Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Belonging in Leadership: Shaping the Future of the Teaching Workforce
Written by Susi Waters
Susi Waters, Operations Manager at Norfolk Research School; the Research Schools Network (RSN) Regional EDI Link (East of England and East Midlands); and Operations Manager and ITT Strategic Lead at the Julian Teaching School Hub.
In today’s educational landscape, fostering diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging (DEIB) feels essential for creating a supportive and effective teaching workforce that reflects the lived experiences of the students we serve. This blog post offers some thoughts on the importance of DEIB in educational leadership and highlights the challenges and opportunities for improvement.
Understanding Intersectionality and Privilege in Leadership
One of the key considerations in promoting DEIB in education is recognising intersectionality — the overlapping and interconnected nature of social categorisations such as race and ethnicity, gender, disability, and socioeconomic status. Leadership roles in education have historically been dominated by white cisgender individuals without disabilities, but there’s a growing call for more inclusive representation.
Many of us are familiar with the concept of “checking our privilege,” which can sometimes trigger defensiveness. It’s helpful to remember that, in this context, “privilege” refers to an absence of disadvantage. Having “white privilege” doesn’t equate to guaranteed success; it means that one’s skin colour hasn’t posed societal barriers.
Chris Hildrew, a headteacher in Somerset, articulates this experience well:
“I am usually in the majority. I joke about how I have the privilege full house: White. Male. English. Straight. Cisgender. Middle class. […] When I speak, people listen. They always have. I expect them to.“
Data from Edurio(2021) and NFER (2024) reveal that the representation of non-white educators, disabled individuals, and LGBTQIA+ educators remains low in leadership positions. Addressing these disparities calls for thoughtful recruitment, retention, and career development strategies.
The Role of ITT Recruitment in Teacher Diversity
Recruiting a diverse teaching workforce starts with how we market initial teacher training (ITT) programmes. While people of colour are overrepresented among applicants for ITT, they are significantly underrepresented in the teaching workforce overall. In fact, 60% of schools in England had an all-white teaching staff in 2021 – 22, with 86% having an all-white senior leadership team.
Research by Dr. Gabriella Beckles-Raymond (2020) underlines the importance of targeted recruitment strategies aimed at attracting African, Caribbean, and Asian teachers. Schools and training providers might benefit from adopting inclusive messaging and outreach initiatives to encourage individuals from underrepresented backgrounds to explore teaching careers.
Recruitment should be thoughtful. For instance, we could consider:
- Do providers offer pre-application support, like explaining the English school system to those who didn’t grow up here?
- Are interview processes truly inclusive? Do they provide interview questions in advance or offer online options?
- Is the interview panel diverse in terms of race, gender, and age?
Making sure that trainee teachers have the right support means addressing barriers that can impede career progression. Access to mentorship, leadership training, and workplace policies that foster inclusion are all important aspects to think about.
Making Teaching a Sustainable Career for All
For many educators, especially those from marginalised groups, remaining in the profession long-term can be tough. Research from BERA (2019) on LGBTQIA+ teachers and the “Missing Mothers” project (2024) highlights how workplace culture, lack of support, and discrimination can push talented educators away from the profession.
To encourage sustainability in teaching careers, schools should implement policies that accommodate diverse needs, such as:
- Support for teachers going through menopause.
- Flexible work arrangements for primary caregivers.
Anti-discrimination policies that protect neurodivergent and LGBTQIA+ individuals.
Leadership: Breaking Barriers and Creating Opportunities
Leadership in education needs to evolve to better reflect the communities it serves. Disparities persist; for instance, men are twice as likely to take on leadership positions as women, even though women comprise the majority of the teaching workforce. Gaps remain in representation among racial and ethnic minorities, disabled individuals, and LGBTQIA+ professionals.
Educational leaders can play a significant role in advocating for equity by:
- Sponsoring and mentoring diverse talent.
- Implementing transparent hiring and promotion practices.
- Encouraging conversations about privilege and systemic barriers.
- Revisiting senior leadership recruitment processes to ensure job descriptions and interview processes don’t unintentionally place women, disabled individuals, or caregivers at a disadvantage.
