Notes on: Smith, H. & Lander, V. (2024)  Leeds Beckett University  Anti-–Rracism Framework for Initial Teacher Training. https://www.leedsbeckett.ac.uk/research/centre-for-race-education-and-decoloniality/anti-racism-framework/ Dave Harris It was based on a research project commissioned by the NEU [National Education Union ] supported by Newcastle University, and Leeds Beckett. They did a global literature review about antiracism in teacher education in a survey applied to all ITE providers. They worked with the Centre of Race Education and Decoloniality, Show Racism the Red Card, Universities of Sanctuary, BAME Ed Network, NEU, NALDIC. The background is a recent DFE survey saying that only 53% of NQT felt well prepared to teach pupils from all ethnic backgrounds, and 39% well prepared to teach EAL. [They also use the term BGM for some reason]. They are keen to stress: 'overarching values and understandings; to offer a summary of the global literature review; to discuss the themes of pedagogy and curriculum, student teaching placements, leadership in teacher education, staff training by teacher educators and school-based mentors, course evaluation processes' (4). They also drew on the antiracist principles and toolkit by Wellcome. there is also an antiracism charter by the  NEU. Overarching values and understandings. [Looks like a derivation of CRT tenets — racism is real, takes many forms, overt and covert, can be manifested through missions and silences, interacts with forms of oppression and so on. There is an emphasis on being antiracist rather than nonracist which requires 'vigilant action, prioritisation and embedded practice… [Activity]' [based on Kendi] (6). This is supported by a number of survey respondents students stressing antiracism, active teaching and the promotion of change. So -- they do mean antiracism specifically in the CRT sense? Executive summary of the global literature review. They looked at material from the UK, US, Ireland, South Africa, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, all of which apparently stressed 'the need to embed antiracist pedagogies in IT' (8), although this is rare, and tends to rest with one or two tutors. Support is specifically lacking in England and not found in policies produced by the DFE or OFSTED. The impact is found in statistics about low admission and noncompletion, the experience of BGM student teachers 'lack of confidence and knowledge to challenge racism and/or embed antiracist teaching'. The dominant racial identity is still white in contrast to increasing diversity. There are strategies available elsewhere 'underpinned by knowledge of Critical Race Theory (CRT) and Critical White Studies (CWS)'. It is impossible to gauge the long-term impact of antiracist pedagogies, but committed tutors say it is important [well -- they would] . Themes [designed in the form of sections on practice questions, things to think about with links to the literature review, external links and practice notes and examples]. For example: Pedagogy and curriculum. Practice questions include 'are you aware of the Equality Act on your responsibilities… What does the legislation and what do the policies mean in relation to the understanding of race racism and antiracism on your course?. Things to think about include 'what is your understanding of racism… Manifested in interpersonal interactions and systems, processes and policies?' With reference to their examples of racial realism, whether racially minoritised people are involved, whether they have examples of critical race counter narratives, whether they drawn critical theory or have examined 'arguments that Critical Race Theory in ITE is essential in challenging racist norms in education'. External links and practice notes and examples include reading McIntosh on the invisible knapsack, attending a session with staff from the Black Curriculum [online] and referring to various other examples, two of which mention CRT. One in particular refers to a 'Talking Race podcast from the Centre for Race, Education and Decoloniality' (9) [large collection]. Other activities include modelling antiracist practice, with examples of colourblindness discussions of meritocracy as myth or reality, and further references to modules in which race racism and antiracism are discussed. There is a section on teaching students to become antiracist educators, with activities on countering student antipathies/fears of uselessness, 'student denial, anger and defensiveness. E.g. understanding racially coded language… Sincere fictions and tools of whiteness' [with references to the literature review]. Students might particularly object in terms of the link between class and race. There is a warning about 'white saviourhood', and remarks about producing a safe environment, developing critique without being critical, with reference to material on a pedagogy of discomfort in the literature review. Examples also include critical reflections of whiteness. One item is Bhopal in the Guardian on the Sewell report [rather thin paraphrase of Gillborn's critique]. Black student teachers should not be expected to bear the burden of counternarratives or exemplification. There is a reference to an HEI using 'laddering' to support 'the dialectic between theory {in this case critical race theory} and practice to support their development as an anti' (12) racist teacher. A final section suggests extension of the discussion to Islamophobia, anti-Semitism, 'anti-Gypsy-ism/Roma phobia' There is a final section