Blog Task 3: Race

As a non-native English speaker, I have experienced firsthand the gap between an English-based curriculum and the challenges faced by students who speak English as an additional language (EAL). UAL’s Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Annual Report 2025 (UAL, 2026) states that, among the five most common student domiciles, 36% of students come from countries where English is not the first language. The above continually inspires me to seek ways to make communication more accessible and to create a more inclusive learning environment for all students, regardless of their race or English proficiency.

CRT: Critical Race Theory

Pitsburgh’s Public Source (2026) Critical Race Theory. Available at: https://www.publicsource.org/parents-talk-with-kids-about-race-critical-race-theory-1619/ (Accessed 08 July 2026)

Reflecting on one of the readings for this blog task, A CRT Framework for Education Policy Analysis by Alice Bradbury (2020), it became clear that Bradbury argues that educational institutions often embed racial and linguistic inequalities within their policies and practices. Rather than being the result of intentional discrimination, these inequalities are frequently systemic, creating an uneven playing field for the EAL student. While policies such as equal treatment and standardised testing may appear fair on the surface, Bradbury argues that treating all students identically overlooks their unequal starting points, particularly regarding language background and access to learning.

Applying Bradbury’s argument to the BA Footwear course, I can see how our approach to language may unintentionally create an uneven playing field for the non-native English-speaking student. Starting with the first unit of Year 1, students are required to write a 1,000-word exhibition review alongside a 500-word reflective piece of writing. The inequality lies not only in the volume and complexity of the writing students are expected to produce, but also in the written materials they must interpret to understand the assessment requirements. For EAL students, navigating assessment briefs, learning outcomes, and academic terminology may present an additional barrier before they even begin the assignment itself.

BA (Hons) Cordwainers Footwear and Accessories, Year 1, Unit 1, Learning Outcomes

UAL (2026) BA (Hons) Cordwainers Footwear and Accessories. Year 1, Unit 1, Learning Outcomes, Course Handbook.

In this first unit, students are assessed against four Learning Outcomes, all of which are written in formal academic English. I find these challenging to interpret myself, so it is easy to see how they may present an even greater barrier for EAL students. Below, I have attempted to rewrite each Learning Outcome in simpler, more accessible language while trying to maintain its original message:

BA (Hons) Cordwainers Footwear and Accessories, Year 1, Unit 1, Alternative Learning Outcomes

Bikker, D (2026) BA (Hons) Cordwainers Footwear and Accessories. Year 1, Unit 1, Alternative Learning Outcomes.

A few questions for reflection:

• Do these simplified versions still convey the same meaning as the original Learning Outcomes?
• Could this more accessible language be used more widely, or does simplifying the wording reduce its precision or impact?

---

References

Bradbury, A. (2020) ‘A critical race theory framework for education policy analysis: the case of bilingual learners and assessment policy in England’, Race Ethnicity and Education, 23(2), pp. 241–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2019.1599338

UAL, (2026) Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Annual Report 2025. Available at: https://www.arts.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0023/561434/EDI-Report-2025.pdf (Accessed 08 July 2026)