Six ways to grow a network for racial justice – Times Higher Education

Report on the MedRACE Initiative: Advancing Sustainable Development Goals in Medical Education

Initiative Background and Alignment with Global Goals

A University of Leicester initiative, MedRACE (Medicine: Raising Awareness, Celebrating Excellence), was established to address structural inequalities within medical education, directly contributing to several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). With 66 per cent of its medical students from UK minoritised ethnic backgrounds, the university identified a responsibility to foster an inclusive environment. The initiative was catalysed by events in 2020, including the British Medical Association’s Racial Harassment Charter, the health disparities exposed by the COVID-19 pandemic, and the murder of George Floyd. These events highlighted critical gaps in achieving SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being) and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities), prompting the formation of a student-staff group committed to racial justice.

What began as a small group has evolved into a community of over 80 members, embedding principles of equity, diversity, and inclusion into the curriculum and institutional processes. This work is fundamental to building effective and accountable institutions, as outlined in SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions).

Key Success Factors in Promoting Equity and Quality Education

An external evaluation identified six key features underpinning the success of the MedRACE initiative, each aligning with the framework of the Sustainable Development Goals.

1. Authentic Student-Staff Collaboration: The model is built on trust and a flat hierarchy, where student experiences directly inform action. This embodies SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals), creating a powerful partnership between students and staff to achieve shared objectives for equity.
2. A Proactive, Action-Oriented Approach: The group focuses on implementing concrete solutions rather than performative governance. By taking decisive action, such as including student representatives on senior appointment panels, the initiative strengthens institutional accountability, supporting SDG 16.
3. Consistent Support from Leadership: Sustained backing from university leadership has been crucial for implementing and championing change. This top-level commitment is essential for building the strong, inclusive institutions required to meet SDG 16.
4. Seeing Change Motivates: Tangible outcomes, such as an art exhibition on inclusion and a project to source inclusive theatre headwear, demonstrate progress and motivate further action. These visible achievements reinforce the commitment to providing an equitable and Quality Education (SDG 4) for all students.
5. Student-Led, Staff-Supported Governance: The model empowers students to lead the agenda, with staff providing facilitation and advocacy. This approach directly addresses SDG 10 by ensuring the voices of minoritised groups are central to decision-making processes.
6. People-Centred Culture: A welcoming environment allows for open discussion of sensitive topics. When a policy was reviewed to permit the wearing of a Sikh religious bangle (kara) in surgical theatres, it demonstrated the institution’s commitment to reducing inequalities (SDG 10) and ensuring student well-being (SDG 3).

Project Outcomes and Contributions to Sustainable Development

MedRACE has initiated several projects that deliver measurable contributions to the SDGs.

• Active Bystander Training: This training equips students to challenge inappropriate behaviour, fostering a safer and more inclusive learning environment that is essential for delivering a Quality Education (SDG 4) and building just institutions (SDG 16).
• Curriculum and Policy Change: Students and staff collaborate to review and reform curriculum content and institutional policies. A project to improve teaching on recognising jaundice in babies with black and brown skin is a direct contribution to SDG 3 by addressing health inequities at the foundational level of medical training.
• Expansion to MedPRIDE and MedDialect: The success of the MedRACE model has led to its expansion to address challenges faced by other minoritised groups, including LGBTQ+ communities. This broadens the initiative’s impact on SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities) and SDG 5 (Gender Equality).

Conclusion: A Replicable Model for Institutional Change

The MedRACE initiative serves as a proven model for how student-staff collaboration can drive meaningful and lasting institutional change. By empowering students and securing commitment from staff and leadership, the program makes significant contributions towards achieving multiple Sustainable Development Goals, most notably SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities), SDG 4 (Quality Education), SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being), and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions). It provides a replicable framework for other institutions seeking to advance justice and equity in higher education.

Analysis of the Article in Relation to Sustainable Development Goals

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

The article highlights issues and initiatives that are directly connected to several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The core focus on addressing racial inequality, promoting inclusion in education, and tackling health disparities links the MedRACE program to the following SDGs:

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being: The article discusses medical education and health disparities, which are central to ensuring healthy lives and promoting well-being for all.
• SDG 4: Quality Education: The primary focus of the MedRACE initiative is to improve the quality and inclusivity of medical education, ensuring an equitable learning environment for all students.
• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities: This is the most prominent SDG in the article, as the entire MedRACE program is designed to “address structural inequalities” and combat discrimination based on race and ethnicity within the educational and healthcare systems.
• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions: The initiative’s efforts to strengthen reporting processes, ensure representative decision-making, and create a just and accountable institution align with this goal.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Based on the actions and objectives described in the article, several specific SDG targets can be identified:

1. SDG 4: Quality Education

   • Target 4.5: “By 2030, eliminate gender disparities in education and ensure equal access to all levels of education and vocational training for the vulnerable…” The article’s focus on supporting students from “UK minoritised ethnic backgrounds” and the expansion to other “minoritised groups” directly addresses the goal of ensuring equal access and success for vulnerable groups in higher education.
   • Target 4.7: “By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote…human rights…appreciation of cultural diversity…” The initiative’s work on curriculum change, such as “teaching on recognising jaundice in babies with black and brown skin,” and providing “active bystander training” equips future doctors with skills that promote human rights and cultural appreciation.

2. SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

   • Target 10.2: “By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of…race, ethnicity, origin, religion or other status.” The MedRACE model, which is “student led, staff supported,” empowers students from minority backgrounds to “shape the agenda and drive the change they want to see,” directly promoting their inclusion.
   • Target 10.3: “Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory…policies and practices…” The article provides concrete examples of this, such as changing the local trust’s policy to accommodate the Sikh “kara” (religious bangle) and the “inclusive headwear project” to source theatre headwear suitable for religious wear or larger hair.

3. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

   • Target 16.7: “Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels.” The article describes how MedRACE achieved this by establishing “authentic student-staff collaboration,” a “flat hierarchy,” and ensuring students are included on “school appointment panels,” with one student even sitting on the panel to appoint the head of school.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

The article mentions or implies several quantitative and qualitative indicators that can be used to measure progress:

• Indicators for SDG 4 (Quality Education)

  • Proportion of students from minority groups: The article provides a baseline statistic that “66 per cent of medical students come from UK minoritised ethnic backgrounds,” which can be tracked to measure continued diversity and inclusion.
  • Number of curriculum and policy changes implemented: Progress can be measured by tracking the number of student-led projects that result in tangible changes to the curriculum and university policies, such as the project on “recognising jaundice in babies with black and brown skin.”

• Indicators for SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities)

  • Number of institutional policies reviewed and amended to be more inclusive: The successful review of policies regarding the “kara” and “inclusive headwear” serve as examples. Progress can be measured by the number of such discriminatory policies identified and changed.
  • Student participation in governance: The presence of “student representatives on school appointment panels” is a direct indicator of student empowerment and inclusion in decision-making.

• Indicators for SDG 16 (Strong Institutions)

  • Existence and activity of participatory bodies: The MedRACE group itself, with its “more than 80 members” and consistent “monthly meetings since 2020,” is an indicator of a functioning mechanism for inclusive participation.
  • Student perception of institutional responsiveness: The article implies this through statements like “students feel heard, which results in more people feeling able to speak out.” This could be formally measured through surveys on student belonging and confidence in reporting mechanisms.

4. Create a table with three columns titled ‘SDGs, Targets and Indicators” to present the findings from analyzing the article. In this table, list the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), their corresponding targets, and the specific indicators identified in the article.

Source: timeshighereducation.com