inviting self-evaluation on what is being done well, what needs to change what barriers emerge and so on. The next section is student teachers and placements. There is far too much to summarise. In general, BGM students are supposed to be properly supported and given confidence especially if they report racism, and the survey found a few examples of this. One specific example is providing leave to celebrate Eid for a Muslim student — most respondents said there was little provision for any religious celebration. The section on leadership in teacher education asks about whether leadership is 'committed and courageous… To advance antiracism', how it might be embedded, how it's linked to the number of BGM people in leadership positions and there is reference to this issue and also retention. There should be a policy which is well monitored, including EDI — some respondents noted this did not apply to specific departments. Gillborn's article on genetics is one of the readings, and there is advice on being an ally. Staff training begins with  'Are the ITE/T staff and partnership committed to antiracism?', have they had suitable training on antiracism and do they understand how racism works? Do BGM staff leave this provision. Is it a priority for management? None of the HEI's survey said that it was. Another section asked for course evaluation processes and the extent to which antiracism teaching was evaluated, how colleagues who taught it were protected against 'negative student reactions', how placements for BGM students were managed, and how racist incidents were recorded, and student teachers trained to recognise it. The global literature review is aimed to create 'an accessible and trusted research informed antiracism framework for ITE… In England' (25), aiming at UN supported sustainable development goals — quality education, reduced inequalities, peace, justice and strong institutions. Racism reproduces itself, often subtly. It is internalised by BGM in a form of double consciousness [Dubois this time]. We need to review the literature [not listen to counter stories?]. Large-scale longitudinal evidence is 'difficult to source' partly because talking about race and racism causes social anxiety. Many antiracist pedagogies are new and there has not been time to assess them. BAME itself is a disputed term but they use it for consistency. They also have their own commentary which uses BAGM [even broader and more ambiguous, of course] The literature review is preceded by a glossary, very brief one, which includes: 'Institutional racism – racism, discrimination and iniquities occurring within an institution, where the inherent structure and organisation of the institution is built to benefit white people and marginalise BAGM people' (27) [tautology], or 'white privilege — privileges white people hold on the basis of race' [Qquite substantial commentary] Statistics show that only 53% of NQT feel well prepared to teach pupils, 92% of teachers in England were white, only 3% of heads were ethnic minorities, and the same in the USA and Australia this reinforces 'the concept of power inequities'(29). There are lower retention rates and a semistructured discussion in a paper 'revealed micro-aggressions and overt racism from white peers and stereotyping whilst on placement'. Other sources include Joseph Salisbury on race and racism in secondary schools, and the YMCA report, leading to comment on discrimination on hairstyles and the YMCA. Similarities are frowned with studies in Australia. It all shows that 'antiracist pedagogy is an ITE/T are urgently needed' (30), and Joseph Salisbury agrees [his is a study of Greater Manchester. Other statistical patterns can also be cited.] Advocates of 'racial literacy ' include Afua Hirsch. If we make antiracism part of a course it will remove it from an individual choice [no problems with compulsion?]. Freire would agree, after they have added '[white supremacist]' to his quote about the current system. Turning to policy, you can still get an outstanding grade from Ofsted without demonstrating antiracist teaching [shock]. All you need is an ED policy! So what incentive is there? 'Increase the low number of BAME teachers'  (31) [assume they will support it] and to support antiracism more widely, as the recent race equality legislation does. However, it is still focused on policy rather than action, as Mirza argues, and to developing policy. An OFSTED report in 2005 displayed an absence of acknowledgement of race equality guidance, seeing race relations merely as a formal structure to do with attainment gaps. However the proper tackling of underachievement or the prevention of race -related incidents, together with an acknowledgement that school inspectors often failed to recognise race equality is essential so is the problem. So does OFSTED's policy of working with the police, especially criticised by Joseph Salisbury. Schools should not '"promote the politicised multiculturalism which does not encourage political literacy or critical analysis"' [citing Osler] ( 32). The emphasis on British values also minimises the focus on race ethnicity diversity and inclusion.  