The American Journal of Social Science and Education Innovations
16
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajssei
TYPE
Original Research
PAGE NO.
16-24
10.37547/tajssei/Volume07Issue02-03
OPEN ACCESS
SUBMITED
30 December 2024
ACCEPTED
15 January 2025
PUBLISHED
11 February 2025
VOLUME
Vol.07 Issue02 2025
CITATION
Obohwemu, K. O., Nchindia, C. A. ., Kachitsa, C. L. ., Sahoo, S. S. ., &
Oluwadamilola, T. (2025). Protocol for a Systematic Review of the
Experiences and Mental Health Outcomes of BAME Academics in Non-
Traditional Higher Education. The American Journal of Social Science and
Education Innovations, 7(02), 16
–
24.
https://doi.org/10.37547/tajssei/Volume07Issue02-03
COPYRIGHT
© 2025 Original content from this work may be used under the terms
of the creative commons attributes 4.0 License.
Protocol for a Systematic
Review of the Experiences
and Mental Health
Outcomes of BAME
Academics in Non-
Traditional Higher
Education
Obohwemu Oberhiri Kennedy, PhD
Faculty of Health, Wellbeing & Social Care, Global Banking School, Oxford
Brookes University, Birmingham Campus, United Kingdom; and PENKUP
Research Institute, Birmingham, United Kingdom
Christian Atabong Nchindia, PhD
Faculty of Business Management, Global Banking School, University of
Suffolk, Manchester Campus, United Kingdom
Charles Leyman Kachitsa, PhD
Faculty of Business Management and Enterprise, Global Banking School,
Leeds Trinity University, Manchester Campus, United Kingdom
Supriya Subhadarsini Sahoo, PhD
Study Skills Lecturer, Global Banking School, Canterbury Christ Church
University, Manchester Campus, United Kingdom
Oluwadamilola Tayo, MPH
Faculty of Health, Wellbeing & Social Care, Global Banking School, Oxford
Brookes University, Leeds Campus, United Kingdom
Corresponding Author: Obohwemu Kennedy
Oberhiri, PhD
ABSTRACT:
The experiences of Black, Asian, and
Minority Ethnic (BAME) academics in higher education
institutions have garnered increasing attention due to
persistent disparities and challenges faced by these
groups. This protocol outlines a systematic review
aimed at exploring the experiences of BAME academics
in alternative higher education institutions. The review
will synthesize existing literature to identify key themes,
challenges, and opportunities encountered by BAME
academics in these non-traditional settings. The
systematic review will follow established guidelines,
The American Journal of Social Science and Education Innovations
17
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajssei
The American Journal of Social Science and Education Innovations
including a comprehensive search strategy across
multiple databases such as PubMed, Scopus, and Web
of Science. Inclusion criteria will focus on peer-
reviewed articles, dissertations, and reports that
examine the experiences of BAME academics in
alternative higher education institutions. Studies will
be selected based on relevance, methodological rigor,
and the richness of data on BAME academics'
experiences. Data extraction will involve detailed
coding
of
study
characteristics,
participant
demographics, and key findings related to the
experiences of BAME academics. Thematic analysis will
be employed to identify recurring patterns and themes
across the selected studies. This approach will allow for
a nuanced understanding of the unique challenges and
opportunities faced by BAME academics in alternative
higher education institutions. The findings from this
systematic review will provide valuable insights into
the lived experiences of BAME academics, highlighting
areas for policy intervention and institutional support.
By identifying best practices and areas needing
improvement, this review aims to contribute to the
development of more inclusive and equitable higher
education environments. The results will be
disseminated
through
academic
publications,
conference
presentations,
and
stakeholder
engagement to inform future research, policy, and
practice. This protocol underscores the importance of
addressing the specific needs of BAME academics in
alternative higher education institutions and aims to
foster a more inclusive academic landscape.
KEYWORDS:
BAME Academics, Alternative Higher
Education, Systematic Review, Diversity and Inclusion,
Academic Experiences.