Moving Forward
We should ask ourselves: are we really setting up all teachers to enjoy a sustainable and fulfilling career?
Rethinking our approach to leadership is key — not just at senior levels but also in shaping the next generation of educators. There are alternative pathways to leadership in education beyond headteacher roles, such as Teaching School Hubs, Research Schools, and ITT leadership. These roles often offer flexibility, hybrid options, and meaningful opportunities to affect educational policy.
Ultimately, if we don’t act, the next generation of teachers will mirror those who currently remain in the system. Without deliberate attention and change, we risk perpetuating a cycle where leadership remains uniform. However, by embracing diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging, we have the potential to create a teaching workforce where all educators feel valued and every child sees themselves reflected in their role models.
To cultivate a more inclusive educational system, leaders should commit to ongoing education and implementing best practices. By embracing these principles, we can nurture a teaching workforce where diversity is celebrated, equity is upheld, inclusion is practised, and belonging is experienced by all. The future of education rests on leaders willing to challenge the status quo and promote DEIB at every level.
This blog is a summary of a session that Susi delivered as part of Derby Research School’s Change Champions conference in autumn 2024; it forms part of the RSN and Norfolk Research School’s ongoing work around EDI and developing diverse voices.
All sources and recommended reading can be found here and you can watch the full session here.
Decolonising the curriculum
Written by Shashi Knott
Shashi Knott is an English teacher and former Deputy Head of Sixth Form, with 16 years of experience teaching in state secondary schools across North London. After earning her MSc in Education, Power, and Change, she transitioned from her role as a full-time English teacher to focus on driving change within education. She is interested in working with other professionals to see how we can create more compassionate environments in schools. She is currently an outreach English teacher and Associate Trainer with KCA Training.
Decolonising the curriculum is like finding new love—it’s hard work, often requiring us to let go of what we’ve cherished. It’s a struggle, and one that calls for understanding and acknowledgment of the emotions involved.
The department meeting went silent. A chair scraped awkwardly as we shifted at tables. It was nearly 4.30pm. Everyone had marking to do. Was this about to get tricky?
In London, where I work as an English teacher, 46.2% of residents identify as non-white. It’s not a difficult context to make an argument that the texts we teach our students should be more representative. And yet, somehow, we don’t seem to make it happen.
We could absolutely have spent some of our fast- vanishing department budget on a new set of texts for Year 9. Amazingly, we all agreed that Elizabeth Acevedo’s ‘The Poet X’ would be an excellent choice for the spring term. However, when one of us asked, “What about George Orwell?” I know they were not the only ones thinking this. The silence in the room might have suggested otherwise, and we all knew what we should say next. So when our Head of Department was conciliatory, coming up with the comfort of delay, we were all secretly relieved. “We’ll revisit the discussion at the end of the term.” “ We’ll review again in our gained time.” “We’ll assess our existing schemes of work for diversity. ”
We know what we should be advocating for, but there are so many reasons why teaching ‘Animal Farm’ feels more comfortable, and it’s not just because we already have established schemes of work.
As English teachers and often English graduates, we have all internalised an idea of what constitutes the canon. Literary critic Harold Bloom describes canonical texts as works of ‘aesthetic beauty’ (1994) and therefore, he suggests, to question these texts is to question the merit of art itself. Bloom describes the ‘idealistic resenters’ who ‘denounce competition’ and want to focus on marginalised voices, as missing the point of art and culture. (1994) Whilst Bloom’s ideas have been convincingly challenged and are now certainly out of fashion, they are ideas that we cannot fail to have internalised. Many of us grew up with these views being the dominant narrative in the study of English Literature and speaking for myself, I did much work to embrace the canon. I certainly did not want to be seen as someone who missed the point of art.
We have to acknowledge that decolonising our minds is uncomfortable. It involves acknowledging that some of the texts we loved, we might need to let go. A bit like the way a song from our youth, however rubbish, will always evoke strong feelings, those first occasions of literary love will do the same. The first time you felt seen, grown up, clever, understood. That first moment of connection with the canon. Mine was Keats, the perfect poet for the
misunderstood teen. Decolonising the curriculum involves a deconstruction of the canon, of beloved texts, and that can mean a painful epistemic discomfort. We picked apart those texts. We invested meaning in them. We succeeded at them. That’s why we’re English teachers.
