.

The role of the researcher

Failing to explore our position as a researcher inevitably results in the infiltration of class, race and gender bias into the work (Ochieng, 2010, p. 1729). This can be combatted through confirmability, whereby the researcher attempts to, “not overtly allow personal values and theoretical inclinations to sway the conduct of the research and the findings deriving from it” (Bryman, 2016, p. 386). This can only be achieved through reflexivity. Acknowledging your position, traits and subsequent impact is imperative. As a black British researcher of African descent interviewing black British African and Caribbean individuals, it is important to not be ignorant to the fact that my race plays its own role, having an impact that is beyond researcher control. However, this can be beneficial because, “matching researcher and participant race may increase comfort levels in the research and increase participation and disclosure” (Mizock et al, 2011, p. 3). Rich data can be produced, and good rapport established.

It is imperative for researcher and participant to have a “sense of connectedness” (Ochieng, 2010, p. 1729), likely in my study due to the shared Black British culture. Furthermore, in Mizock et al’s (2011, p. 2) study it was found that when both the researcher and participant were of the same race, communication was easier as the ‘burden’ to explain race was lifted.

How were participants found?

The gatekeeper method was used to collect my participants. This was due to me having limited contact with second year University of Nottingham students.

I required participants who had already experienced first year, so they were able to recount their experience, as asked in one of the interview questions. Furthermore, as a third year student, I did not want to risk the possibility of participants having prior relational contact with me. Due to these reasons I made sure all participants were in their second year of study, this also provided consistency. I asked an acquaintance to ask his peers who fit the criteria (second year, University of Nottingham, black African or Caribbean) if they would be happy to participate in the study.

However, a limitation of this method was placing reliance upon a third party to provide participants, which is such a fundamental aspect of this study. In this case, the initial participant acts as an “informal research participant” as they carry out the referral (Atkinson and Flint, 2001, p. 4). This selection bias impacts the validity and generalizability of the sample as there is not a randomised selection process but rather a dependence upon the subjective choice of the participant (Atkinson and Flint, 2001, p. 2). However, a benefit is that trust can easily be established as the individual was referred by an acquaintance therefore a level of confidence in the process is automatically granted.

Following my interview with the first participant, the snowballing effect took place. Participant one recommended a friend who then recommended another, and so on. This was the way in which my remaining three participants were found, through a “chain referral” (Atkinson and Flint, 2001, p. 1) among individuals within a similar target population. This can be interpreted as a drawback however as the participants were coming from a limited sample of people. However, the snowballing effect is well suited to this study as it is labelled a convenience method of sampling. It is used when there is difficulty in accessing participants (Naderifar et al, 2017, p. 2), which was the case in this study.

How was the data collected?

The data was audio recorded on a secure device that only I had access to. Following this, the data was transcribed verbatim by myself. This ensured confidentiality, a primary ethical procedure.

How was the data analysed?

The data was analysed thematically. This is the process of data reduction and analysis whereby data is categorized and reconstructed in ways that captures the key concepts within the data (Ayres, 2012, p. 2). Categories are primarily formed during data collection but also can be developed during the review of the literature. A benefit is that common themes are identified to form overarching concepts and make sense of data beyond the individual researcher’s understanding. It is up to the researcher to identify themes as this method requires interpretations from the researcher (Guest et al, 2014, p. 9).

Ethics

As the researcher it is imperative to reduce the likelihood of participants suffering risk, harm or disadvantage as a result of taking part (Flick, 2011, p. 6) in the study. The participant information sheet was handed to each participant at the beginning of the interview. It aided in reducing uncertainty, nerves and any other negative feeling associated with the interview process. Furthermore, each participant was required to sign a consent form prior to the interview taking place. This officially indicated that informed consent had been gained which is a fundamental aspect of ethical conduct within research (Crow et al, 2006, p. 83).

Emotional disturbance can occur when reactivating memories (Flick, 2011, p. 6), which occurred during my interview when participants were asked to recount secondary school and first year experiences. To minimize this and potential harm caused as a result of discussions surrounding race, immediately following the interview, debriefing questions were asked.

Confidentiality and anonymity are methods of protecting participants (Surmick, 2018, p. 1). A benefit is they both increase individual comfort surrounding participation (Coffelt, 2018, p. 3) as well as reducing the likelihood of harm. With confidentiality, “revealing the identity of study participants based on their request may empower them in certain circumstances because their voice can finally be heard” (Surmick, 2018, p. 1) however, I did not do this in my study as it was very small-scale. Students would have been easily identifiable, potentially subject to backlash and critique. This is due to the sensitive topic that had been discussed. Furthermore, during the interview’s, participants recounted personal memories. As the researcher I masked all information that made them identifiable, therefore assigning participants pseudonyms (Coffelt, 2018, p. 2), thus reducing vulnerability. Furthermore, I ensured that data could not traced to any participants.

Limitations

A key limitation of this study is that it is small scale and exclusive to the experience of Black British students at the University of Nottingham. As a consequence, its generalizability, validity and reliability is limited because it reflected such a limited number of Black British students experience of self-segregation whilst at university. Therefore, it cannot be used to reflect the experiences of students outside the sample group.

Furthermore, there was not an equal number of participants of African descent and those of Caribbean decent. There were three Africans and only one Caribbean persons. This serves as a limitation because ideally there would be an equal number of both so that this study could accurately reflect the experiences of Black British African and Caribbean students. However, the data is skewed towards the experiences of Black British students of African descent.

If I were to repeat this study I would use triangulation which is the use of more than one method in the study of social phenomena (Bryman, 2016, p. 386). Specifically, the methods of semi-structured interviews and observation would be used. This would allow me as the researcher to first-hand see patterns, make observational notes and form interview questions from these. This would result in two sets of data as well as one partially informing the other, thus resulting in rich data that is not completely dependent upon participants personal accounts, but my observation of reality.

Chapter 3: Findings and Discussion

The table below provides the participant’s key characteristics to provide context, a reference points and reduce potential confusion that may arise. I refer to individuals using their pseudonym, to maintain anonymity.

Pseudonym Gender Cultural background Degree subject

Participant 1 Michelle Female African French

Participant 2 Ethan Male African Business

Participant 3 Jamie Male Caribbean Economics

Participant 4 Tia Female African Sociology

My research into understanding ‘why are all the black people in the lecture hall sitting together?’ suggest relatedness to six main concepts, namely: Cultural values, familiarity, shared race equals shared experiences, discomfort, outsider and integration. These concepts will be thoroughly explored to understand this phenomenon. At this juncture, it is significant however to note that these concepts do not reflect the behaviours of all black students just my participants.

The structure of this section focuses on the main concepts which became evident during the interviews. Within these main concepts, additional notions were observed, and these are discussed within the subheadings.

Cultural values

Immediate

It was significant to note that on the first day of university, all four participants decided to sit next to fellow black students they had no prior knowledge of, highlighting the immediacy of this behaviour. Jamie exemplified this by stating, “I didn’t know anyone on my course, so I just went to sit on the row with the black student”. This also highlighted how minorities can use their hypervisibility, “the state of being extremely visible” (Buchanan & Settles, 2019, p. 2) to their advantage. Jamie used this to quickly recognise another he perceived as having the same racial identity as himself. Ethan demonstrated the same as he branded the group of black students as “my people”, choosing to sit with them for this reason. Tia not only supports this but provides insight into why this immediate racial separation is such a consistent pattern of behaviour. She comments, “you automatically go and sit next to the black people… you feel more comfortable because going to university is already an isolating experience”. She infers that there is solace in solidarity, which is particularly longed for upon entering a new and daunting environment.

