Maria’s PgCert Blog

This reflective commentary considers the design of a teaching intervention focused on the intersection of sustainability and social equity within a Cosmetic Science course in a Business and Science department. While the intervention has not yet been delivered, the process of designing it has provided a valuable opportunity to critically reflect on my academic practice, institutional constraints, and the challenges of embedding intersectional social justice within an industry-facing scientific curriculum. This reflection situates the proposed intervention within institutional, sector-wide, and industry frameworks, while also engaging with my positionality and the realities of academic labour in higher education.

The intervention was developed within the context of UAL’s institutional commitment to social justice and inclusive pedagogies. UAL’s Education for Social Justice Framework foregrounds the need to address structural inequalities through curriculum design, encouraging educators to move beyond surface-level inclusion towards critical engagement with power, history, and systems of exclusion. Designing a workshop that positions sustainability as a social justice issue within cosmetic science aligns closely with this institutional ethos. However, the fact that the intervention was conceived as an out-of-curriculum addition rather than a core curricular component raises important questions about how inclusion and sustainability work is valued and resourced within higher education.

At a sector-wide level, Advance HE promotes inclusive learning and teaching as an embedded and sustained practice, emphasising reflexivity, dialogue, and systemic awareness. Yet, as Fernandez et al. (2024) argue, institutional approaches to equality and inclusion can become managerial or performative when they rely on isolated initiatives or individual goodwill rather than structural support. Reflecting on my own experience, the decision to design the intervention as a standalone workshop was partly pragmatic, allowing flexibility and experimentation. However, the reality that my current workload does not allow for the delivery of additional out-of-curriculum activities highlights a key tension identified in the literature: responsibility for inclusion is often devolved to individual educators without corresponding adjustments to workload, recognition, or institutional structures.

This tension becomes particularly visible when considering the nature of the intervention itself. The workshop aims to encourage students to critically examine sustainability narratives within the cosmetics industry by exploring who benefits from “green” or “clean” beauty and who bears the environmental and social costs of production. This approach reflects Nichols and Stahl’s (2019) argument that intersectionality in higher education must involve institutional and structural critique, rather than focusing solely on identity or representation. Designing such an intervention has prompted me to reflect on how institutional structures—including workload models and curricular boundaries—can unintentionally limit the scope of transformative pedagogical work.

My student cohort further reinforces the importance of this intervention. Approximately half of the students on the Cosmetic Science course are international students, bringing with them diverse cultural, geographic, and socioeconomic perspectives. Many have direct or familial experiences of the global inequalities underpinning cosmetic supply chains, environmental harm, or uneven regulatory frameworks. Designing the workshop with this cohort in mind has highlighted the potential richness of student-led discussion and peer learning, while also underscoring the ethical responsibility to create spaces where these perspectives can be shared meaningfully rather than instrumentalised. At the same time, it has reinforced the need for sensitivity and care, ensuring that students are not positioned as spokespersons for particular regions or experiences.

Reflecting on my own positionality has been central to this process. I am a cisgender, heterosexual woman from Cyprus who moved to the UK fourteen years ago to study and subsequently remained in academia. Teaching cosmetic science within an arts institution, places me at an intersection of disciplinary cultures, where scientific authority, creative inquiry, and critical pedagogy coexist, sometimes uneasily. This positioning has shaped my awareness of how scientific curricula can marginalise ethical and social questions, particularly when aligned closely with industry priorities.

Engaging with Fernandez et al. (2024) after my tutor’s recommendations has reinforced my commitment to resisting top-down or prescriptive approaches to inclusion, as is the norm in most UK educational institutions and UAL. Although the intervention has not yet been delivered, its design intentionally decentralises my authority as a lecturer, privileging dialogue, case studies, and collective analysis. This reflects an understanding of inclusion as a relational practice rather than a set of competencies to be transmitted. Designing the workshop has therefore been as much about interrogating my own assumptions as it has been about student learning.