Wilkins analysed OFSTED teacher education reports in 2013 and noted a commitment to put equality and diversity at the heart, while displaying  'a total absence of acknowledgement of race equality or antiracism' in actual guidance or the description of standards, nor did it mention much 'equality and diversity' and mentioned race only five times. Instead, OFSTED follows the wider public policy of using 'the "correct" words — taking an ambivalent minimalist approach as opposed to critical reflection of racial bias and antiracism within a critical race theory framework' (33) [the specific criticism seems to be that OFSTED is more interested in meritocracy and equality of opportunity]. Specifically, EAL are often lumped together with kids in SEN. Compliance with provision is lightly enforced. Gillborn is right to say that race equality is still a minor issue. At least, however, it leaves the field for teachers to choose antiracist pedagogy. They then develop a rationale for antiracist pedagogies, beginning with lots of people who advocate them, including Arday and Mirza. Bhopal says that teachers find it difficult to teach students whose cultural values are different from their own [!], That many have negative stereotypes and little knowledge of the culture of minority ethnic children and attribute academic failure to their backgrounds rather than to their own pedagogy. Lots more references follow. Pollock is quoted to say that preservice teachers should engage with every day racism and antiracism, although this is complex. Lots of other references thrown at the problem which is that 'preservice teachers to become more critically aware of the limited parameters of their thinking… [So they need]… Continual opportunities for dialogue and storytelling… About themselves, their internalised ideologies, the influence of White privilege and power' (35). They need to develop racial literacy. They need more sessions on race. Theses are often seen as scary or threatening and can be 'derailed and denied '. Picower is  quoted on the tools of whiteness which protect dominant understandings of race. There is 'an increasingly racially diverse population'[so a need for antiracism and racial literacy]. Lander defines racial literacy 'as part of an antiracist framework' and it involves '"appropriate language referring to a child's ethnicity and to develop their awareness of race issues in a predominantly white area… A positive disposition to the presence of pupils from BME backgrounds"' (36). A survey of courses in Ireland found that racism was barely covered and then only in lectures — the same goes for studies of white supremacy. Nevertheless, the trainee teachers did identify aspects of Irish post primary education that were 'institutionally racist' and said they were inadequately prepared to teach because their own values were not sufficiently engaged (37). Arday and Mirza [nothing more specific] found that one student lacked racial literacy and antiracist training and reported a baffled tutor. There was fear and lack of knowledge, lack of expertise, lack of time to develop antiracist pedagogy, although the need for them is clear if disengagement is to be avoided. There is a desire for them as well, even among white tutors, say A and M. The same heroes are quoted as defining racial literacies referring to the material background of the situation, '"the political economic and social structures that produce inequality"' which also have to be addressed if BME situations are not to be reproduced — they use CRT (38) at least a framework for analysis of qualitative data which promoted storytelling. They also discussed the need to assimilate to whiteness which would support antiracist pedagogies and encourage dropout. So what was identified as best practice actually 'reinforce racism and racist stereotyping' such as examples of Nigerian students who were saved by white tutors who individually supported them, all the tough love given to a hijab wearing Muslim (38) [exactly what Arday has done himself in his own career?][NB A&M cited not contributors -- helpful. P.198 is the ref to one of the quotes tho --Hobson and Whigham, specifically cited later] . Critical self reflection on whiteness, CWS, is needed as lots of people have argued, including Hobson and Wigham. There is the possibility of much anxiety, although lots of white tutors want to do antiracism. [Lots of references again to A and M in general]. Racial literacy should particularly address the embodiment of racism, and qualitative data using CRT would be a good way to proceed, but no amount of empathy will compensate for authentic lived experience. There will always be 'resistance and defiance' among white students and tutors must be prepared for this and learn how to manage it. Resistance might be combined with challenge, which is more promising. Both require 'excruciating honesty' and not all students will accept it, so it is wrong to rely only on reflexive processes. There may be particular problems with white students who have experienced poverty grappling with the concept of white privilege (39). However, resistance only points to the need for more antiracism. We might have to reconsider tolerance which can be 'a mechanism of avoidance… A hindrance towards further racial literacy' because 'one can tolerate something without understanding, respecting or valuing it' (39). There may be pressure to reduce the reporting of racist incidents, by not classifying them properly, seeing them as, for example a joke. There may be a push towards facing the issue, provided by racially diverse schools, but this should not be the only push. Instead, engagement with activist groups is needed. Even then, teachers can see themselves as white saviours, as some do in South Africa. BGM voices are needed. There are the usual patterns of underachievement for BAME students in ITT, some of whom feel they have to be