Solidarity

“The black community has always been one that championed supporting each other and staying together… You’d always, sub-consciously gravitate towards your people because, I feel like it is innately conditioned in us to support our people”. Here, Jamie expressed how this solidarity goes beyond the lecture hall. It is cultural. Through primary socialisation (Vincent-Geslin and Ravalet, 2015, p. 60) black individuals are taught to stick together and support one another, leading them to inevitably bring this value with them into higher education. However, this behaviour can be critiqued as separatism (Vieria, 1969, p. 1618) which has detrimental impacts. After trying to develop friendships with White and Asian students, one participant found that, “there was nothing wrong with them… it’s just my stubbornness causing me to subconsciously gravitate towards black people and be a bit closed minded”. A separation between him and students of other races was evident, which exemplified how solidarity as a cultural value can cause individuals to restrict themselves, prioritising black kinship. Vera and Imani (1996, p. 4) support this, claiming the issues students of colour face are the result of problems within their cultural community, not the institution. They also agree that it is primarily the value of “sticking together” that leads to self-segregation and possible close mindedness towards out-group members.

In the instances where black people do occupy this space, many feel isolated and detached. This is re-emphasised by the lack of BAME lecturers. In 2012-13 there were 15,200 white lecturers in comparison to a mere 85 black lecturers (Sian, 2017, p. 1). This huge racial disparity contributes to black students feeling as if they do not belong in this environment. For Tia, she saw this as a key reason why she stuck with black people and commented that white students probably did not notice the lack of black lecturers. She stated that she looks, “at the board in the sociology department, and I always look how many black people there are – there’s two… they’ll never understand how it feels to never be represented”. Here, Tia’s desire for others of the same racial identity is evident and supports Shelby’s (2002, p. 232) claim that black people should unite, as they have a distinct identity, so should work together to help overcome shared struggles. She believed that this is only achieved through black solidarity.

Three of the participants had a ‘black friendship group’ in secondary school, that they did not consider to be their primary friendship group. It was a collection of black students within their year group. Jamie recalled that for this group, “you just come together when you want to and talk about your culture… we were friends because we were black (laughs) and the minority”. This gives credence to the idea that for black students these groups are normative, beneficial and function to reinforce social identity, as well as a sense of belonging. Michelle was privately educated in a class with four white students and the only black person in her educational environment. Despite this, or perhaps because of this, “black people sticking together” can be interpreted as highly important to her as she mentioned the solidarity of black people on eleven separate occasions throughout the thirty-minute interview.

Familiarity

Security and comfort

In relation to the two images presented to participants, Jamie stated that he would sit with the black student(s) because, he “would probably feel the most comfortable there”. He explained that, “sometimes if you’re in an area with so many white people and you’re the only minority, you feel like you’re being stared at”. He alluded to feeling secluded and 'othered’, resulting in hypervisibility and increased self-consciousness. Carter (2007, p. 548) claims that same race groups are established to cope with racial hypervisibility. They provide, “comfort amongst black people because they also understand” the unique experience of trying to navigate through a predominately white institution as a black student. Furthermore, this can lead to social distance being “established and maintained” as identified through Jensen’s (2011, p. 65) definition of othering.

Tia narrates some of her experience explaining, “you then go into this lecture hall, you see a sea of white faces and it’s just like ‘Oh my God how do I fit in here?’ So, you go and sit among the black people because it is your way of making yourself feel comfortable. It’s your way of coping”. This participant highlights the initial feeling of not belonging and thus looking to find comfort in what she sees as familiar.

. The desire to fit in is human nature but when the ability to do so is compromised, feelings of isolation and exclusion arise. This can be combatted through more diverse representation and increased levels of integration. However, in the case of students not racially integrating, Jamie comments that “some people are not trying to make an effort”. This is a valid viewpoint considering, black pupils sit with fellow blacks out of comfort and white students sit together because “they have the opportunity to do so” (Strayhorn & Johnson, 2014, p. 394) as the majority. This reinforces feelings of discomfort that manifests into segregation. This can only be combatted through increased diversity in these spaces and encouraged integration, leading to more cross-racial interaction (Strayhorn & Johnson, 2014, p. 394). As such, it would be more likely that black students would not feel the need to immediately seek out other black students to have a sense of comfort and security in lectures.

During the interview, for both image scenarios, three out of four of my participants chose the seat next to the black student(s). Ethan, however, did not choose to sit among the group of black students. He explained that if they appeared to be having a flowing conversation, he would assume they were a friendship group and therefore would not want to impose. He was averse to sitting with the white students as he did not see himself fitting into this group because, “it is uncommon for me to be in a group of just white people because my parents, their friends and my own, were all a mixture of different ethnic minority groups”. In this way, we see Ethan falling into what feels familiar to him, as he decided to sit among the racially mixed group of students. He grew up in an area that was very “ethnically diverse”, therefore the image of a racially mixed body of people was not unusual to him. It provided a sense of comfort. This displayed how a sense of security and belonging is not only granted through racial similarities, but also grounded in upbringing and social environment.

Identity

Settles et al (2018, p. 64) express that for an individual belonging to a minority group at university, concealing part of your identity is not unusual. Whilst interviewing Ethan, he revealed that black students change their identity when around White and Asian students. He explained that, “you feel the need, because of the preconceived idea of black people… some people may want to debunk the stereotype”. Jamie can be used to build upon this theory as he recounted observing a difference in black students’ behaviour when interacting with non-black peers, in comparison to fellow black students. He claimed this change was intentional, to separate themselves from stereotypes such as, “black people are noisy”. This is not an uncommon thought with Boakye (2019, p. 227) stating that his ‘first career’ is positively representing black people in settings where he is the only black person. The fear of being stereotyped by other races is what often leads to black people taking these actions. This is supported by Ethan’s claim that individuals, “have to act in a certain way that may not be true to themselves, just to show other races that this is not what black people are like”. This exemplifies how, in attempt to discredit stereotypes, black individuals conceal part of their identity when around other racial groups.

Self-segregated groups, however, reaffirms an individual’s identity. Ethan states that they, “can also help enrich your culture”, ultimately providing a deeper understanding of it and thus increase one’s sense of personal identity. Black students are more likely to explore their race and these groups provide the space and opportunity for this to occur (Carter, 2007, p. 542). By building kinship with those who identify in the same way, Ethan commented that it caused him to learn more about himself. Education can occur in a variety of ways, including communication with others (Abinum, 1979, p. 163) this is an example of that. This is especially beneficial to the Black British diaspora, whose identity is rooted in two (or more) nations and can often feel as if they do not belong. “Black people in Britain have been consistently portrayed as outside the realm of the national culture, and moreover, incompatible with it” (Alexander, 1996, p. 4), thus being perceived as an ‘other’. Hammond (2019, p. 3) would agree that these groups, not only to enhance understanding of oneself, but are also strategically adopted by students to “establish a sense of belonging”.

Inevitably the separation within lectures impacts the racial makeup of friendship groups. To this point Tia recounts that she would not say she had many close friends in university that are not black. This is an interesting remark because during secondary school, most of Tia’s friends were white. Clearly there had been a shift, which was rooted in belonging. During sixth form, she had a negative racial experience, which will be explored later in the discussion. This experience made her aware that, “a lot of these groups have very rampant anti-blackness within their communities” and caused her to want to maintain distance between herself and non-black communities. As Tia got older, she had an increased awareness of her racial identity as a Black British individual. This, plus her consciousness of other’s negative perception of her racial identity, caused Tia to want to explore this identity further.

