The colonial legacy in Cambridge Assessment literature syllabi

Abstract

This study analyzes the literature syllabi of Cambridge Assessment International Education (CAIE), a highly influential international education organization that determines curricula and conducts examinations for nearly one million students annually. Although CAIE describes its syllabi as internationalized and free from cultural bias and discrimination, little research has been conducted to confirm or reject these claims. Using a framework of postcolonial feminism and postdevelopment theory, this study analyzes author representation in CAIE literature syllabi to reveal potential colonial and patriarchal dimensions. We analyze the six CAIE literature syllabi in terms of author nationality, world region, and gender. The results indicate a clear bias in favor of European male authors and a consistent underrepresentation of women authors from the Global South. Authors of the MENA region are entirely excluded from the syllabi. Women authors from Latin America are also almost entirely absent. The study concludes that CAIE literature syllabi are not sufficiently international or multicultural, but instead reflects the continued legacy of colonial relations between British education and the Global South. Since the colonial era, CAIE has continued to enact banking education at a global scale by conceiving of the Global South as lacking in literature worthy of study. In order to begin to decolonize their literature syllabi, we suggest that CAIE should draw from diverse literature throughout World Englishes, especially literature written by women authors in the Global South.

Education and racial capitalism

“…Each of these examples can be examined through the lens of racial capitalism. As we have discussed, building such 'valuable' infrastructures involves practices of enclosing and dispossessing and racialised divisions of labour: behind 'valorised' school league table results are stories of white opportunity hoarding and white flight (Wilson, 2019;Ho, 2011); and the prestige of 'desirable' curriculum products is often built from the erasures of non-European knowledge and, in some cases, direct histories of 'civilising' colonised people through education, as recent research on the Cambridge International curriculum has shown (Golding & Kopsick, 2019).…”

The colonial governmentality of Cambridge Assessment International Education

“…In a similar vein, governmentalities in international education sometimes subjectivate students and educators with racial hierarchies reflective of modernity and coloniality (Emenike and Plowright, 2017; Wynne-Hughes and Pswarayi, 2020). This subjectivation is often accomplished through the implementation of Eurocentric curricula (Golding and Kopsick, 2019; Tikly and Bond, 2013; van Oord, 2007). Many international schools also feature a racialized pay structure in which “expatriates” from the global North are better compensated than either expatriates from the global South or their “local” counterparts (Canterford, 2003; Tanu, 2016; Tarc and Mishra Tarc, 2015; Thompson, 2016).…”