Decolonising the English curriculum is as much about interrogating our own relationship with literature as it is about buying new books or creating schemes of work. It is about being willing to forge new relationships with texts and giving our students those special moments of connection, potentially with texts that are not our one true love. It’s not just about representation for global majority students, it’s about a more inclusive literary canon for everyone.
Maybe as English teachers we need to go forth and find new literary loves. New characters to fall for. New writers to make students feel understood, and to voice, in new ways, all the age old feelings. Not a new canon. Just new names to add in. New, gritty, glittering, literary loves for students of English to come.
References
Bloom, H. (2014) The western canon: The books and school of the ages. New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
What Is the Point of Dialogue?
Written by Sharon Booth
Founder & Director, Solutions Not Sides. Sharon has an MA from Cambridge University in Theology and Religious Studies. She taught English at Amideast in Tunisia and then went on to work in Amman, Jordan as a Productions Manager. She was employed as PA to the Defence Attaché at the British Embassy, then returned to the UK and began work in Israeli-Palestinian conflict resolution, founding the Solutions Not Sides Education Programme in 2010. Sharon speaks Arabic and French and has studied ancient Hebrew. In January 2016, she was awarded a master’s degree with distinction from King's College London, specialising in nationalism and religion.
Dialogue is fundamental to building relationships and resolving differences. It is a crucial tool for addressing conflicts, yet when pain and injustice run deep, the idea of engaging in dialogue can feel futile—or even wrong.
When faced with deep moral disagreements, people may question whether dialogue is worthwhile. Engaging with opposing viewpoints can feel uncomfortable and even counterproductive. In such moments, the instinct may be to advocate solely for what feels right. Yet, it is precisely during these times that dialogue becomes most valuable—not necessarily to achieve agreement but to foster greater empathy, reflection, and mutual understanding.
Dialogue in a Polarised World
These challenges are heightened in times of deep societal division. When issues are viewed in black-and-white terms, conflicts become entrenched, and meaningful conversations break down. This dynamic has been evident in Britain in recent years on topics like Brexit, immigration, and the Israel-Palestine conflict. Though often framed as binary, these issues are complex and multi-layered. Recognising this complexity is key to breaking through entrenched positions—but it can feel overwhelming, particularly for educators navigating these discussions in schools.
In England, the Department for Education requires teachers to maintain political impartiality in the classroom. While this guidance is intended to prevent partisan bias, it has also led to uncertainty about how to approach difficult topics. Some educators, lacking expertise in areas like the Middle East conflict, may choose to avoid these discussions altogether. However, shutting down conversations about political and social issues does a disservice to young people.
Without education on these topics and training in how to engage in difficult conversations, students miss out on opportunities to develop a nuanced understanding of the world. Worse, they may grow up ill-equipped to engage thoughtfully with societal challenges.
Dialogue as a Tool for Empowerment
This is where dialogue finds its true purpose—not as an end in itself but as a means to empower young people. At Solutions Not Sides (SNS), we developed the Olive Branch Award for schools, colleges, and community institutions as a framework for discussing Israel-Palestine. Rooted in values of non-violence, equality, and the rejection of hate, the programme takes a “win-win” approach to contentious issues. Within this structure, dialogue becomes a tool for critical thinking, helping students articulate their beliefs while respecting others’ perspectives.
The Olive Branch Award is not about reconciling opposing views or forcing agreement. Instead, its purpose is to foster understanding—of social dynamics, emotional experiences, and conceptual frameworks—so that students can make informed decisions about how to act. By engaging in dialogue within this framework, young people learn how to stand up for their beliefs while recognising that others may hold different views. Crucially, they also learn that hatred has no place in a diverse, compassionate, and fair society.
To be effective, dialogue must be approached with care and supported by specific tools that become embedded in school culture over time. Skills such as active listening, effective communication, and empathy are cultivated over a three-year period through the Olive Branch programme.