Shared race equals shared experiences

Deeper friendship because of common race

Michelle made it clear that if the group of black students she sat with were not present, she would just sit on her own. This is a testament to the lack of comfortability and weaker friendships formed with those outside her self-segregated group. My participant explained that she did have white friends on her course, however they were “not friends that I would communicate with outside of university”. This inferred that her relationships with these white peers were ones of convenience, in comparison to her black peers whom she voluntarily spent time with outside of her course. This reemphasised the deeper, more genuine nature of these kinships. A group of Black British students are a collection of individuals who share an element of experience. This, plus consistently sitting together in lectures, inevitably caused stronger friendships to form. Howarth et al (2014, p. 83) defined cultural identity as the coming together of life history and representations of others. She would concur that recognising your personal identity in others would produce feelings of belonging and comfort. For black people, this recognition of personal identity is commonly assumed by skin colour (Gillborn, 2005, p. 488) thus often becoming the foundations for a deep kinship.

This experience however, is not uniform, with Jamie offering a different perspective. He developed better friendships with those who sat around him in the lecture hall. He also commented that these people “happened to be black”. Jamie claimed that sitting with black students and forming kinships with them was purely coincidental, inferring that good friendships within lectures are formed with those whom one is consistently sat around, regardless of race. From my participant’s comment, it can be concluded that if he sat with non-black students, the quality of friendships would remain the same as when sat with his black peers. For Jamie, common race does not seem to be a compelling factor in building deeper friendships, in contrast to Michelle where the impact appears to be significant.

Common understanding of experience

There are a multitude of reasons for why black students often choose to sit with other blacks, but for Tia, one is simply because, “they understand”. She expressed that white students will never understand what it is to be black and the impact it has on how you are treated. She stated that a black person is more likely to understand the effects of such experiences. My participant stated that she did not want to explain any aspect of this to outgroup members because she does not, “have the time or the interest”. Among non-black peoples there is a general understanding, to a certain extent, of what it means to be Black British and the implications of this. The impact of the media, in conjunction with non-black people having kinships with black people grants a certain level of understanding. However, this is not standardized, as the level of understanding varies depending on personal circumstance and environment. The result of this is general gaps in knowledge about the Black British experience. Subsequently, non-black individuals may understandably have questions, but this is the exact situation Tia expressed she wanted to avoid. The fact that she did not have to explain her reality is one of the key factors that influenced her decision to sit with the black students. She was surrounded by those with a common understanding of her experience, stemming from a shared race.

Whilst Tia did not wish to explain the black experience to others, Jamie felt that white people do not have a personal desire to learn about minorities anyway. He conveyed that because Britain is predominately white, he believes that white individuals do not feel the need to learn about their black or Asian counterparts and, “for that reason I don’t think the self-segregation will stop”. He explained, because of the gap he perceived in white people’s knowledge of blacks, black people will continue to physically disassociate themselves from the white majority. This supports (Stanfield, 1991) who agrees that for some black pupils, the out-group appears too different to interact with. This again points to a knowledge gap of the black experience existing between black and non-black groups. The response from my participants indicates that rather than addressing this gap, it is easier to gravitate towards those that already understand their experience.

Outsider

Blacks are not ‘expected’ to occupy the university space for a plethora of reasons. This includes a disproportionate amount of black people, in comparison to the black population, having lower income “working class” jobs (Bhambra, 2017) Research found that between 2012 and 2018, Black British employees of Caribbean or African descent earned on average, five to ten percent less than their White British counterparts (Office for national statistics, This results in lower economic and cultural capital, which in turn reduces the likelihood of obtaining a university level education as cultural capital is acquired through “a network of connections” (Bourdieu, 1986, p. 19) that improves social and financial status. This contributes to the lack of expectation for black individuals to be in higher education and occupy the university space.

Intra-racial labels

The concept of ‘Black’ is a social construct (Howarth, 2014, p. 83) and Ethan highlighted this when commented that there is a, “stigma behind being black where you have to act in a certain way to be black”. He gave the example of how speaking standard English is sometimes critiqued, questioned and labelled as “speaking white”. For young, black people, no infiltration of slang into their speech can cause their blackness to be called into question. If a black individual does not fit into the socially constructed framework then their black identity can be denied in ways, including being assigned insulting labels such as ‘bounty’ (Boakye, 2019, p. 302). This highlights how the concept of not being black enough can culminate in one being marginalized within their own community. This can cause damage to a black individual’s perception of their own identity. For Crozier and Davies (2008, p. 298) this would be a double marginalization. This can cause a feeling of discomfort around this cohort of people and emphasises how self-segregating groups, black communities within themselves, can be problematic in their own way.

Ethan continues to shine light on intra-racial complexities when commenting that, “with a group of black people once you get over the whole ‘you’re not black enough’ thing or people judging you on your blackness, you can definitely be yourself because you feel comfortable around people because they are the same as you”. He highlights feelings of not belonging as a black person within the black community, a topic that is not widely discussed in literature. It is a neglected area within sociology that this research addresses.

To perceive some people as black on the outside and white on the inside seems to be deeply ingrained within black culture, as accentuated by the interview with Tia. During the interview, Tia personally acknowledged somebody in this way, not just objectively commenting on a pattern she had observed. She described encountering another black person within a PWI, starting a dialogue with them, then concluding that she was “still the only black person” because that individual “acts white”. For those who uphold black characteristics, deemed acceptable by same-race members, there seems to be a snubbing of those who do not. It is important to note that Ethan identified this as something black pupils acknowledge but move past. So, it can be deduced that this labelling results in a recognition of difference, not denial of membership.

Moreover, Shahid (2018) would agree that self-segregating groups grant black individuals with a unique freedom to be their true selves. In line with this thought, Tia claims that around non-black people, “there are certain jokes you don’t make, there’s certain things you don’t say”. This infers that for outsiders there are culturally specific dialogue that they do not understand, as well as things that are acceptable within this group, but not outside it. Tia’s explanation of the n word can be used as an example of this. She explained that although she does not personally use it, she does not care if a fellow black person uses the term, because they are “allowed to say it”. Conversely, she proclaimed that she will “be damned if I say it in front of a white person, they think that gives them a pass to say it in front of me”. Here, we can clearly see two completely different attitudes towards the use of this racial slur. Tia’s belief in censoring herself when around non-black people is a testament to the complexities of intercultural communication (Jackson, 2012, p. 192). When in a group consisting entirely of black people, these constraints are not present, highlighting one way in which these groups produce comfortability for its members. It allows individuals to be their true, unfiltered selves.

Discomfort

Representation

Tia studied sociology and explained that, although she was aware of the Eurocentric foundation on which university was built upon, she expected more diversity within her specific curriculum. “Sociology is supposed to be a ‘woke’ subject and then you’re taught it and you’re just like it’s not. It’s very white”. Woke is an American political term defined as an awareness of societal injustices, particularly racism. Here, my participant demonstrated her dismay at the lack of representation. She explained that very few modules were taught that encompassed black individuals, their experiences, or their literature. On the occasions when this did occur, she explained it was in close proximity to struggle, perpetuating the stereotype that the black experience is grounded in suffering. Suffering is an aspect of black history but can also evoke feelings of discomfort for black students seated among a white majority. To help safeguard against this feeling, individuals may choose to sit in self-segregating groups as depicted in the social support model. In this model, same-race individuals need these groupings to succeed at university (Buttny, 1999, p. 247) because they involuntarily provide emotional support. Not only this, but the groups also develop the shared culture that provides the representation that some black students, such as Tia, longed for within this environment.