tougher than anyone else. Some face institutional racism according to one research paper, others struggle to find work straight after graduation. Racism needs to be addressed more centrally, for example through a 'cross curricular daily session [chcek]  led by BAME teachers from partner schools' (41). There may be covert racism disguised as professionalism — one study showed that indigenous students in Canada still experienced 'racialised micro-aggressions'. Her study used CRT to encourage storytelling, and her graduates challenged white supremacist norms, assimilating on the one hand but also trying to embed indigenous knowledge and history into their education. One idea is to adopt 'a neo-abolitionist pedagogy', to access BAGM peer networks as long as they have the same professional opportunities, working with counter storytelling, describing pigeonholing and the experience of racialism. Participants work together to identify and dismantle whiteness and its 'dominant narrative' (42). 'Critical race counternarratives' might be used (43) to see how student teachers manage conflict, for example in the teaching of history which challenges dominant narratives, again 'under a CRT framework' (43). Other approaches might show the creation of race and how it benefits whiteness, not to induce guilt but to provide positive experiences for BAGM. BAME teachers need to be 'recognised and accepted as knowledgeable and skilled educators'. CRT and CWS need to be considered as pedagogies in teacher education — they are 'valuable antiracist pedagogical approaches'. Picower argues from a CWS perspective and so do lots of other academics. Classically the topic of racism is avoided and teachers are colourblind which 'reproduces white supremacy through denial' (44). Three 'discursive techniques' are particularly employed — 'naturalisation, ex– nomination and universalisation (Flintoff et al. 2014)' (45). [The only tricky one is ex-nomination — where 'white ITE tutors ignore their racialised selves'. Others have advocated a 'three-dimensional narrative inquiry space with White preservice teachers', where they looked backwards and forwards and inward and outward at narrative threads, doing storytelling and dialogue. They are not required to share their perspectives or take on the tutors, but expand their perspectives. Others have used CWS in the US using '"a transdisciplinary approach"' [citing Maitis and Mackay 2015] (45), which addresses whiteness as an ideology which might be shared by black people. The same authors address emotions and theorise them [how?]. Some draw on their own experiences. There is also the issue of emotions and the need to be emotionally prepared and secure. Emotional expression has to be encouraged but 'within the CWS framework', which means choosing emotional readings by POC and asking students how they feel; organising community trips to areas of high rates of deprivation compared with affluent predominantly white areas and asking how students feel, but they must be careful not to reinforce the ideology of poor blacks who deserve their inferiority. Finally they must encourage teacher candidates to apply these concepts and develop '"a more humanistic education"'. Emotional resources might include 'social media, music and adverts' with analysis on white supremacy. M and M ask students to imagine what they might do to imagine why a POC might experience the US differently from a white person — students reported [lots of knapsack things], and in some cases Facebook deleted these comments, providing experience of denial. There were little games like 'the marshmallow activity [building structures using marshmallows and pasta] and the Chorizo  test [a multiple choice test paper with the questions are based on nonwhite dominated cultures]' (46). Responses can be gathered before and after the CWS aspect of the course and M and M claim it as evidence of the value of their course. Other work, including Smith, and work by Mattias and Zembylas (2014) involves stimulating emotion and critical reflection and examining the relation between them while viewing documentaries. The teacher had a role in shaping the viewing process, apparently and supporting critical reflections. The studies also showed the deployment of tools of whiteness including 'anger, sorrow and defensiveness'. Smith urges some caution however since these emotional responses might only operate at face value. (47). Other emotional responses might include feeling that opposition to antiracist pedagogy cannot be expressed and we are reminded that not all teacher students might immediately respond — 'it may take months or years before they begin to accept, understand, and work on undoing'. There may be dysconscious racism 'an uncritical acceptance of the status quo'. A particular 'constructive – developmental' model was applied to white students difficulties in understanding racial dynamics revealing difficulties in developing the ability to make meaning: a key aspect apparently was "Subject – Object distinction. Individuals can't think about or control Subject because it is us. Object is what we make meaning of, since we can think about, control and act on Object"' developmental change involves increasingly seeing bits of subject as objects so that we can reflect on them [citing Keegan 1980]. This apparently goes on at different levels ending in being able to see yourself as something influenced by external sources which further enables the management of what you believe to be true and evidence that counteracts