The decision to frame the intervention as a standalone workshop has also prompted critical reflection. While this format allows flexibility, it risks reinforcing the marginality of social justice work by positioning it as optional or supplementary. Nichols and Stahl (2019) caution against such episodic approaches, arguing that meaningful intersectional practice requires institutional embedding. Acknowledging that my workload currently limits my ability to deliver additional sessions has forced me to confront the structural conditions under which inclusive practice operates. Rather than viewing this as a personal shortcoming, I increasingly understand it as an institutional issue that reflects how teaching, care, and inclusion work are distributed and valued.

Looking ahead, the longevity of the intervention remains an important consideration. One potential way to extend its impact without significantly increasing workload is through the development of a shared digital resource. For example, students could be invited to analyse cosmetic brand websites as a pre-task, focusing on visual representation, sustainability claims, and inclusion. Using a platform such as Padlet or Miro would allow students to share observations asynchronously, creating a repository of case studies that could be revisited during future teaching or embedded into existing modules. This approach aligns with inclusive pedagogical principles by valuing diverse perspectives and supporting co-construction of knowledge, while also acknowledging practical constraints.

In conclusion, although the intervention has not yet been delivered, the process of designing it has been a meaningful site of professional learning. It has deepened my understanding of intersectional social justice, highlighted the importance of institutional critique, and foregrounded the realities of academic labour within higher education. This reflection demonstrates that sustainable transformation in teaching practice is not only about innovation, but also about recognising and challenging the structural conditions that shape what is possible. As such, the intervention remains a work in progress—reflective of both my aspirations as an educator and the constraints within which those aspirations must be negotiated.

References:

Advance HE (2021) Embedding equality, diversity and inclusion in learning and teaching. York: Advance HE.

Fernandez, E., Ahmed, S., Johnson, R. and Patel, S. (2024) ‘Against managerial inclusion: Reclaiming social justice as relational practice in higher education’, Teaching in Higher Education, pp. 1–15.

Nichols, S. and Stahl, G. (2019) ‘Intersectionality in higher education research: A critical review’, Higher Education Research & Development, 38(6), pp. 1255–1268. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2019.1638341

Building on my earlier reflections on intersectionality, this piece considers how race intersects with other identities to shape student experiences within my practice as a science educator and personal tutor in higher education. Reflecting on race has required me to engage more critically with the structural dimensions of education, moving beyond individual interactions to consider how institutional norms, policies, and expectations are racialised.

As a personal tutor, I work closely with students navigating academic and personal challenges that are often shaped by racialised experiences. Students from minoritised backgrounds may describe feelings of heightened visibility, pressure to perform, or uncertainty about belonging within the university environment. These experiences frequently intersect with class, faith, disability, and migration status, compounding barriers to engagement and confidence. Reflecting on these encounters has made me more attentive to how race shapes not only access to support, but also students’ willingness to trust institutional processes and articulate their needs.

Bradbury’s (2020) application of Critical Race Theory to education policy highlights how ostensibly neutral systems can reproduce racial inequities through assumptions about language, assessment, and standards. This has prompted me to reflect on how assessment practices within science education may similarly privilege particular forms of academic ‘capital’. Expectations around written expression, scientific communication, and “professional” behaviour can disadvantage students whose prior educational experiences or linguistic backgrounds differ from dominant norms. While these practices are rarely intended to exclude, their cumulative impact can reinforce racialised patterns of attainment and participation.

Teaching in scientific disciplines has also led me to reflect on representation and imagined futures. Garrett’s (2024) work on the career trajectories of racialised minority PhD graduates underscores how racism continues to shape academic pathways, aspirations, and perceptions of legitimacy within higher education. This has encouraged me to consider how the undergraduate and postgraduate teaching spaces that I am routinely part of, contribute to students’ sense of whether they belong within science, research, or academia more broadly. The absence of diverse role models, coupled with implicit assumptions about who is suited to scientific careers, can subtly constrain students’ imagined futures.