Self-segregation as the result of racism and stereotyping

The persistent use of lexis with racial undertones by non-black people continues to elicit negative emotions among black individuals. It influences black people’s lives including impacting decisions, such as choosing where to sit in a lecture hall. For Michelle and Tia, when asked to recount their secondary school experience, most race-related memories were attached to distress, anxiety and sadness, mirroring what Tatum (2017, p. 33) also found in her research. For Michelle particularly, she recalled hearing her white peers saying the n word and describing other black girls using socially derogatory terms such as ‘ratchet’ and ‘ghetto’. Despite contemporary society’s attempt to reclaim and rebrand the n word, many black people do not appreciate its use especially from non-black people. It is a racial slur with inextricable links to suffering, trauma and subordination. Michelle commented that, “because of that experience and some of the ignorance… now I’ve come to university, if I can avoid this behaviour I will”. Here, we see how her experience of racial slurs and stereotypical labelling shaped her decision-making. A conscious effort was made to be with fellow black students, to control the types of race-related encounters she had. She recognised that in the new university environment she had the power to physically remove herself from non-black people, thus reducing the likelihood of these negative racial experiences.

Questions surround “whether strong in-group identification leads to stigmatization, or instead acts as a protective factor against racism” (Walsh, 2001, p. 173)”. For Michelle it functioned as the latter. For Tia and Jamie however, belonging to a ‘black group’ resulted in negative experiences. When Tia moved into sixth form, her primary friendship group became a group of black girls. A few white girls would regularly exclaim at the group, “you’re being so loud”. Tia conveyed that, “when the white group would shout, no one would say anything and it’s like – you’re projecting all of these micro-aggressions onto us”. My participant acknowledged the racial undertones this reoccurring encounter had. This experience is rooted in discrimination and the stereotype of black people being perceived as loud in comparison to the white, British norm (Bhopal and Jackson, 2012, p. 14).

Likewise, Jamie had a similar experience of stereotyping that caused a decreased desire to integrate with non-black people in the university setting. He expressed that it was widely known that he belonged to the ‘black group’ on the course, largely because all the black people consistently sat together. During a conversation with a white course mate, he disclosed what part of London he was from. This comment with met with the response, “isn’t the crime in that area bad”. My participant believed this was only mentioned because, during his experience of conversing with white students on his course, many had tried to infiltrate topics associated with black people into the conversation. This included mentioning that they listened to music by a black artist or integrating more slang into their dialect. Jamie believed the comment was made in an ignorant attempt, by the white individual, to relate to him because he is black and, “they associate crime with black people”. The racist inference of this comment gave my participant a glance into the stereotypical perceptions some people have of blacks. This experience caused Jamie to want to stick with the black people to avoid the discomfort felt in these scenarios, thus causing further self-segregation.

Integration

Self-segregation limits you

When asked about diversity, Jamie highlighted its importance because university is also about placing yourself in uncomfortable environments in preparation for the workplace. He explained that black students sitting away from their fellow black peers can be beneficial, although not always necessary. The significance of this is highlighted by Lewis (2012, p. 271) who stated that the relations formed at university have a substantial impact upon your life afterwards. She claimed a benefit of integrating at university is creating interracial networks, especially helping ethnic minorities gain access to jobs and general information that could produce “significant economic advancement”. These are opportunities that they may have otherwise not been exposed to. Where a black individual exclusively communes with ‘the black group(s)’, Jamie and Lewis would both agree that this leaves one ill-prepared for the working world. On the contrary, critical race theorists (Cole, 2012) would critique this, claiming that the same racial issues present in the education system are present in the working world. This is because racial inequality is such a deep-rooted problem, it permeates all aspects of society. Bhopal and Jackson’s (2013, p. 14) study of black colleagues struggling to fit in with the white majority, supports this view by creating parallels between the black experience at university and that of working life.

Carter (2007, p. 553) claimed that self-segregated groups, where oppressive actions are not present, are imperative. Given Michelle’s past negative racial experiences, this is a stance she would agree with. Michelle praised the group for providing “security”, however critiqued it because “it puts you in a box”, highlighting the limitations self-segregating groups can have on black students. Jamie supported this when he explained that he, an individual who belonged to a racially diverse friendship group at school, was much more accepting of others in comparison to his black friends who had only belonged to groups of black people. Here, the disadvantage is evident. Tolerance and understanding of other races are the outcome of racial integration. Ethan’s experience can be used to emphasize this point further. In the hypothetical scenario outlined the ‘security and comfort’ sub-section, he was the only the participant who chose the seat among the racially mixed group, when there was a seat available next to the black student(s). He had also done this a generous amount of times whilst at university and because of this feels as if he can put himself in any environment, of different racial makeups, and still feel comfortable. This is valuable because it creates an acceptance of those from other races as well as help, “to begin to understand why they are the way they are, rather than what they are on the surface”. Here, Ethan highlights how integration produces understanding by allowing people to deepen their knowledge of different races. This can lead to the reduction of stereotyping, tension, and discomfort between racially different groups of people.

Interestingly, all four of my participants saw diversity at university as a positive. Jamie built upon this, claiming that he longed for more of it particularly within lectures but does not see how this will become a reality. This feeling is in line with some of Buttny’s (1999, p. 263) participants who expressed a desire for more integration but were unaware of how to achieve it.

Conclusion

The research carried out uncovered reasons why Black British students self-segregate within university. This is primarily due to five concepts. These are, cultural values, familiarity, shared race equals shared experiences, feeling like an outsider and discomfort. Integration was also present in the previous chapter however, functioned to provide analytical insight, rather than a direct answer to the research question.

Following the interviews, it emerged one of the key factors determining self-segregation was solidarity. This cultural value is deeply ingrained within members of this community and has been shown to unconsciously inform decision making. This encompassed choosing where to sit in a lecture hall. As made evident through the discussion of black friendship groups, solidarity is not a phenomenon of higher education, it does however, breed familiarity. It emerged from the data that this is another reason for self-segregation. Within the new and daunting university environment, black students long for a sense of security and being around fellow blacks provided this. Data revealed that many black students felt on the margins of belonging whilst at university, interestingly intra-racial labelling (bounty) can elicit these same emotions.

Another reason for self-segregation is the perceived gap in white people’s knowledge about being Black British. Being aware of perceived stereotypes often leads to black people behaving in ways that are not representative to themselves attempting to debunk the negative perceptions. This is socially draining (Lewis, 2012, p. 287), limiting the liberty individuals have be their true selves. Self-segregating groups provide this element of freedom, as well as the representation that many black individuals long for within PWIs. Furthermore, historical negative experiences, (racial slurs) influence decision making such limited contact with non-black people, in an attempt to avoid discomfort and stereotypes.

The primary purpose and aims of this study were met, answered the research question and provided insight into self-segregation. My investigation unearthed a dearth in literature surrounding self-segregation of Black British university students and my study attempts to bridge this gap and contribute to knowledge in this field. A limitation of my study is the lack of representativeness however in a repeat study, I would expand my research covering other academic years, degree subjects and increase the number of participants. This would result in increased representativeness and generalisability, making findings more reliable.

The lack of literature in this area infers that this research area has been deemed unworthy of investigation, overlooked and is not of interest to academics. As a black sociologist, this area is of personal interest to me, proving to be beneficial as it stopped the silence surrounding, allowing this matter to be academically seen (Richardson, 2017, p. 32). This study is relevant to society because not only does it explain an element of the Black British university experience, it also sheds light on the need for more BAME lecturers. This issue was highlighted, bringing increased awareness towards the need for change. As identified in the study, this will profit black students, providing them with comfortability and subsequent empowerment (Hammond et al, 2019, p. 9).

