In a December 2025 WonkHe article, Richard Freeman from UCL Institute of Education stated “widening participation cannot end at enrolment; it requires sustained support structures that acknowledge the different challenges faced by doctoral students from underrepresented backgrounds”.
This reflects widespread understanding of the need for inclusive practices. But it remains common for gatekeeping of the doctoral “entry ticket” into much of academia to perpetuate poor, exclusionary practices as normal, essential, unavoidable and even laudable. Strategies, policies and processes, from induction to progression to examination to career mentoring are all informed by these, “baking in” barriers.
Resolving the challenges becomes the students’ job, not that of the awarding institute. This has to change.
Research environments need much more work to build inclusive cultures, to enable more diverse doctoral cohorts to thrive, not just survive. This is why much of our research culture work revolves around inclusive cultures, removing barriers and reassessing how we define excellence.
The culture is not built by or exclusively for doctoral students. It is shaped by all academics, particularly professors, for all academics.
A story of five professors
Home life or h-index
A few years ago (this side of 2015) a senior, successful professor stated without apparent irony that women were not properly represented in the professoriate because “when they should be working 60 hours a week to be successful researchers, they are having babies.” Were these ill-advised remarks after a few drinks at a local hostelry, with a bunch of similarly-minded senior academics of limited self-awareness? Not at all. It was during a Faculty research committee. It certainly tested the chair’s skills of calling out and calling in!
Nonetheless, it was instructive by being wrong on so many levels. Why should having babies preclude me from also being a successful researcher? Maybe in part because of the normalisation of long hours he also confidently espoused? Of being available to work in the lab at odd hours, or fly round the world to present results? That he felt comfortable saying this in a committee meeting pointed to the fact his statements were backed up by organisational practices, if not formal policies.
- Assess quality not quantity in determining research success
- Retain talent through proper leave and returner programmes, and not just for maternity. Better yet, create a culture that retains and nurtures talent through the career gaps that can arise for anyone.
The diversity tax
Another professor has significant physical disabilities. In addition to using a wheelchair to get around, and having associated health needs, on occasion they experience a “crash”, where they are unable to function effectively. They must focus on rest, recovery and return for some time. They have gained professorial status through the excellence of their academic contribution like everyone else. But it has inevitably taken longer, not only because of the “crash” gaps but also even where of policies, procedures, colleagues have been supportive and appropriate, they have had to advocate for their own needs. They have incurred the “diversity tax” on their time, energy and motivation.
- Everyone needs to account for differences (disability or otherwise) as they shape policy, expectations, criteria for promotion or funding, and seek to be informed and educate themselves to be effective in this
- Don’t make the marginalised or underrepresented spend time and energy educating, advocating, challenging in addition to building academic excellence; educate yourself, share the load and build in adjustments by design
Toxic academic freedom
A third professor routinely logged over 2500 hours (i.e. 50 hrs a week on average, with no allowance for annual leave) in “workload modelling” and was actively encouraging research associates on his projects to do the same. This in a sincere belief it was essential to succeeding as an academic. If you look at the criteria for professorial status in many institutes, as well as how they are often applied in practice, he might not be wrong. Long hours can result in impressive publications lists and impactful outcomes that are rewarded. Looking after your team’s wellbeing is not.
Attempts to address this by trying to reduce his commitments or spread the load were met, ironically, with health concerns. These were never associated with his over-work, but always with a perception that trying to help him manage that (and mitigate the impact on those he mentored) was some form of stress-inducing control. Academic freedom as the choice to damage yourself, build unreasonable expectations in colleagues, and perpetuate a long-hours culture.
- Don’t let defending the academic freedom to pursue the research you judge to be the most important, fascinating, relevant, leave you and others without support for their wellbeing, health and safety
- Be aware that if an institute’s policies, processes and norms are informed only by a focus on freedom, they can neglect the legal and moral imperatives to look after people
Representation a necessary but not sufficient condition
A professor told a story about an undergraduate student he encountered. This student had gone to his tutor, saying they were dropping out of their physics degree because they were the only gay person in the department. She (another professor) immediately took him to the next-door office, where the professor was working. He is openly gay, and was able to show this student that gay people were present and successful in physics.
Even though the professor was visible as a gay man in his research community, he wasn’t visible to students in his own department. There wasn’t a culture of sharing, a common theme in science settings where the personalities and experiences of scientists are often set to one side as if they will imperil the purity of discovery through measurement, observation and theory.
- Leave behind this idea that if the science represents an objective truth, we can ignore that it is a human endeavour, shaped and changed by how people interact. Learn from disciplines where subjectivity is a given, and the best research accounts for that.
- Don’t leave things to chance, but encourage openness and sharing, acceptance and celebration of difference, and actively demonstrate that everyone can contribute to academic research. Intentionally build an inclusive culture where difficult conversations can take place respectfully and safely.
(Not so) hidden norms and expectations
Another professor shared her experiences as an early- and mid-career academic working towards promotion. She had caring responsibilities for her spouse that meant she could not travel away from without considerable planning and cost. Certainly not for the days and weeks away at conferences which are the core networking and reputation building events in academia. Nether to move around between institutes in her early career, a common practice even now despite redeploying research associates between projects becoming more common. She succeeded without adhering to these two key mobility-based assumptions of academic careers through her own resourcefulness, but also with the support, imagination and mentorship of a handful of colleagues.
- Watch out for implicit expectations such as the “mobility assumption” or the “long hours fallacy”. They consistently discriminate in against those who are already underrepresented as professors, because they under-pin much of the criteria for promotion.
- Reward supporting and developing other researchers, and not just by counting doctoral students supervised (which plays into the long hours fallacy). Professorial criteria should value growing an inclusive and diverse population of academics, because that creates sustainability at the institutional level.
Success metrics
Five professors of broadly the same age with very different perspectives on how academic success is framed and supported, about who can be a professor. Three men, two women – which is a better balance than exists in the sector. Only the women had to address systemic and cultural barriers. Maybe that is because exceptional stories in the face of barriers is common for successful women and rare for successful men?
Women make up around 50% of those in academic roles and have done for at least a decade. Their representation in the ranks of the professoriate has climbed slowly from 23% to 31% over that same decade. There has been more than enough time for equitable progression to have “naturally” corrected this.
Less than 1% of professors were black in 2023/2024, while black academics filled nearly 4% of other roles*.
If this was a discrepancy in recovery rates from surgery we would be figuring out what we don’t understand, what we are not accounting for, that discriminated against women or black people.
In academic progression, we need to look honestly at the explicit and implicit biases in promotion criteria that favour some groups over others. It isn’t about access to higher education. Women make up half of humanity, and 4% of the UK population is black. They are represented in proportion to their presence in the UK.
Higher education has to address the often gendered, often narrow and often unhealthy assumptions reflected in how we judge eligibility for the title of professor. If we don’t, we are giving doctoral students a false promise of equitable opportunities in academia.
This is why we are working to improve research cultures, be it for doctoral students, early career researchers, professors or the wider academic community. Get in touch to explore how we can support your needs, or learn about our research into how doctoral students understand the interaction between culture and what is valued.
*Academic staff statistics from the Higher Education Statistic Agency OC025 Chart 3 and supporting data. Public data do not allow breakdown by both ethnicity and nationality, so comparison with UK population is indicative only.
This article originally appeared on LinkedIn for Eyres Inclusion Consulting.
Eyres Inclusion Consulting 