One common concern is that engaging with differing perspectives could be seen as endorsing them. However, dialogue is not about validating all views equally but about understanding why different perspectives exist. This allows students to reflect critically without feeling pressured to accept or condone harmful viewpoints.
At SNS, we emphasise that education is not about excusing or justifying views but about understanding why people hold them. This approach enables students to develop both intellectual rigour and emotional intelligence—essential qualities for active citizenship.
Supporting Schools Through the Olive Branch Award
Schools and colleges that participate in the Olive Branch Award benefit from a range of activities and resources designed to foster dialogue. We support staff and students through training, networking, an annual conference for staff, ambassador programmes, priority places on our residential courses for students, and opportunities to engage with peacebuilders from Israel-Palestine.
This summer, the first cohort of Olive Branch schools will complete the three-year programme and receive accreditation. Some of the initiatives we’ve seen include:
- Lunchtime and after-school clubs exploring conflict-related topics like journalism
- School murals dedicated to peace and justice
- Students founding interfaith initiatives in their schools
- Peer-to-peer learning projects following SNS workshops
These initiatives show that, when given the tools to navigate complex discussions, students become empowered to address difficult topics with inclusivity and empathy.
The Bigger Picture: Why Dialogue Matters
In today’s polarised world, it’s easy to feel disillusioned about dialogue, especially when faced with deep-seated divisions. But avoiding difficult conversations only fuels misunderstanding and hostility. Through structured dialogue, we can equip young people with the skills to engage with complexity with confidence and compassion.
The point of dialogue isn’t just to resolve differences; it’s to empower individuals to think critically, act ethically, and engage constructively—even with those they disagree with. In doing so, we prepare the next generation not just to lead but to build a society rooted in mutual respect and shared humanity.
At its core, dialogue is about more than talking—it’s about listening with purpose and acting with integrity. Within a framework that prioritises education over division and understanding over hate, it becomes one of the most powerful tools for creating a better future.
What can we learn about masculinity and misogyny from the Netflix drama 'Adolescence'?
Written by Bold Voices
Bold Voices is an award-winning social enterprise preparing and empowering school communities to recognise and tackle gender inequality and gender-based violence through the delivery of educational talks, workshops, training and resources for young people, teachers and parents.
Originally published here: https://www.boldvoices.co.uk/blog/2025/3/20/what-can-we-learn-about-masculinity-and-misogyny-from-the-netflix-drama-adolescence
On March 13 Adolescence premiered on Netflix, a week on and the show has a 98% rating on Rotten Tomatoes and has sent waves across media, starting conversations about themes of masculinity, the ‘manosphere’, incel culture and gender-based violence more widely. It is a show that has driven home the fear of what happens when harmful attitudes and beliefs develop into extreme violence.
If you’re looking to understand some of the key terms used in the series take a read of this article first: https://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/andrew-tate-incel-meaning-adolescence-netflix-b1217106.html
The question of ‘why’ runs throughout the four-part series. What made this 13 year old boy brutally stab and murder his school mate, Katie. Where did his behaviour come from? Was it the ‘masculinity’ modelled by his father? A generally kind man who displays a couple of emotional and physical outbursts throughout the show (including physically intimidating and handling a child who vandalised his work van)? Was it his friends at school who ultimately provided him with the murder weapon? Was it the misogyny influencers and their ideas? Or the social media sites platforming these influencers and offering young people the impunity which allows them to say harmful and destructive things to and about each other?
Throughout the show we are trying to understand if Jamie is a good kid at heart who was ultimately misguided and has done something devastating, but out of character. Or whether he is a bad kid that has been able to manipulate and hide his darkness from his parents, and even us as viewers. But then again how bad of a kid can you really be with planet wallpaper and stickers of tiny astronauts? These minor and seemingly unremarkable, but ultimately essential, details about Jamie’s room make up the final scenes of this powerful show. They are a reminder that Jamie could be any young boy in any family. It is just how unremarkable he is as a character that makes this story so poignant.
So what themes about masculinity, and adolescence, can we draw out from the show?