References

Abinum, J. (1979) ‘Is freedom an aim of education?’, The journal of educational thought, Vol. 3, P. 163-166

Alexander, C. (1996) ‘The art of being black’, United Kingdom: OUP Oxford

Asari et al (2008) ‘British national identity and the dilemmas of multiculturalism’, Nationalism and ethnic politics, Vol. 14, No. 1, p. 1-25

Atkinson, R. and Flint, J. (2001) ‘Accessing hidden and hard to reach populations: Snowball research strategies’, Social research update, Vol. 33, p. 1-4

Ayres, L. (2012) The SAGE Encyclopaedia of Qualitative Research Methods, Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications

Baubock, R. and Faist, T. (2010) Diaspora and Transnationalism: concepts, theories and methods, Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press

Bhambra, G. (2017) ‘Brexit, Trump and methodological whiteness: on the recognition of race and class’, The British Journal of Sociology, Vol. 68, No. 1, p. 15-221

Bhopal and Jackson (2013) ‘The experiences of black and minority ethnic academics: Multiple identities and career progression’ Available at https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/350967/1/__soton.ac.uk_ude_personalfiles_users_kb4_mydocuments_Diversity%2520research_Final%2520report%2520April%25202013_Final%2520Report%25208July%25202013_Research%2520Report%2520The%2520Experiences%2520of%2520Black%2520and%2520Minority%2520Ethnic%2520Academics.pdf [Accessed 29 October 2019]

Bhopal, K. and Jackson, J. (2013) ‘The experiences of black and minority ethnic academics: Multiple identities and career progression’ Available at https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/350967/1/__soton.ac.uk_ude_personalfiles_users_kb4_mydocuments_Diversity%2520research_Final%2520report%2520April%25202013_Final%2520Report%25208July%25202013_Research%2520Report%2520The%2520Experiences%2520of%2520Black%2520and%2520Minority%2520Ethnic%2520Academics.pdf [Accessed 29 October 2019]

Boakye, J. (2019) Black-listed, London: Dialogue Books

Bourdieu (1986) ‘The forms of capital’ in Rochardson, J. (1986) Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education, United States: Greenword, p. 17-20

Brug, P. and Oliver, T. (2010) ‘To go or not to go: access and barriers to ethnic minority participation in higher education within the United Kingdom’ in Peterson, P. et al (Ed. 3), Vol. 8, Netherlands: Elsevier Science, p. 673-678

Bryman, A. (2016), Social research methods, Ed. 5, Oxford: Oxford University Press

Buchanan, N. and Settles, I. (2019) ‘Managing (in)visibility and hypervisibility in the workplace’, Journal of vocational behaviour, Vol. 113, p. 1-3

Buttny, R. (1999) ‘Discursive constructions of racial boundaries and self-segregation on campus’, Journal of Language and Social Psychology, Vol. 18, No. 3, p. 247-263

Carter, D. (2007) ‘Why the black kids sit together at the stairs: The role of identity-affirming counter spaces in a predominantly white high school’, The journal of negro education, Vol. 76, p. 542-553

Cassell, C. and Symon. G (2004), Essential guide to qualitative methods in organizational research, London: SAGE Publications

Coffelt, T. (2018) ‘Confidentiality and anonymity of participants’, The SAGE encyclopaedia of communication research methods, Vol. 1, p. 2-3

Cole, M. (2009) ‘The color-line and the class struggle: A Marxist response to critical race theory in education as it arrives in the United Kingdom’, Power and education, Vol. 1, No. 1, United Kingdom: Routledge Taylor and Francis Group

Cole, M. (2012) ‘Critical race theory in education, Marxism and abstract racial domination’, British journal of sociology of education, Vol. 33, No. 2, p. 167-183

Cose, E. (1997) Color-blind: Seeing beyond race in a race-obsessed world, United States: Harper Perennial

Cowan, G. (2005) ‘Interracial interactions at racially diverse university campuses’, The journal of social psychology, Vol. 145, p. 49-62

Crow et al (2006) ‘Research ethics and data equality: The implications of informed consent’, International journal of social research methodology, Vol. 9, No. 2, p. 83

Crozier, G. and Davies, J. (2008) ‘The trouble is they don’t mix: self-segregation or enforced exclusion?’, Race ethnicity and education, Vol. 11, No. 3, p. 285-298

Crozier, G. et al (2019) ‘Working the Borderlands: working-class students constructing hybrid identities and asserting their place in higher education’, British journal of sociology of education, Vol. 40, Issue 7, p. 933-934

Delgado, R. and Stefancic, J. (2001) Critical race theory, Ed. 2, New York: New York University Press

Denzin, N.K and Lincoln, Y. (2008), The landscape of qualitative research: theories and issues, Ed. 2, London: SAGE Publications

Feagin et al. (1996) ‘The agony of education: Black students at white colleges and universities, New York: Routledge

Flick, U. (2011) ‘What is qualitative research?’, Designing qualitative research, Vol. 4, P. 2-13

Gillborn, D. (1990) Race ethnicity and education, London: Unwin Hyman Ltd.

Gillborn, D. (2005) ‘Education policy as an act of white supremacy: whiteness, critical race theory and education reform’, Journal of Education policy, Vol. 20, No. 4, United Kingdom: Routledge Taylor and Francis Group

Guba, E. and Lincoln, Y. (1994) ‘Competing paradigms in qualitative research’, Handbook of qualitative research, Vol. 1, p. 108-115

Guest, G. et al. (2014) ‘Introduction to applied thematic analysis’, Applied thematic analysis, Vol. 1, p. 4-14

Hammond, J. et al. (2019) ‘Working hard to belong: a qualitative study exploring students from black, Asian and minority ethnic backgrounds experiences of pre-registration physiotherapy education’, BMC Medical Education, Vol. 19, Issue 1, p. 2-9

Howarth, C. et al. (2014) ‘It’s only other people who make me feel black: Acculturation, identity and agency in a multicultural community’, Policy psychology, Vol. 35, No. 1, p. 81-84

Jackson, J. (2012) The Routledge handbook of language and intercultural communication, United Kingdom: Routledge

Jensen, S. (2011) ‘Othering, identity formation and agency’, Qualitative studies, Vol. 2, No. 2, p. 1-60

Jost, J. and Sidanius, J. (2004) Political psychology, United Kingdom: Routledge

Lewis, V. (2012) ‘Social energy and racial segregation in the university context’, Social science quarterly, Vol. 93, No. 1, p. 270-288

Maher, L. and Dertadian, G. (2017), Qualitative research, Society for the study of addiction, Vol. 1, p. 170

Mizock, L. et al. (2011) ‘Researcher interjecting in qualitative race research’, Qualitative social research, Vol. 12, No. 2, p. 1-2

Naderifar, M. et al. (2017) ‘Snowball sampling: A purposeful method of sampling in qualitative research’, Strides in development of medical education, Vol. 1, p. 1-2

Ochieng, B. (2010), ‘”You know what I mean:” The ethical and methodological dilemmas and challenges for black researchers interviewing black families’, Qualitative health research, Vol. 20, No. 12, p. 1725-1734

Office for National Statistics (2019) ‘Ethnicity pay gaps in Great Britain: 2018’ Available at [https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/earningsandworkinghours/articles/ethnicitypaygapsingreatbritain/2018#introduction] Accessed 30 April 2020

