This article partially explains a variety of social/exam based phenomena that lead to and are often associated with academic racism. This may include racism that is made more respectable via its codification into Higher Education Institution output (including publications, textbooks produced within Higher Education and the general misuse of Higher Education influence for racially preferential gain both within Universities themselves, and in university collaborations with industry).

The term also refers to racially biased publication productions processes. The possibilities of academic racism are most clearly signaled by the departure from traditional and well-entrenched exam and test taking methods of assessment that are the mainstay of any meritocratic basis on which individuals can be assessed. Many situations in which testing taking and assessment are based upon social decision-making processes as opposed to more acceptable and less socially discriminatory 'pen and paper' tests (ideally, machine tests/computer tests) have the clear potential to enable discriminatory practice. Examples of such situations might include vivas, oral examinations (except within linguistics), etc....

Academic racism and the publication production process

The misuse of power by heads of department, supervisors, or examiners often provides certain individuals and groups with those resources needed to produce publications of a particular type over and above those provided to others. Such resources might include time (by providing false or meaningless direction in the supervisorial role), computer/information resource access

Racial basis in academic practice

Possible examples of racial bias include (though are not limited to) some of the following :

Differences in collaboration and group publication practices that discriminate on racial and ethnic grounds.

A lack of objective, formalised and or standardised undergraduate, postgraduate and post-doctoral assessment that is clearly discriminatory in nature (for example, the lack of pen and paper tests/multiple-choice machine based tests to assess mathematical competence). PhDs/MScs that may be awarded without standardised testing (namely, 'high standard' pen-and-paper tests, such as, for example : http://www.leeds.ac.uk/students/office/exampapers/math.htm – which is a link to exam papers that are not too difficult by Oxbridge standards, especially considering that they are modular).

A lack of adherence to good practice (often resulting in actual malpractice) when supervising, teaching or assessing different members from different groups.

A discriminatory or unrepresentative admissions process (that would often result in some ethnic groups being substantially over-represented in poorly performing institutions whilst being under-represented in more respectable/high teaching quality institutions).

A lack of standardised supervision processes or records. For example, short and practical records of supervision discussion and guidance at the undergraduate, post-graduate and doctoral level - preventing students and supervisors from resolving differences of factual quotation.

Preferential treatment of students ("If you cannot provide the same help you provide to one student, to all students, refrain from providing it except where 'reasonable'").

Publications and academic racism

Graduate/doctoral training courses and racial bias

Any training course that attempts to assess either an individual, or group of individuals without making use of a (prefarably state-level) standard of examination and assessment (usually taking the form of human-marked or machine-marked pen and paper/computer tests) after having provided said individuals with the same quality of lectured material/preparation material (including lecture notes, information resource access, etc...) is clearly open to bias. The most natural form of bias would likely be racial bias.

See also

Racism in Higher Education<br>
Racism