INTRODUCTION:
Problem Statement
The experiences of Black, Asian, and Minority Ethnic
(BAME) academics within higher education institutions
have become a critical area of scholarly inquiry,
particularly in the context of ongoing efforts to
promote diversity, equity, and inclusion. Despite
numerous policy initiatives aimed at addressing racial
disparities, BAME academics continue to face
significant barriers that impede their career
progression and overall academic experience. These
challenges could be more pronounced in alternative
higher education institutions, which include non-
traditional and less research-intensive universities.
Such institutions, while offering unique opportunities,
also present distinct obstacles that warrant thorough
investigation.
The literature on BAME academics consistently
highlights a persistent underrepresentation in senior
academic and leadership positions, reflecting broader
systemic issues within higher education. Studies have
shown that BAME academics face structural and cultural
barriers, including institutional racism, lack of
mentorship, and limited access to professional
development opportunities (Arday & Mirza, 2018;
Bhopal, 2020; Rana et al., 2022). These barriers not only
hinder career advancement but also contribute to a
sense of isolation and marginalization among BAME
faculty members (Rollock, 2019; Ishaq & Hussain, 2022;
Harris & Ogbonna, 2023).
Alternative higher education institutions, characterized
by their diverse student populations and often
innovative approaches to teaching and learning, provide
a unique context for examining the experiences of
BAME academics. These institutions may offer more
flexible career paths and a greater emphasis on teaching
excellence, yet they also grapple with resource
constraints and less established research infrastructures
(Smith, 2021). The intersection of these factors creates
a complex environment in which BAME academics
navigate their professional journeys.
The need for a systematic review of the experiences of
BAME academics in alternative higher education
institutions is underscored by the growing div of
evidence documenting the challenges faced by these
individuals. For instance, research has revealed that low
priority status profiling of BAME faculty and
institutionally racist structures in higher education
institutions (HEIs) are key challenges facing BAME
academics plotting career pathways to senior leadership
roles (Felix, 2022; Tiatia-Siau,2023; Mkwebu, 2024).
Additionally, the intersection of race and leadership is
further exacerbated by the structural and cultural
inequalities that pervade within universities, often at
the expense of ethnic minorities who are rarely afforded
continuing professional development and mentoring
(Arday & Wilson, 2021; Thomas & Mikel, 2021; Verma,
2022).
This systematic review protocol seeks to synthesize
existing literature on the experiences of BAME
academics in alternative higher education institutions,
with a particular focus on identifying key themes,
challenges, and opportunities. Employing a rigorous
methodological approach, this review will contribute to
a deeper understanding of the unique experiences of
BAME academics and inform the development of
targeted interventions to support their career
progression and well-being. The findings will have
significant implications for policy and practice,
highlighting the need for inclusive and equitable
academic environments that recognize and address the
The American Journal of Social Science and Education Innovations
18
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajssei
The American Journal of Social Science and Education Innovations
specific needs of BAME faculty members.
This research protocol underscores the importance of
addressing the systemic barriers faced by BAME
academics in alternative higher education institutions.
By
exploring
their
experiences
through
a
comprehensive review of the literature, this study aims
to provide a nuanced understanding of the coping
mechanisms and support structures that can enhance
the academic and professional lives of BAME faculty.
This work will contribute to the broader discourse on
diversity and inclusion in higher education, advocating
for meaningful change that promotes equity and
excellence for all academics.
Objectives
Primary Objective: To systematically analyse and
synthesize existing evidence on the experiences of
BAME academics in alternative higher education
institutions, with a focus on recruitment, retention,
progression, job satisfaction, inclusivity, and mental
health outcomes (anxiety, depression, etc).
Secondary Objective: To compare the experiences of
BAME academics in alternative higher education
providers, such as the Global Banking School (GBS),
with their experiences in conventional universities,
particularly
in
terms
of
career
progression
opportunities, job satisfaction levels, and mental
health outcomes (anxiety, depression, etc).