Richardson, J. (2015) ‘The under-attainment of ethnic minority students in UK higher education: what we know and what we don’t know’, Journal of further and higher education, Vol. 39, No. 2, P. 278-291

Richardson, J. (2017) ‘Can we talk about race? An interview Beverly Daniel Tatum’, Phi Delta Kappan, Vol. 99, No. 3, p. 31-35

Settles, I. (2018) ‘Scrutinized but not recognised: (In)visibility and hypervisibility experiences of faculty of color, Journal of vocational behaviour, Vol. 113, p. 63-72

Shahid, N. et al. (2018) ‘Lift every voice: Exploring the stressors and coping mechanisms of black college women attending predominately white institutions’, Journal of black psychology, Vol. 44, p. 3-5

Shelby, T. (2002) ‘Foundations of black solidarity: Collective identity or common oppression?’, Ethics, Vol. 112, No. 2, p. 230-233

Sian, K. (2017) ‘Being black in a white world: Understanding racism in British universities’, Journal on collective identity research, Vol. 2, p. 1-10

Stanfield, J. (1991) Understanding everyday racism: an interdisciplinary theory, Ed. 2, London: SAGE Publications

Strayhorn, T. and Johnson, R. (2014) ‘Why are all the white students sitting together in college?’, The journal of negro education, Vol. 83, No. 3, p. 385-395

Surmick, A. (2018) ‘Confidentiality in qualitative research involving vulnerable participants: Researchers’ perspective’, Qualitative social research, Vol. 19, No. 3, p. 1

Tajfel, H. (1970) ‘Experiments in intergroup discrimination’, Experiments in intergroup discrimination, Vol. 223, No. 5, p. 96-98

Tajfel, H. (1981) ‘Human groups and social categories’, Studies in social psychology, Vol. 1, p. 272-274

Tatum, B. (2003), Why are all the black kids sitting together in the cafeteria, America: Basic books

Tatum, B. (2017) Why are all the black kids sitting together in the cafeteria?, Ed. 2, United States: Basic Books

Vera, J. & Imani, N. (1996) The agony of education, New York: Routledge

Vieria, N. (1969) ‘Racial imbalance, black separatism, and permissible classification by race’, Michigan Law Review, Vol. 67, No. 8, p. 1553-1629

Vincent-Geslin, S. and Ravalet, E. (2015) ‘Socialisation to high mobility?’ in Viry, G. and Kaufmann, V., High mobility in Europe, London: Palgrave Macmillan, p. 59-82

Walsh, J. (2001) ‘The multidimensional inventory of black identity: A validation study in a British sample’, Journal of black psychology, Vol. 27, No. 2, p. 173-185

Warmington, P. (2012) ‘A tradition in ceaseless motion: critical race theory and black British intellectual spaces’, Race ethnicity and education, Vol. 15, No. 1, United Kingdom: Routledge Taylor and Francis Group

Wellington, J. and Szczerbinski M. (2007), Research methods for the social sciences, London: Bloomsbury Publishing PLC.

Appendices

Appendix 1: Interview questions and areas of focus

1. Introduce the dissertation and discuss the research question

a) Discuss my personal experience of the situation with the participant

b) Is this something you have noticed? Or are you aware that this happens?

c) Do you have personal experience with this and is it done intentionally or not?

d) Discuss reasons behind this

2. Present images of two lecture halls with different racial layouts (see Appendix 2)

3. For each of the images, discuss with participants:

a) Who do you feel comfortable sitting next to?

b) Talk me through your thoughts when deciding where to sit

c) Is the decision influenced by race?

4. Why do you think self-segregation of black students in lectures happens? (General discussion)

5. What is the ethnic makeup of students you sit with?

6. Tell me about your secondary school experience including details on:

a) The racial makeup of your school

b) The racial makeup of your friendship group – did this change as you got older? (Aim to uncover if this is an ongoing pattern or behaviour specific to higher education)

7. In first year, who did you initially sit with? Do you still sit with these people? Are you more likely to sit next to someone purely based on their race in first year – don’t know them)

8. Do you think it is important to have a racially diverse group of peers?

a) Why? Do you think others think this way as well?

b) Has anyone ever told you this? (parents/friends)

9. Do you think it important, who sits with who in lectures?

a) Does it matter if black students sit together?

b) Why?

Debriefing questions

1. How did you find the interview?

2. Is there anything you would like to discuss further?

3. Is there anything you would like me to clarify?

Appendix 2: Lecture Hall Images

Image 1: 1 black group, 1 racially mixed group, 1 white group

Image 2: 1 black student, 1 racially mixed group, 1 white group

Appendix 3: Participant Information Sheet

Participant Information Sheet

Date:

Title of Study: Why are all the black people in the lecture hall sitting together?

Name of Researcher(s): Naomi Dadzie

I would like to invite you to take part in our research study. Before you decide I would like you to understand why the research is being done and what it would involve for you. I will go through the information sheet with you and answer any questions you have. Talk to others about the study if you wish. Ask me if there is anything that is not clear.

What is the purpose of the study?

The purpose of the study is to uncover reasons for the self-segregation of black students at university and why it is so common.

This study aims to gain insight (through literature and interviews) into the pattern of the tendency of black students to sit together in a lecture, if not in one big group then in a few small clusters. This study investigates reasons for this and discusses wider issues such as race within higher education.

Why have I been invited?

You are being invited to take part because you are a Black British second year university student (male/female). I am inviting 4 participants like you to take part.

Do I have to take part?

It is up to you to decide whether or not to take part. If you do decide to take part you will be given this information sheet to keep and be asked to sign a consent form. If you decide to take part you are still free to withdraw at any time and without giving a reason. This would not affect your legal rights.

What will happen to me if I take part?

You will be expected to take part in an interview on University Park Campus lasting no more than 1 hour. Following this you will be given a debriefing session to recap the interview and ensure minimal emotional harm is caused.

Expenses and payments

Travel expenses will not be covered, and participants will not be paid an allowance to participate in the study.

What are the possible disadvantages and risks of taking part?

Race and concepts related to it such as discrimination will be discussed in the interview. This may trigger emotional responses for some participants. Due to this it is important to make you aware of the potential upset this may cause.

To reduce the likelihood of this occurring a debriefing session will be held immediately after the interview to ensure minimal emotional distress has occurred as a result of the interview.

What are the possible benefits of taking part?

I cannot promise the study will help you but the information but you may find it interesting to share your experience of either observing or being a participant in the self-segregation of black students in lectures.

The primary benefit to me as a researcher is the data you provide will be used in my dissertation.

What if there is a problem?

If you have a concern about any aspect of this study, you should ask to speak to the researchers who will do their best to answer your questions. If you remain unhappy and wish to complain formally, you can do this by contacting the School Research Ethics Officer. All contact details are given at the end of this information sheet.

Will my taking part in the study be kept confidential?

We will follow ethical and legal practice and all information about you will be handled in confidence.

If you join the study, the data collected for the study will be looked at by authorised persons from the University of Nottingham who are organising the research. They may also be looked at by authorised people to check that the study is being carried out correctly. All will have a duty of confidentiality to you as a research participant and we will do our best to meet this duty.

All information which is collected about you during the course of the research will be kept strictly confidential, stored in a secure and locked office, and on a password protected database. Any information about you which leaves the University will have your name and address removed (anonymised) and a unique code will be used so that you cannot be recognised from it. Anonymised data may also be stored in data archives for future researchers interested in this area.