I could say that this understanding I have, stems from my own experiences. Despite all the privileges I had – being a heterosexual female from a European country, I did not have parents or grandparents who attended university, nevertheless in a different country than my own. Hence navigating the complexities of academia, understanding the different levels of education, and eventually accepting that I can be part of this ‘system’, was a lengthy process. I can only imagine how much more difficult or long this process could be for my students that come from even more underprivileged backgrounds, where the lack of ‘inside knowledge’ is compounded with systemic racism, sexism and homophobia.

Reflecting on my practice, I recognise the importance of adopting a more explicitly anti-racist but simultaneously agile and reflexive approach. This includes critically examining curriculum content, assessment design, and everyday interactions, as well as listening attentively to students’ lived experiences without individualising systemic issues. An intersectional approach to race, disability, and faith in HE requires sustained attention to power, representation, and structural inequalities, reinforcing that inclusive practice is not simply about supporting individuals, but about challenging the conditions that shape educational opportunity.

References:
Bradbury, A. (2020) ‘A critical race theory framework for education policy analysis: The case of bilingual learners and assessment policy in England’, Race Ethnicity and Education, 23(2), pp. 241–260.

Garrett, R. (2024) ‘Racism shapes careers: career trajectories and imagined futures of racialised minority PhDs in UK higher education’, Globalisation, Societies and Education, pp. 1–15.

Following my earlier reflection on intersectionality and disability, this piece focuses specifically on how faith intersects with other identities within my practice as a science educator and personal tutor in higher education. Teaching disciplines such as biology, microbiology and materials science requires careful navigation of knowledge systems that are often framed as objective, value-neutral, and secular. Reflecting on my practice has highlighted how this framing can create tensions for students for whom faith is a significant and integrated aspect of identity.

In my role as a personal tutor, students occasionally disclose that their faith shapes how they experience university life, including their engagement with scientific study. These disclosures are rarely framed as challenges to scientific content, but rather relate to belonging, representation, and the emotional labour of negotiating perceived incompatibilities between faith and science. This is particularly evident where faith intersects with ethnicity, gender, or migration status, and where students may already experience marginalisation within academic spaces. Such intersections can amplify feelings of visibility, scrutiny, or pressure to conform to dominant norms.

One notable exception was when a student disclosed to me that they ceased having relationships with their family as they were going against the family’s faith, culture and wishes, and as a female they chose to pursue university studies, in a creative scientific field – which was not the norm for other female members of their family. Again, I had to think about my reactions during this exchange and how I could better support the student in their new reality, rather than collude with them in their anger and sadness over losing their family’s support.

Within the classroom, I have also become increasingly aware that science education can unintentionally reinforce binaries between rationality and belief. For example, curriculum narratives that present scientific knowledge as entirely detached from social, cultural, or historical context may implicitly position faith as antithetical to academic legitimacy. Reflecting on this has prompted me to reconsider how I frame scientific inquiry, not by compromising disciplinary rigor, but by acknowledging the human, historical, and ethical dimensions of scientific knowledge production. I constantly share tidbits of information on the history of scientific research, prompting the students to think how they can avoid historical injustices and how they can safeguard their practices from causing harm. This approach creates space for students to engage critically without feeling that aspects of their identity must be left at the door. It is however a very delicate process, that requires me to understand and have a good relationship with each student cohort, to avoid revictimisation and perpetration of outdated beliefs as facts.

Intersectionality has also sharpened my awareness that faith does not exist in isolation. Students who hold visible faith identities, particularly women or students from racialised backgrounds, may experience additional layers of surveillance or stereotyping in laboratory and classroom settings. As a tutor and educator, this has reinforced the importance of attentive listening, reflexivity, and cultural humility and understanding, particularly when supporting students navigating both academic and personal pressures.

Moving forward, I aim to continue developing an inclusive science pedagogy that recognises faith as one of many intersecting identities shaping student experience. This includes being mindful of language, teaching examples, and assessment scheduling, as well as fostering learning environments where intellectual challenge does not require identity erasure. This reflection has reinforced that inclusive practice in science education is not about resolving tensions between faith and science, but about creating spaces where complexity can be acknowledged and engaged with thoughtfully.