REVIEW QUESTIONS
1.
What are the systemic barriers faced by BAME
academics in conventional universities?
2.
How do alternative higher education
institutions provide inclusive and supportive
environments for BAME academics?
3.
How do the career progression opportunities,
job satisfaction levels, and mental health
outcomes (anxiety, depression, etc) of BAME
academics differ between alternative and
conventional higher education institutions?
4.
What are the unique challenges and
opportunities for BAME academics in
institutions like GBS?
METHODS
Main Outcomes
The main outcomes are as follows:
1.
Career Progression Opportunities:
o
Definition: The availability and accessibility of
opportunities for BAME academics to advance in
their careers within higher education institutions.
o
Measurement: This outcome will be measured
through qualitative data from interviews, surveys,
and case studies that report on promotion rates,
access to leadership roles, and professional
development opportunities.
o
Timing: Measurements will be taken from studies
that report on career progression over various time
periods, including longitudinal studies where
available.
2.
Job Satisfaction Levels:
o
Definition: The overall contentment and satisfaction
of BAME academics with their job roles,
responsibilities, and work environment.
o
Measurement: This outcome will be assessed using
standardized job satisfaction scales, qualitative
interviews, and surveys that report on factors such
as work-life balance, recognition, and support from
colleagues and administration.
o
Timing: Measurements will be taken from cross-
sectional and longitudinal studies that provide data
on job satisfaction at different career stages.
3.
Health Outcomes:
o
Definition: The physical and mental health status of
BAME academics, including stress levels, burnout,
and overall well-being.
o
Measurement: Health outcomes will be measured
using validated health assessment tools, self-
reported health surveys, and qualitative data from
interviews and focus groups that discuss stress,
mental health challenges, and coping mechanisms.
o
Timing: Measurements will be taken from studies
that report on health outcomes at various points in
time, including during significant career transitions
or after specific interventions.
4.
Inclusivity and Supportive Environment:
o
Definition: The extent to which alternative higher
education institutions provide an inclusive and
supportive environment for BAME academics.
o
Measurement: This outcome will be assessed
through qualitative data from interviews, surveys,
and institutional reports that discuss policies,
practices, and cultural aspects that promote
inclusivity and support for BAME academics.
o
Timing: Measurements will be taken from studies
that provide data on inclusivity and support over
different time periods, including before and after
the implementation of specific diversity initiatives.
These outcomes will be systematically analysed and
synthesized to provide a comprehensive understanding
of the experiences of BAME academics in alternative
higher education institutions, highlighting areas for
improvement and potential interventions to enhance
The American Journal of Social Science and Education Innovations
19
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajssei
The American Journal of Social Science and Education Innovations
their career progression, job satisfaction, and overall
well-being.
3.1.1 Effect Measures for Main Outcomes
The effect measures for the main outcomes are as
follows:
1.
Career Progression Opportunities:
o
Effect Measure: Odds Ratios (OR)
o
Definition and Measurement: The odds of BAME
academics achieving career progression (e.g.,
promotions, leadership roles) compared to their
counterparts in conventional universities. This will
be measured using data from qualitative studies
and surveys that report on career advancement
rates.
2.
Job Satisfaction Levels:
o
Effect Measure: Mean Differences (MD)
o
Definition and Measurement: The difference in
mean job satisfaction scores between BAME
academics in alternative higher education
institutions and those in conventional universities.
This will be measured using standardized job
satisfaction scales and surveys.
3.
Health Outcomes:
o
Effect Measure: Relative Risks (RR) and
Standardized Mean Differences (SMD)
o
Definition and Measurement: The relative risk of
adverse health outcomes (e.g., stress, burnout)
among BAME academics in alternative higher
education institutions compared to those in
conventional
universities.
Additionally,
standardized
mean
differences
in
health
assessment scores will be used to compare overall
well-being. These will be measured using validated
health assessment tools and self-reported surveys.
4.
