Making metrics matter: A more ambitious approach to tackling racial inequity in higher education
Think tank: HEPI
Author(s): Dr Katharine Hubbard
February 5, 2026
This report from UK think tank HEPI calls for structural changes to accelerate improvements towards racial equity in English higher education.
A new paper by Dr Katharine Hubbard, Making Metrics Matter: Tackling Racial Inequity in Higher Education (HEPI Debate Paper 43), argues progress towards racial equity in English higher education has been ‘notoriously slow’ and calls for structural changes to accelerate improvements.
Black and Asian students remain less likely to graduate with a First or Upper Second class degree. Black academics are severely underrepresented, particularly at professorial level, with only 1% of UK professors identifying as Black. Dr Hubbard warns that without systemic reform, these inequities will persist indefinitely.
The paper considers the current regulatory landscape, including the Equality Act (2010), Access and Participation Plans and the Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF). It finds racial equity is not positioned as a major strategic priority for institutions, allowing them to ‘get away with’ poor performance on equity while maintaining strong reputational metrics.
Using new analysis of TEF2023 outcomes, Dr Hubbard demonstrates even Gold-rated institutions can have significant racial inequities. Seven TEF Gold providers have Black awarding gaps that exceed 25 percentage points, and more than half of Gold and Silver institutions significantly under-recruit Black academics. In some cases, students could complete their degree without ever encountering a Black academic.
Dr Hubbard proposes a pragmatic model for embedding racial equity into TEF assessments. Her flag-based system identifies institutions with significant inequity in student outcomes or staff representation, and adjusts TEF ratings accordingly. Under one scenario, around one-in-five providers could see their TEF rating change due to racial inequity or underrepresentation.
The paper concludes with a call to the Office for Students and the wider sector to take bolder action. It argues that Access and Participation Plans have raised awareness but lack the reputational clout of TEF ratings. Incorporating inequity and under-representation more directly into the TEF would send a clear signal that racial disparities are unacceptable in a system that claims to champion excellence.
