A new working group has been formed at the University of Brighton in response to the discomfort many students and members of staff feel by the use of terms such as BAME or BME. In fact, the regular ethnicity question in registration forms seems to upset a great number of people.

The Race Equality Terminology Working Group was convened by Professor Andrew Lloyd (Academic Operations PVC) and is chaired by Professor Tara Dean (Research and Enterprise PVC). It has a wide representation of the university community, including staff and students. Its formation was a commitment from the univeristy’s UEB to look into the matter following the Black Lives Matter Action Forum held on 6th July 2020 chaired by Dr. Marlon Moncrief.

For a rather novice term, its use is surprisingly entrenched in the parlance of education experts, the media and in business. It is widely used for funding and statistical purposes frequently featuring in reports and narratives that define and categorise groups of people in a way that many feel robs them off their true identity and does little to promote inclusion. Invariably, students that I mentor report that they do not know what the term means and, even when they learn, they still do not feel it describes them.

In a Civil Servant’s blog post in July last year (Don’t Call Me BAME or BME), Indian born Zamila Bunglawala from the Race Disparity Unit in the Cabinet Office, explains why she dislikes being called BAME or BME while advising on equality and inclusivity dos and don’ts. Many will recognise the benefits of using acronyms or initialisms. After all, language and communication, like many other human fields are characterised by the principle of minimal effort. Using acronyms to classify people is just a symptom of something deeper.

However, using such terms to identify individuals or groups of individuals can mask rather than clarify issues. A good example is the so called “BAME progression gap”. It is often reported that Black students are affected much more than Asian students or students from other ethnicities. It can also irate people as the constant power dynamics between form designers and form fillers results in accumulation of data, duplication of effort and a feeling of “big-brother-watching-us-all” that has little to do with equality and inclusion. At least two daunting impacts of such arbitrary classifications are the unavoidable homogenisation (or bundling up) of certain groups of people (Black people, for example, when the speaker means Asian but refers to them as BAME) and the potential for data manipulation by those in a position of power to disenfranchise people.

A typical example of homogenisation was evident in the answer Health Secretary Matt Hancock gave to the question, “How many Black people are in the current cabinet?” to Sky News in June this year.

Although Mr Hancock accurately mentioned “two BAME” staff in his answer, non were Black as the interviewer repeatedly emphasised. Mr Hancock’s lapse can be seen as a consequence of the confusion the term creates, which may suit the State and the Institution, and therefore be hard to eliminate, while hurting others.

Another undesirable impact may well be the potential manipulation of the data collected to target certain groups of the population, like the example in 2016 of a data analytics company profiling of Black American citizens to be targeted with electoral campaign ads created to dissuade them from voting. As reported by Channel 4’s Krishnan Guru-Murthy, this resulted in a reduction by 19% of voter turnout in Wisconsin alone. Some may say that, rather than the actual result of the election, it was the detailed database that identified individuals based on their ethnicity that is a matter for grater concern.

Some of us seem to be resigned to the role the ethnicity question plays in higher education. The RETWG (here’s another acronym!) reflects this. There is a need, however, to strike a balance between respecting personal identities and the requirement for data to inform research and justify funding, which drives development in the sector. Choosing a different term (people of colour, or Black and Brown) may make little difference if individuals continue to feel ignored. As a member of the working group, I am looking forward to its report and recommendations. One of my key unknowns is what would happen if we decided for stopping using BAME and BME in writing and in speech?

Graciano Soares is Chair of the University of Brighton Race and Faith Network. He is Co-editor of Talk it out!