Inclusivity and Supportive Environment:
o
Effect Measure: Risk Differences (RD)
o
Definition and Measurement: The difference in the
proportion of BAME academics reporting an
inclusive
and
supportive
environment
in
alternative higher education institutions versus
conventional universities. This will be measured
using qualitative data from interviews and surveys
that discuss institutional policies and practices.
These effect measures will provide a comprehensive
understanding of the experiences of BAME academics,
highlighting areas for improvement and potential
interventions to enhance their career progression, job
satisfaction, and overall well-being.
Additional Outcomes
The additional outcomes are as follows:
1.
Mentorship and Professional Development:
o
Effect Measure: Proportion Differences (PD)
o
Definition and Measurement: The difference in the
proportion
of
BAME
academics
receiving
mentorship
and
professional
development
opportunities in alternative versus conventional
universities. This will be measured using qualitative
data from interviews and surveys that report on
access to mentorship programs, workshops, and
training sessions.
2.
Work-Life Balance:
o
Effect Measure: Mean Differences (MD)
o
Definition and Measurement: The difference in
mean work-life balance scores between BAME
academics in alternative higher education
institutions and those in conventional universities.
This will be measured using standardized work-life
balance scales and self-reported surveys that assess
factors such as workload, flexibility, and personal
time.
3.
Perceived Discrimination and Microaggressions:
o
Effect Measure: Relative Risks (RR)
o
Definition and Measurement: The relative risk of
experiencing discrimination and microaggressions
among BAME academics in alternative higher
education institutions compared to those in
conventional universities. This will be measured
using qualitative data from interviews and surveys
that report on incidents of discrimination,
microaggressions, and overall workplace climate.
4.
Sense of Belonging and Community:
o
Effect Measure: Standardized Mean Differences
(SMD)
o
Definition and Measurement: The difference in
mean scores for sense of belonging and community
among BAME academics in alternative higher education
institutions versus conventional universities. This will be
measured using standardized scales and qualitative data
from interviews and surveys that assess feelings of
inclusion, support, and community engagement.
5.
Research Productivity and Impact:
o
Effect Measure: Mean Differences (MD) and
Citation Counts
o
Definition and Measurement: The difference in
mean research productivity (e.g., number of
publications, grants received) and impact (e.g., citation
counts) between BAME academics in alternative higher
education institutions and those in conventional
universities. This will be measured using bibliometric
data and self-reported surveys that report on research
The American Journal of Social Science and Education Innovations
20
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajssei
The American Journal of Social Science and Education Innovations
activities and achievements.
These additional outcomes will be systematically
analysed to provide a comprehensive understanding of
the experiences of BAME academics, highlighting areas
for improvement and potential interventions to
enhance their professional development, work-life
balance, and overall well-being.
3.2 Eligibility Criteria
•
Inclusion Criteria:
o
Studies focused on BAME academics in higher
education, particularly in the UK.
o
Research
on
recruitment,
retention,
progression, progression, job satisfaction, inclusivity,
and mental health outcomes (anxiety, depression, etc)
for BAME academics.
o
Literature on alternative higher education
providers.
o
Peer-reviewed journal articles, conference
proceedings, and policy reports.
o
Studies published in English.
•
Exclusion Criteria:
o
Studies not focused on BAME academics.
o
Literature on non-academic staff or students.
o
Studies unrelated to higher education settings.
o
Non-English language publications (unless
translated versions are available).
Databases and Search Strategy
The PRISMA guidelines (Page et al., 2021) would be
adhered to. The search is scheduled for January to
March 2025.
•
Academic Databases:
o
Scopus
o
Web of Science
o
PubMed
o
ERIC (Education Resources Information
Centre)
o
JSTOR
o
ProQuest (e.g., Dissertations & Theses Global)
o
Google Scholar
•
Grey Literature:
o
Policy reports (e.g., from Advance HE, UUK, or
the Equality Challenge Unit)
o
Institutional reports from alternative providers
like GBS.
o
Government
publications
and
diversity
studies.
