Master's candidates facing discrimination on the basis of their surnames

In December 2021, the survey by the French Defender of Rights (Défenseur des Droits) and the International Labour Organisation (ILO) revealed that more than one in three young people report having experienced discrimination or discriminatory harassment.

The existence and extent of discrimination in the labour market, housing market and other markets is well documented. Unfortunately, there is no indication that the field of higher education and research escapes this problem. Tests have already shown that discrimination has a widespread presence in the civil service, particularly in access to employment. Other experimental work has shown that teachers, in their evaluations, were victims of their stereotypes about the chances of success of immigrant students. Thomas Breda and Mélina Hillion called out discriminatory biases in favour of the minority gender in the CAPES and Agrégation teaching examinations.

Discrimination is both an offence and a subject of research. Several interpretations have been proposed by researchers. It may reflect the unconscious stereotypes of recruiters, or it may be deliberate, driven by a subjective dislike of a particular personal trait. It may even be the result of constructed reasoning, involving conscious stereotypes about the abilities of a particular social group. Two approaches are used to measure it. Researchers first solicit the experience of people discriminated against through surveys. This is the case, for example, of the Virages survey on sexual violence conducted by the INED. A complementary approach is to directly observe the behaviour of those actively discriminating. This is the principle known as correspondence testing.

Initial testing in universities

We tested the hypothesis of discrimination in access to enrolment in a Master's programme using a representative sample of 607 courses at 19 universities. Our protocol was based on simple requests for information, as in the international literature on discrimination in access to housing. Fictitious students directly solicited Master's degree supervisors by e-mail in order to apply. Their demands were similar, and differed only in one personal trait.

Two criteria were tested: a North African origin, suggested by the candidate's first name and surname, and a motor disability situation, with the candidate indicating that they used a wheelchair. We then studied the responses of the training supervisors and interviewed them through a post-survey, three months after the initial test.

Our results highlight the existence of a discriminatory bias in the processing of requests for information by the Master's supervisors. Compared to the reference applicant who received a positive response to 70% of their requests, an applicant of North African origin had 6.8 percentage points, or 12.3% less chance, of receiving a response to their request for information. The proportion of discrimination in Master's requests was highest in the legal fields (where it reached 33.3%) and was very high in the field of Science, Technology and Health. It was very low in the literary and language fields. The penalty for the wheelchair user was close to 2 percentage points, but this was not statistically significant.

Discrimination rate correlated to the attractiveness of the Master's programme

The study was published in February 2022 and highlights several determining factors of discrimination. Firstly, it is favoured by a lack of information on the quality of the candidates. Those inflicting discrimination more frequently indicate that they have difficulties in assessing the quality of training carried out outside their institution.

The organisation of recruitment is also an issue. The results show that those who make decisions on their own during recruitment discriminate more often than those who have a more collective procedure in place.

Finally, the most attractive courses, those with the highest insertion rates, tend to discriminate more. The fields in which discrimination is the most present are those that receive the most applications (414 vs. 265). The training courses in which discrimination is the most present are also those that lead to better professional integration and better employment conditions and pay. For example, the difference in response rates between applicants is 15 percentage points for Master’s courses with a 30-month employment rate of 92% or more, whereas it is not significantly different from zero for those with a lower employment rate. These differences in attractiveness and employment rates explain most of the differences in the level of discrimination between specialities and universities. Once these are taken into account, differences between universities, between regions or between fields of study are no longer significant.

While public debate and research on discrimination are mainly focused on access to employment, it has been observed that discrimination prevails well before professional integration, even in access to training. The consequences of such discrimination should not be underestimated. Candidates facing discrimination will have to make a greater effort to access proper training and, for a given level of effort, they will access training leading to fewer job opportunities. This reduces the very return on their investment in their education.

These initial results provide an incentive for further research. With the support of the Ministry for Research and Higher Education, the Defender of Rights and France Universités, Université Gustave Eiffel launched the National Observatory of Discrimination and Equality in Higher Education (Ondes) in February 2022. Its aim is to promote research on these issues, in all disciplines and using qualitative and/or quantitative methodologies. The Observatory is open to all institutions wishing to participate in the framework of partnerships under construction. It is a tool for scientific animation and raising awareness among stakeholders.

In the field of higher education and research, this initiative implements the proposals for the creation of a National Observatory of Discrimination within official statistics, made by both the Defender of Rights and our colleague Thomas Piketty.

Taking more effective action against racism and sexism

In line with Article 80 of the law on the transformation of the civil service of 6 August 2019, each of the 181 higher education and research establishments has adopted an equality plan including the fight against discrimination. According to the report by the Ministry, universities have set up counselling units to deal with reports of violence and discrimination, which complement the national platform (the 3928 hotline) launched in February 2021. They organise awareness-raising activities and training sessions for all members of the university community.

Innovative thinking could be pursued on the organisation of access to training courses by integrating the question of the working conditions of supervisors: clarification of selection criteria, traceability of the recruitment procedure, improved collegiality, combating the work overload or isolation of training supervisors, etc.

The university community is rich in people who are committed to fighting racism, sexism and discrimination. Student organisations have also suggested interesting opportunities, such as increasing the number of places in the most attractive courses, access to appeal procedures or transparency in selection criteria.

The fight against arbitrary decisions, discrimination and violence is in line with the values of equality and universality at the heart of the university project. However, the selective nature of courses and the improvement of the working conditions of faculty members raise questions about the human and financial resources of higher education. It is unlikely that institutions alone will be able to win the fight against discrimination and for equality. The commitment of the government remains decisive in order to implement ambitious public policies with a national scope.