Paper short abstract:

This presentation takes seriously Ulf Hannerz's suggestion that diversity is anthropology's business and analyses how it has come to matter in England's higher education system. Specifically, it examines how participants in a university's diversity initiatives theorise diversity.

Paper long abstract:

The Thatcher government's policies which hastened de-industrialisation, encouraged privatisation and grew the financial sector continued under the Major and New Labour governments. Much of Britain's manufacturing was eliminated and the economy became dominated by the service sector. It brought with it an increased emphasis on the university system's role in preparing the young people for the new forms of labour now required. However, the largest increase in university entrance was from those from a middle-class background. In response governments since the 1990s have pursued a widening participation (WP) agenda. They have stressed that not only have universities to increase entry from under-represented groups, they also have to change their course offerings to more adequately serve the economy and their pedagogical and pastoral practices to serve the new, diverse, attendees.

Diversity might be anthropology's business (Hannerz, 2010), but the discipline has paid relatively little attention to WP. Instead, it has been studied principally by sociologists and education scholars who have emphasised how it has failed the working class, see for example Diane Reay's 'Miseducation'. In this presentation, I draw on ongoing fieldwork conducted with current and former WP participants to address anthropology's oversight and offer a new perspective. Specifically, I focus on how WP participants come to think about diversity. Ultimately, by exploring this phenomenon, I contribute to an ongoing conversation within the anthropology of Britain on the development of English ideas of otherness.