•
Reference Lists:
o
Review references from key studies identified
during screening.
The search string for PubMed, using Boolean operators
and keywords, is shown in Table 1.
Table 1: Search String for PubMed
("BAME academics" OR "Black Asian Minority Ethnic
lecturers") AND ("higher education" OR "universities"
OR "alternative providers") AND ("recruitment" OR
"progression" OR "diversity" OR "inclusivity") AND
("job satisfaction" OR "mental health outcomes")
Database-specific syntax for advanced searching (e.g.,
truncation, wildcards) would be used, employing special
characters or techniques to refine and enhance your
search queries in databases. For example:
1.
Truncation: This involves using a symbol (often
an asterisk *) at the end of a word root to find all
variations of that word (Salvador-Oliván et al., 2019;
Adamson et al., 2022; Coburn, 2024). For example,
searching for educat* will return results for education,
educator, educational, etc.
2.
Wildcards: These are symbols (such as ? or #)
used within a word to replace one or more characters
(Zhang et al., 2021; Hill & Chen, 2024; Tosco, 2024). For
example, searching for wom?n will return results for
both woman and women.
The search string would be piloted on one database and
refined as needed.
Screening and Selection Process
•
Stage 1: Title and Abstract Screening
o
Team members review titles and abstracts to
exclude irrelevant studies.
•
Stage 2: Full-Text Screening
o
Retrieve full-text articles for studies that pass
Stage 1.
o
Apply inclusion/exclusion criteria rigorously.
Data Extraction
To select studies for inclusion in the systematic review
on the experiences of BAME academics in alternative
higher education institutions, a comprehensive search
strategy will be employed. This will involve searching
multiple databases, including PubMed, Scopus, Web of
Science, and ERIC, using a combination of keywords and
MeSH terms related to BAME academics, higher
education, and alternative institutions. The search will
be limited to peer-reviewed articles, dissertations, and
reports published in English.
The selection process will follow a two-stage screening
The American Journal of Social Science and Education Innovations
21
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajssei
The American Journal of Social Science and Education Innovations
approach. In the first stage, titles and abstracts of
identified studies will be independently screened by
two reviewers to assess their relevance based on
predefined inclusion criteria. Studies will be included if
they focus on the experiences of BAME academics in
higher education institutions, specifically alternative or
non-traditional settings. In the second stage, full-text
articles of potentially relevant studies will be retrieved
and independently assessed by the same reviewers.
Any discrepancies between reviewers will be resolved
through discussion or consultation with a third
reviewer.
Data extraction will involve collecting detailed
information from the included studies using a
standardized data extraction form. The data to be
extracted will include study characteristics (e.g.,
author, year, country), participant demographics (e.g.,
ethnicity, gender, academic position), study design
(e.g., qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods), and
key findings related to the main and additional
outcomes (e.g., career progression, job satisfaction,
health outcomes, mentorship, work-life balance,
perceived discrimination, sense of belonging, research
productivity).
The data extraction process will be conducted
independently by two reviewers to ensure accuracy
and consistency. Extracted data will be recorded in a
secure, centralized database, and any discrepancies
will be resolved through discussion or consultation
with a third reviewer. The extracted data will then be
synthesized and analysed to provide a comprehensive
understanding of the experiences of BAME academics
in alternative higher education institutions.
Quality Assessment
Several key characteristics of the studies will be
assessed:
Study Design: The type of study (e.g., qualitative,
quantitative, mixed-methods) and its methodological
framework.
Population: Demographic details of the participants,
including ethnicity, gender, academic rank, and
institution type.
Interventions/Experiences: Specific experiences or
interventions related to BAME academics, such as
mentoring programs, career progression, and
institutional support.
Outcomes: The primary and secondary outcomes
measured, such as career satisfaction, retention rates,
and perceived barriers.
Setting: The context of the study, including the
geographical location and type of higher education
institution.