Your personal data (address, telephone number) will be kept for 6 months after the end of the study so that we are able to contact you about the findings of the study and possible follow-up studies (unless you advise us that you do not wish to be contacted). All research data will be kept securely for 7 years. After this time your data will be disposed of securely. During this time all precautions will be taken by all those involved to maintain your confidentiality, only members of the research team will have access to your personal data.

Although what you say in the interview is confidential, should you disclose anything to us which we feel puts you or anyone else at any risk, we may feel it necessary to report this to the appropriate persons.

What will happen if I don’t want to carry on with the study?

Your participation is voluntary and you are free to withdraw at any time, without giving any reason, and without your legal rights being affected. If you withdraw then the information collected so far may not be possible to extract and erase after 6 months and this information may still be used in the project analysis.

What will happen to the results of the research study?

Results will be written up as part of my third year dissertation project. Participants will be anonymized therefore unidentifiable.

Who is organising and funding the research?

This research is being organised by the University of Nottingham as part of my undergraduate third year dissertation.

Who has reviewed the study?

All research in the University of Nottingham is looked at by a group of people, called a Research Ethics Committee, to protect your interests. This study has been reviewed and approved by the School of Sociology and Social Policy Research Ethics Committee.

Further information and contact details

Researcher: Naomi Dadzie (lqynd2@nottingham.ac.uk)

Supervisor/PI: William Dixon (lqzwd@exmail.nottingham.ac.uk)

Research Ethics Officer: Dr Alison Mohr, alison.mohr@nottingham.ac.uk, Tel: 0115 84 68151

Appendix 4: Interview Consent Form

School of Sociology and Social Policy

Participant Consent Form

Name of Study: Why are all the black people in the lecture hall sitting together?

Name of Researcher(s): Naomi Dadzie

Name of Participant:

By signing this form I confirm that (please initial the appropriate boxes): Initials

I have read and understood the Participant Information Sheet, or it has been read to me. I have been able to ask questions about the study and my questions have been answered to my satisfaction.

I consent voluntarily to be a participant in this study and understand that I can refuse to answer questions and I can withdraw from the study at any time, without having to give a reason.

Taking part in this study involves an interview completed by the participant that will be recorded using audio notes.

For audio recordings these will be transcribed as text and recording will be destroyed once research project is complete.

Personal information collected about me that can identify me, such as my name or where I live, will not be shared beyond the study team.

My words can be quoted in publications, reports, web pages and other research outputs.

I give permission for the de-identified (anonymised) data that I provide to be used for future research and learning.

I agree to take part in the study

______________________ ______________________ ________________

Name of Participant Signature Date

For participants unable to sign their name, mark the box instead of signing

I have witnessed the accurate reading of the consent form with the potential participant and the individual has had the opportunity to ask questions. I confirm that the individual has given consent freely.

______________________ ______________________ ________________

Name of Witness Signature Date

______________________ ______________________ ________________

Researcher’s name Signature Date

2 copies: 1 for the participant, 1 for the project file

Appendix 5: Research Participants Privacy Notice

Privacy information for Research Participants

For information about the University’s obligations with respect to your data, who you can get in touch with and your rights as a data subject, please visit: https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/utilities/privacy.aspx.

Why we collect your personal data

I will collect personal data under the terms of the University’s Royal Charter in our capacity as a teaching and research body to advance education and learning. Specific purposes for data collection on this occasion is to aid in the investigation into the self-segregation of black people in lectures at university.

Legal basis for processing your personal data under GDPR

The legal basis for processing your personal data on this occasion is Article 6(1a) consent of the data subject.

Special category personal data

In addition to the legal basis for processing your personal data, the University must meet a further basis when processing any special category data, including: personal data revealing racial or ethnic origin, political opinions, religious or philosophical beliefs, or trade union membership, and the processing of genetic data, biometric data for the purpose of uniquely identifying a natural person, data concerning health or data concerning a natural person’s sex life or sexual orientation.

The basis for processing your sensitive personal data on this occasion is Article 9(2a) the data subject has given explicit consent to the processing.

How long we keep your data

This data is being collected so it can be used in my dissertation, therefore all data will be deleted once I have received my feedback and final marks.

Measures to safeguard your stored data include anonymisation of data as well as storing audio and transcriptions on device(s) only I have access to.

Who we share your data with

It is possible that your data will be shared with my supervisor, once the data has been anonymised.

Appendix 6: Signed Ethics Application Form

School of Sociology & Social Policy

Application for Research Ethics Approval for UG and PGT Students

This form and any attachments must be completed, signed electronically, and submitted to

LQ-researchethicSSP@exmail.nottingham.ac.uk

This form must be completed for all research projects, assignments or dissertations which are conducted within the School. You must not begin data collection or approach potential research participants (gatekeepers excepted) until you have submitted this form and received ethical clearance from the Schools’ Research Ethics Committee (SSP-REC). Any change in the question, design or conduct of the research over the course of the research should be reported and may require a new application.

The following checklist is a starting point for an ongoing process of reflection with your supervisor(s) about the ethical issues concerning your study. Two things need to be stressed:

• Checking one or more shaded boxes does not mean that you cannot conduct your research as currently anticipated; however, it does mean that further questions will need to be asked and addressed, further discussions will need to take place, and alternatives may need to be considered or additional actions undertaken.

• Avoiding the shaded boxes does not mean that ethical considerations can subsequently be 'forgotten'; on the contrary, research ethics – for everyone and in every project – should involve an ongoing process of reflection.

Application Checklist

You should provide documents to cover each of the questions below where your response is ‘yes’, and tick to indicate the type of evidence you have enclosed. All forms/templates are on the Research Ethics website.

Questions about your application Evidence required Enclosed

Does the research project, dissertation or assignment involve human participants or their data? Application for Research Ethics Approval (this form) ☒

Participant Consent Form ☒

Participant Information Sheet ☒

Research Participant GDPR Privacy Notice ☒

Is the research of a sensitive nature, i.e. involves vulnerable participants and/or is concerned with a sensitive topic? An exemplar of any communication inviting individuals to participate in the study ☐

An indicative list of survey or interview questions to be used in the study ☐

Does the research involve data collection off campus in the UK or overseas?

Overseas travel involving data collection is referred to the University’s Insurance Office. Please consult the travel advice Flow Chart and Overseas Travel Guidance and DO NOT book travel or arrange fieldwork until your application has been approved. Fieldwork Risk Assessment Form and Hazard Checklist

☐

Does the research require approval from an external UK REC (eg, NHS-HRA, HMPPS) or a Non-UK REC for research conducted outside of the UK? (NB. UG students will not be eligible to apply to external RECs) External REC approval ☒

Has your supervisor approved the research by signing this form? Supervisor signature ☒

Section 1: Applicant details

Name of researcher Naomi Dadzie

Status ☒ Undergraduate student

☐ Postgraduate taught student

Student ID number 4306227

Degree programme BA Criminology & Sociology

Module name and number Dissertation in Sociology/Social Policy/Criminology (SOCI3001)

Email address Lqynd2@nottingham.ac.uk

Names of other project members (if applicable)

Name of supervisor or course convenor William Dixon

Section 2: Project details (please provide brief details about your proposed research)

Project title Why are all the black people in the lecture hall sitting together?

Research question(s) or aim(s) When attending lectures you will observe that that vast majority of black students are sitting together - if not in one large group then in a few small clusters.

This research is important because it investigates a pattern that most observe but hardly ever question. It is an example of segregation and I believe it is important to investigate why this so frequently occurs.