Masculinity, the ‘manosphere’ and ‘incel’ communities
Jamie is a boy who we come to understand has been spending time online, getting drawn into ‘manosphere’ and ‘incel’ communities. During the second episode that takes a look at Jamie’s school, we learn about the “call to action by the manosphere”, the meaning behind ‘red pills’ and ‘blue pills’ and the 80/20 rule (that 80% of women are attracted to 20% of men).
“Red pill is like I see the truth, it’s a call to action by the manosphere. Which is where the 100 comes in, the 80/20 rule. 80% of women are attracted to 20% of men. Women, you must trick them because you will never get them in a normal way… she’s saying he’s an Incel dad” – Episode 2 | 29:50 – 31:00
When we hear from Jamie about this, he acknowledges that he knows about these ideas and that “he had a look but didn’t like it” although in talking about the 80/20 rule he says “I do think they’re right about that though”.
The writer, Jack Thorne, is very honest about the fact that through his research he realised that “there was a logic to this and how they see the world”. It is through Thorne’s vulnerability in admitting this that we are reminded of an uncomfortable truth, that the attitudes and beliefs displayed by many of these online forums and communities are attractive to boys and young men and resonate with a vulnerability they actually feel.
In the third episode Jamie is asked about what he thinks about men, about masculinity. In particular, he’s asked about his dad and grandad, what he thinks about them and what type of men they are. We get insights into the stereotypes that pervade about masculinity; his dad as a hard worker who provides for his family, who can get angry and lose his temper, who loves his wife and is good to women, but doesn’t have any female friends. None of this is positioned as ‘good’ or ‘bad’, but it holds a mirror up to the expectations we have of men and masculinity that continue to frame a ‘real man’ as someone who is physically and emotionally strong and dominant, who protects and provides for loved ones and who sees women as objects of love and affection, but not necessarily giving space for relationships to women that exist outside of caregiver, nurturer or romantic partner.
These questions are vital, and they connect back to the extreme views many boys and young men are consuming online. Rhetoric that is based on the inherent idea that a ‘real man’ doesn’t show vulnerability or weakness, protects and provides for those around him, is successful at ‘getting women’, and gains status through money, physical strength, women and material markers of success such as fast cars and displays of wealth.
Jamie couldn’t necessarily clearly articulate what makes someone ‘a man’ but he knew exactly what makes someone ‘not manly’ and his visceral rejection of those ideas were far more natural for him to display, when asked if he was friends with women he says “no” and “I’m not a twt though*”. His disdain for feminine traits and femininity is far clearer than his ‘love’ for ‘manliness’, a nuance that is powerfully captured in the show.
Femininity, objectification, power and misogyny
Not only do we get insight into how Jamie feels about himself, we are able to understand a little of how he views girls and women. The fact that he sees girls as objects and that viewing explicit images of girls that he knows (and girls and women he doesn’t know) is not something that he questions; when asked about whether he thinks the girls would be happy about him seeing explicit images of them he responds, “everyone else did”. The normalisation of girls as objects, and the non-consensual sharing and viewing of explicit images of girls, is so normal it is not worth denying or lying about.
It becomes further apparent that Jamie’s relationship to girls is far from healthy. He lies about having had sexual experiences with girls, he shrugs off the fact that he doesn’t have any friends that are girls, when asked about whether he was attracted to Katie after seeing an explicit image of her he makes an objectifying and dismissive comment about her body, saying, “no” and that “she was flat”. Jamie articulates a desire to have a girlfriend however he doesn’t seem able to articulate, or even understand, what that dynamic might look like aside from him owning or receiving sexual gratification or pleasure from a girlfriend. In the fourth episode we are presented with a stark contrast to this when Jamie’s parents are reminiscing about their first date as 13 year olds at the school disco, we hear about teenagers in the first moments of genuine connection, something that feels completely inaccessible to Jamie.
Despite answering “no” to the question of whether he feels powerful viewing explicit images of girls he knows, there are subtler insights into how Jamie feels about power and women. In one moment he stands over the psychologist and shouts in her face, a male member of staff comes to the door but she indicates that she’s okay. In response, Jamie says “what was that? hey? what the fk was that? signalling him away like a fking queen yeah?”. He is angry and riled up when faced with a woman in control.