Data Collection Methods: Techniques used to gather
data, such as interviews, surveys, or focus groups.
Funding Sources: Information about the funding sources
to identify potential conflicts of interest.
For assessing the risk of bias and quality of the studies,
the following tools will be used:
Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) Checklists:
For evaluating qualitative studies, focusing on validity,
results, and relevance.
Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS): For assessing the quality
of non-randomized studies, examining selection,
comparability, and outcomes.
Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Tools: For
various study designs, ensuring a comprehensive
evaluation of methodological quality.
These assessments will ensure a thorough and
systematic evaluation of the studies included in the
review.
Data Synthesis
The data synthesis will involve both qualitative and
quantitative methods to ensure a comprehensive
understanding.
Data Extraction and Preparation
Data will be extracted using a standardized form,
capturing study design, participant characteristics,
interventions/experiences, outcomes, and contextual
factors. This data will be organized into a database for
systematic analysis.
Qualitative Data Synthesis
Thematic synthesis will be used for qualitative data,
involving three steps:
1.
Coding of Text: Qualitative data will be coded line-
by-line to identify key themes and concepts using
software like NVivo.
2.
Development of Descriptive Themes: Initial codes
will be grouped into descriptive themes that reflect
the main patterns in the data.
3.
Generation of Analytical Themes: Descriptive
themes will be further analyzed to develop higher-
order analytical themes, providing deeper insights
into the experiences of BAME academics.
Quantitative Data Synthesis
For quantitative data, a meta-analysis will be conducted
where possible:
1.
Assessment of Heterogeneity: Heterogeneity will be
assessed using the I² statistic and χ² te
st to
determine the appropriate model for meta-analysis.
2.
Data Pooling: Quantitative data from comparable
studies will be pooled to calculate summary effect
The American Journal of Social Science and Education Innovations
22
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajssei
The American Journal of Social Science and Education Innovations
sizes, using weighted mean differences or odds
ratios.
3.
Subgroup Analysis: Subgroup analyses will explore
potential sources of heterogeneity, such as
differences in study design or participant
characteristics.
Integration of Qualitative and Quantitative Findings
A narrative synthesis approach will integrate the
qualitative and quantitative findings:
1.
Summarizing Key Findings: Key findings from both
analyses will be summarized in a coherent
narrative.
2.
Identifying Patterns and Relationships: Patterns
and relationships between the qualitative and
quantitative data will be identified to provide a
holistic view.
3.
Drawing Conclusions: Conclusions will be drawn
based on the integrated findings, highlighting
implications for policy and practice in higher
education institutions.
Analysis of Sub-Groups
Several subgroup analyses are planned to explore
variations in experiences and outcomes. The
subgroups will be based on the following criteria:
1.
Ethnicity: Studies will be grouped by specific ethnic
categories (e.g., Black, Asian, and other minority
ethnic groups) to identify any differences in
experiences and outcomes among these groups.
2.
Gender: The experiences of male and female
BAME academics will be compared to explore
gender-specific
challenges
and
support
mechanisms.
3.
Academic Rank: Participants will be categorized by
their academic rank (e.g., junior faculty, senior
faculty, administrative roles) to examine how
experiences differ across career stages.
4.
Institution Type: Studies will be grouped by the
type of higher education institution (e.g.,
community colleges, private universities, public
universities) to assess how institutional context
influences experiences.
5.
Geographical Location: The impact of geographical
location (e.g., urban vs. rural institutions, different
countries) on the experiences of BAME academics
will be investigated.
Planned Analytic Approach
For each subgroup, both qualitative and quantitative
data will be analysed separately and then integrated:
1.
Qualitative Analysis: Thematic synthesis will be
conducted for each subgroup to identify unique
themes and patterns.
2.
Quantitative Analysis: Meta-analyses will be
performed for each subgroup where data allows,
calculating summary effect sizes and conducting
subgroup comparisons using statistical tests (e.g.,
ANOVA, χ² tests).