The research strategy will be empirical involving the collection of primary qualitative data from human subjects. The research method I intend to use is semi-structured interviews.

Method(s) of data collection The method I intend to use is semi-structured interviews. This is because it allows me as the researcher to ask specific questions, have a certain level of control over the conversation but still allows the participant(s) to contribute to the conversation in any way they deem appropriate (e.g. provide a personal example). This method also allows clarification to occur and insight to be gained.

I will gather research participants by asking a friend to refer me 4 of their friends who meet the criteria (attends The University of Nottingham, self-identifies as Black British according to the census definition, second year of university, 2 males, 2 females.)

The participants will be asked a series of questions pertaining to the race of those who they choose to sit with in lectures, if this was a conscious decision, if they are aware of this segregation, do they think this is good/bad, why they self-segregate (if they do) etc.

Participants will be expected to answer all questions and cooperate (e.g. respond when I reach out to them, show up to the interview).

Proposed site(s) of data collection (please consult the University’s Lone Working, Working Abroad and Safe Conduct of Fieldwork guidelines)

The interviews will take place on the University Park campus (The University of Nottingham) in a room in the Law and Social Science building. This building is a public space and well-known to students so participants should be able to find it with ease. Interviews will take place during the day.

There are no safety issues.

How will access to participants and/or sites be gained? The ‘gatekeeper’ will be a friend of mine currently in his second year at The University of Nottingham. I will be able to provide evidence of his willingness to help. Participants will not need to ask permission to be involved and I currently have no plans to offer an incentive.

How will research data be managed (please consult the Guidance on Research Data Handling for UG and PGT Students)? The data will be recorded on my mobile (or a recording device). The data will then be converted onto my laptop, saved and analyzed from there.

The data will be anonymized and there will be nothing prohibiting the confidentiality of the data.

Only myself and my dissertation supervisor will have access to the data however results will be available to participants.

A DBS check is required if the research involves being left alone with children under the age of 16 and/or vulnerable adults. If the project requires a DBS check, what is your DBS number?

Section 3: Questions about research within or involving the NHS or social care

(NB. The Prison Service does not allow undergraduate research in their institutions) Yes No

Does the study involve: patients or social care users as research participants, relatives or carers of past/present users of NHS or social care services, the use of NHS or social care records or data, Department of Health funding? (NB. NHS-HRA review is not normally required for research involving NHS or social care staff recruited as research participants by virtue of their professional role, except where the proposal raises significant ethical issues) ☐

☒

Does the study involve participants age 16 or over who are unable to give informed consent (eg, people with learning disabilities: see Mental Capacity Act 2005/ Adults with Incapacity (Scotland) Act 2000)? ☐

☒

If you have answered ‘yes’ to any of the questions above, you will need to submit your research for ethics review to the appropriate REC (eg, NHS-HRA). Once approved, a copy should be appended to this completed application form and sent to the SSP-REC for its records. (NB. UG students will not be eligible to apply to external RECs)

Section 4: Ethical considerations

Please answer ALL of the following questions by ticking the appropriate box and providing additional information in the text box where required.

4.1: Questions about consent Yes No

Does the research involve other potentially vulnerable groups: children under 16, residing in residential care, having a cognitive impairment, mental health condition, physical or sensory impairments, previous life experiences (eg, victims of abuse), other (please specify below)? ☐

☒

Will the study require the co-operation of a gatekeeper for initial access to the groups or individuals to be recruited? ☒

☐

Will the research involve people taking part in the study without their knowledge and consent at the time? ☐

☒

If you have answered ‘yes’ to any of the questions about consent, you will need to describe more fully how you plan to deal with the ethical issues raised by your research in the box below:

My friend in second year is the gatekeeper as he is recommending people to me who do not mind taking part in research and who fit the participant criteria. An issue however is that this study is reliant upon his cooperation and efficiency.

I plan to combat this issue by setting him a soft deadline for when I need the participants, otherwise this could compromise the quality of my research.

4.2: Questions about the potential for harm Yes No

Will the research involve discussion of sensitive or potentially sensitive topics (e.g. sexual activity, drug use, physical or mental health, racism, prejudice, illegal activity)? ☒

☐

Will the research involve physically invasive procedures, the collection of bodily samples or the administering of drugs, placebos or other substances (e.g. vitamins, food)? ☐

☒

Will the research place participants at any greater physical or emotional risk than they experience during their normal lifestyles? ☐

☒

Will the research expose the researcher to any significant risk of physical or emotional harm? ☐

☒

If you have answered ‘yes’ to any of the questions about the potential for harm, you will need to describe more fully how you plan to deal with the ethical issues raised by your research in the box below:

This research includes discussions about race. This may elicit ‘negative’ emotions among participants. I plan to deal with this ethical issue but making participants aware beforehand and debriefing them at the end of the interview.

4.3: Questions about data management preparation Yes No

Are you aware of the GDPR and is the proposed research compatible with it? ☒

☐

Is the research to be undertaken in the public interest? ☒

☐

Will research participants be given/directed to an appropriate GDPR privacy notice? ☒

☐

Have you read the University of Nottingham’s Code of Research Conduct and Research Ethics, and agree to abide by it? ☒

☐

Have you read the Data Protection Policy and Guidance of the University of Nottingham, and agree to abide by them? ☒

☐

If you have answered ‘no’ to any of the questions about the potential for harm, you will need to describe more fully how you plan to deal with the ethical issues raised by your research in the box below:

4.4: Questions about data collection, confidentiality and storage Yes No

Will the research involve administrative or secure data that requires permission from the appropriate authorities before use? ☐

☒

Will data collection take place somewhere other than public and/or professional spaces (work setting)? ☐

☒

Will the research involve respondents to the internet or other visual/vocal methods where participants may be identified? ☐

☒

Will the personal data of research participants (e.g. name, age, gender, ethnicity, religious or other beliefs, sexuality, physical or mental health conditions) be revealed in research outputs or stored data? ☒

☐

Will the research involve the sharing of data or confidential information beyond the initial consent given? ☐

☒

Will financial inducements (other than reasonable expenses and compensation for time) be offered to participants? ☐

☒

If you have answered ‘yes’ to any of the questions about data collection, confidentiality and storage, you will need to describe more fully how you plan to deal with the ethical issues raised by your research in the box below:

My research is an investigation into black people therefore the participants I am interviewing will be black British individuals.

I will reveal the race of research participants because in this case, it is a contributing factor to their experience at university and helps shape their perception, thus making it relevant.

Section 5: Ethical approval

DECLARATION OF ETHICAL RESEARCH

By signing this form, I agree to work within the protocol which I have outlined and to abide by the University of Nottingham’s Code of Research Conduct and Research Ethics, which I have read. If I make any changes to my protocol (such as changes to methods of data collection, the proposed sites of data collection, the means by which participants are accessed) which would change my answers to any of the questions above I will submit a new form to my supervisor or course convenor. Once approved, this should be sent to LQ-researchethicSSP@exmail.nottingham.ac.uk.

ndadzie 19 November 2019

Signature of student Date

5r

AUTHORISATION

Having reviewed the ethical issues arising from the proposed research:

☐ I confirm the research can go ahead as planned.

☐ The project must be referred on to the Research Ethics Committee for more detailed ethical scrutiny (please briefly indicate reason(s) for the referral).

19 November 2019

Signature of supervisor Date

The School’s Research Ethics Committee authorises the research to go ahead as described.

Signature of REC / REIO Date

Please remember to enclose all of the documentary evidence required to support your application, as indicated in the checklist on the front page of this application