We also get insight when Jamie reveals the impact that rejection has on him. We hear that Jamie had previously asked Katie out to the fair but that she wasn’t interested and said no to him. Although he insists multiple times that he did not “fancy” her and that he was not attracted to Katie because she’s not “his type”, Jamie shares that he assumed she would be feeling weak after explicit images of her had been shared round the school. Jamie wanted to take advantage of this vulnerability and ask her out, which meant when she rejected him, he was left feeling all the more insulted and angry.
“I just thought she might be weak after all that, cus everyone was calling her a slag or flat or whatever so I thought if she was that weak she might like me. It’s clever, don’t you think. I said I was sorry and that the guy who shared her picture was a wanker and that I’d take her to the fair if she liked… she just laughed and said – I’m not that desperate.” – Episode 3 | 42:00 – 44:00
A culture of misogyny and gender-based violence
A common reaction I’ve heard from parents and adults in response to Adolescence is fear. In particular, a fear that is centred around the online world and the harmful content that children and teenagers may be consuming without us realising. While this fear is incredibly valid and understandable, we must also be wary of not letting this fear distract us from the roots of this problem that exist far beyond the internet and the communities found there.
It is in the subtler moments in the show that we see these roots and an acknowledgement that it isn’t just the online world that led to Jamie’s actions, it is a wider ‘culture’ of gender inequality:
- Jamie does not address his mum or sister at all – exclusively reaching for the support and validation of his father.
- Jamie implies that having female friends makes someone a “twat”.
- Jamie exaggerates and lies about having had sexual experiences with girls to the psychologist and then immediately takes this back and reveals the true extent of those sexual experiences.
- Jamie feels confident enough to shout and scare the female psychologist, someone in a position of authority who is at least 15 years his senior.
- Jamie shares his awareness of his dads disappointment/shame at the fact that he wasn’t ‘sporty’.
- The school teacher only introduces the male police officer and then has to quickly introduce the female police officer when she realises her omission a few seconds later.
- The treatment of female staff members in the school where we hear male students shouting “Shut up miss!”
- The response to Ryan after he is punched by Jade (Katie’s best friend) in the playground – when another student says “You just got banged by a girl you sausage”.
- The way the female psychologist is made to feel uncomfortable by the male CCTV operator.
What happens if we watch the show without focusing on investigating the crime itself, but instead, understanding the culture all around it? The show perfectly presents the subtleness of gender stereotypes and gender attitudes that are pervasive in society. How they are shaping the way we talk to and about each other based on gender, what we expect from ourselves and each other based on gender and how we treat ourselves and others when those expectations are not fulfilled.
Adolescence confronts us with the truth that acts of gender-based violence are not committed by ‘bad apples’. Jamie is a 13 year old child who has been indoctrinated and who has had gender-based violence normalised and even glorified. There are moments that we feel deep empathy for Jamie and moments where we are scared of him, moments that ranged from the casualness with which he displayed misogynistic attitudes to the outbursts of anger and rage. But Adolescence raises the questions rather than providing the answers. The answers lie in the communities around young people coming together to prioritise education that gets to the root of the issue and addresses the gender stereotypes and attitudes that seem harmless in isolation, but together contribute to a culture that normalises gender-based violence and misogyny.
Questions to start conversations based on Adolescence:
- Why is being able to get girls or female attention so important to being seen as ‘manly’?
- Are all young boys as likely to be influenced by these messages as each other? If not – why?
- When Jamie calls himself “ugly” we get an insight into how he views himself and his self-esteem, how does this connect to his actions?
- We know many of these ideas are consumed online, where else do we learn these ideas?
- Why did the boy who received the photo of Katie spread it round? What did he gain by doing this?
- Why did Jamie think Katie was “easier to get” after the photos were leaked? How do you feel about that?
- What did Jamie feel when Katie rejected him? Why might he have felt that way?
Resources and places to learn more about these issues:
Toolkit: School of Sexuality Education – ‘A Look Into the Incel Movement: A Guide to Tackling Online Cultures of Misogyny for Schools, Colleges and Universities’
Book: Laura Bates – Men Who Hate Women
Ted Talk: Jackson Katz at TEDxFiDiWomen – ‘Violence against women—it’s a men’s issue’