This approach ensures a thorough and systematic
evaluation of the studies, capturing the complexity of
BAME academics' experiences and providing actionable
insights for improving their representation and support
in alternative higher education institutions. The
approach will also help identify specific factors that
influence the experiences of BAME academics in
different contexts, providing nuanced insights for
targeted interventions and policy recommendations.
RESULTS
Reporting
•
Will follow PRISMA guidelines for reporting
systematic reviews.
•
Will include a PRISMA flow diagram to
document the study selection process.
•
Will be structured as follows:
o
Abstract
o
Introduction (background, objectives, and
rationale)
o
Methods (search strategy, inclusion criteria,
quality assessment, synthesis approach)
o
Results
(findings,
thematic
analysis,
comparison)
o
Discussion (interpretation, implications, and
limitations)
o
Conclusion and Recommendations
Limitations and Bias
Potential biases include:
1.
Exclusion of non-English studies may lead to
underrepresentation of non-Western perspectives.
2.
Publication bias may favour studies with
significant findings, leading to underreporting of null
results.
3.
Variation in definitions of self-comforting
behaviours across studies may limit direct comparisons.
TIMELINE AND TEAM RESPONSIBILITIES
The proposed timeframe for the research is shown
below:
The American Journal of Social Science and Education Innovations
23
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajssei
The American Journal of Social Science and Education Innovations
Table 2: Research Timeline
S/N
Week
Activity
1.
Week 1–2
Develop search strategy and pilot.
2.
Week 3–4
Conduct database searches
3.
Week 5–6
Screen titles and abstracts
4.
Week 7–8
Full-text screening and quality appraisal
5.
Week 9–10
Data extraction
6
Week 11–12
Synthesis and reporting
DISSEMINATION
Findings will be disseminated through:
1.
Peer-reviewed journal publications.
2.
Conference presentations in psychology
and sociology forums.
3.
Executive summaries shared with mental
health practitioners and educators.
REGISTRATION AND REPORTING
This protocol will be registered in the International
Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews
(PROSPERO). The review will adhere to the PRISMA
guidelines to ensure transparency and rigor.
CONCLUSION
This protocol outlines a systematic review aimed at
exploring the experiences of BAME academics in
alternative
higher
education
institutions.
Synthesizing existing literature, this review seeks to
identify key themes, challenges, and opportunities
faced by BAME academics in non-traditional
settings. The systematic approach, including
comprehensive
database
searches,
rigorous
inclusion criteria, and thematic analysis, ensures a
thorough examination of the topic. The findings
from this review will provide valuable insights into
the lived experiences of BAME academics, informing
policy and practice to create more inclusive and
equitable higher education environments. By
highlighting best practices and areas needing
improvement, this review aims to contribute to the
development
of
supportive
institutional
frameworks that address the specific needs of
BAME academics. Ultimately, this work underscores
the importance of fostering diversity and inclusion
within higher education, promoting a more
inclusive academic landscape that benefits all
members of the academic community.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors declare no funding of interest.
FUNDING
This research did not receive any specific grant from
funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-
for-profit sectors.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors would like to express their sincere
gratitude to Dr. Matthew Carlile, Dean of the
Education Department, GBS, and Tracy Maule, Dean
of the University of Suffolk, for their valuable
feedback. Appreciation is extended to Dr. Robert
Ajani and Marsida Horeshka for their support and
encouragement. The authors would also like to
acknowledge the management and technical staff
of PENKUP Research Institute, Birmingham, UK, for
their excellent assistance and for providing medical
writing and editorial support in accordance with
Good Publication Practice (GPP3) guidelines.
REFERENCES
1.
Adamson, S.R., Kispert, M.K.O., Francis, J.,
Meiser, D., Hernandez, E., Huxhold, W.,
Richards, M., Beatty, N. and Kani, J., (2022).
Beginning Your Research. Information
Navigator.
2.
Arday, J., & Mirza, H. S. (2018). Dismantling
Race in Higher Education: Racism,
Whiteness and Decolonising the Academy.
Palgrave Macmillan.
3.
Arday, J., & Wilson, M. (2021). Many Rivers
to Cross: The Challenges and Barriers Facing
Aspiring Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic
(BAME) Leaders in the Academy. In Doing
Equity and Diversity for Success in Higher
Education (pp. 313-324). Springer.
4.
Bhopal, K. (2020). White Privilege: The Myth
of a Post-Racial Society. Policy Press.
5.
Coburn, L., (2024). Choosing and Narrowing
a Research Topic. Radiologic Technology,
95(6), pp.439-449.
6.
Felix, M., (2022). Anti-racism in UK higher
education. Centre for Global Higher
Education working paper series, 83, pp.1-
22.
7.
Harris, L.C. and Ogbonna, E., (2023). Equal
opportunities but unequal mentoring? The
perceptions of mentoring by Black and
The American Journal of Social Science and Education Innovations
24
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajssei
The American Journal of Social Science and Education Innovations
minority ethnic academics in the UK
university
sector.
Human
Resource
Management Journal, 33(4), pp.940-956.
8.
Hill, J. and Chen, C., (2024). Development of
a tool to automatically translate literature
search syntax. Journal of EAHIL, 20(4),
pp.13-18.
9.
Ishaq, M. and Hussain, A.M., (2022). BAME
employees' work experience in the UK
public sector: An empirical study of
academic
and
research
libraries.
International Journal of Public Sector
Management, 35(3), pp.334-348.
10.
Mkwebu, T. (2024). Racial Equality and
Inclusivity in Academia: Perspectives and
Strategies for Antiracism Outcomes. In The
Palgrave Handbook of Antiracism in Human
Resource Development (pp. 355-381).
Springer.
11.
Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron
I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. (2021)
The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated
guideline for reporting systematic reviews.
BMJ 2021;372:n71. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71.
12.
Rana, K.S., Bashir, A., Begum, F. and
Bartlett, H., (2022, May). Bridging the BAME
attainment gap: Student and staff
perspectives on tackling academic bias. In
Frontiers in Education (Vol. 7, p. 868349).
Frontiers Media SA.
13.
Rollock, N. (2019). Staying Power: The
Career Experiences and Strategies of UK
Black Female Professors. UCU.
14.
Salvador-Oliván, J.A., Marco-Cuenca, G. and
Arquero-Avilés, R., (2019). Errors in search
strategies used in systematic reviews and
their effects on information retrieval.
Journal of the Medical Library Association:
JMLA, 107(2), p.210.
15.
Smith,
L.
T.
(2021).
Decolonizing
Methodologies: Research and Indigenous
Peoples. Zed Books.
16.
Thomas, D.S. and Mikel, M., (2021).
Understanding and interrupting systemic
racism: A ‘race equality receipt’ as a
mechanism to promote transformational
conversations and stimulate actions to
redress race inequality. In Doing equity and
diversity for success in higher education:
Redressing structural inequalities in the
academy (pp. 325-343). Cham: Springer
International Publishing.
17.
Tiatia-Siau, J., (2023). Racism in Academia.
In Handbook of Critical Whiteness:
Deconstructing
Dominant
Discourses
Across Disciplines (pp. 1-16). Singapore:
Springer Nature Singapore.
18.
Tosco, M., (2021). From IPA to wildcards: A
critical look at some African Latin
orthographies. In Language and identity.
Theories and experiences in lexicography
and linguistic policies in a global world (Vol.
7, pp. 56-83). EUT.
19.
Verma, A., (2022). Positioning anti-racism in
higher education. In Anti-Racism in Higher
Education (pp. 3-28). Policy Press.
20.
Zhang, X., Zhao, B., Qin, J., Hou, W., Su, Y.
and Yang, H., (2021). Practical wildcard
searchable encryption with tree‐based
index. International Journal of Intelligent
Systems, 36(12), pp.7475-7499.