it. It was further developed in Puchner and Markowitz (2014). It explains why it's possible to engage with some aspects of antiracist pedagogy but not others, being able to understand but not reflect upon, for example. Thus resistance to antiracism education might mean 'a lack of capacity to understand any concept that requires disassociation to self' [a clear attempt to pathologise the resistors. I wouldn't be at all surprised they were working class as well] CWS and CRT are both fundamental to dismantle the racist status quo and promote 'deep learning and critical self reflection, including subconscious internalisation of racism, leading to an understanding of how racism is reproduced and what actions need to be taken to end it'. However there are multiple tenets of CRT so we need to choose the most salient three — racial realism, that racism is endemic, real; whiteness as property; the challenge to objectivity colourblindness and meritocracy [all this is based on Larkin et al. 2016]. CRT has been condemned politically, but is the only effective intervention as pedagogy (48). Teacher educators need to stress colourblindness, cultural conflict, the myth of meritocracy, deficit conceptions and expectations, through a CRT lens combined with CWS. Pollock et al. 2010 reviewed a mandatory preservice teacher course called Everyday Anti – Racism in the USA, where students were asked what skills they might needs to negotiate racial issues and how personal development experiences on courses like this might be improved. Core tensions were identified by the students about what they can do, turning on the tension between abstract theories of race and concrete examples of practice. The professor divided the topics into principles big ideas, strategies, and specific solutions and encourage students to write weekly reflections on their personal development. In their reflections, students said they felt overwhelmed with the totality of racism and question whether they could change it — they were 'encouraged to understand that individual antiracist teaching practices had the ability to do both initiate change in themselves as individuals and within institutional racism' (49). They also said they needed to examine their own personal thoughts. All this apparently fits with CWS approaches by turning inwards. Further developments of CWS might develop racial literacy, but what of safety? Some want to encourage white discomfort, apparently, but Leonardo and Porter argue instead that '"whites must take ownership feeling uncomfortable in critical race dialogue… Judgement is practised but one is never judged [so] discomfort can be liberating… After many years of experience in the University setting, we have learned that this apostasy — of creating risk as the antidote safety — leads to more transformative learning opportunities. It humanises students of colour because it legitimates their voice and affirms Whites' incompleteness for it is guided by an ethic of concern for and not for a desire to expose whites as simply racist"' (50) [I wonder what the students made it?]. There can be no totally safe environment, however and indeed, the same authors say that '"safety discourses on race are a veiled form of violence and it will require a humanising former violence to expose contradictions in the discourse of safety'". Others have said that it needs to hurt. However this is '"humanising violence"', justified by the need to dislodge racial violence in discourse. Thus informed, we can go on to create antiracist pedagogy [!]. There is no guarantee, however, nor any guarantee that awareness of whiteness will lead to different practices. Some students see diversity as a problem, no doubt because 'they have been taught to see racial diversity as a problem, and not whiteness' (51). This is distancing as a tool whiteness and it is reinforced by the idea of a meritocracy, which in turn supports a deficit model. A study in South Africa gives an example of how this works — teachers wanted to work with black students, but denied that the racialised history of South Africa had an impact, including only respectful behaviour of the kids: this helped them appear as white saviours. White teachers must examine whiteness. Antiracism tends to be sidelined as a specialism and this can produce particular difficulties for POC tutors who tend to specialise in it. It increases fear and vulnerability — one teacher who used emotional counterstorytelling was aware that it was possible that 'white students chose to raise a complaint with the Dean of the institution' (52). So going against white supremacy is risky including detecting it. There could be a place for white allies, which helps make the point that antiracism is for everybody. One teacher tried one hour of teaching a week on indigenous people and non-Anglo minorities, for example, another initiated small group discussion about colonialism and encouraged storytelling, another used BAME biographies [I still think the Monash approache is best]. However there is still a difficulty when it comes to considering students own positions, and it is common to encounter fear avoidance anger and denial. Again this can be traced to the characteristics of whiteness, which is classically unwilling to name racism or identify with the racialised experience, or to do anything other than minimise racist legacies. Preservice teachers can avoid the topic interests of comfortable experience. Race and racism might be placed in a broader field. Personal experience of another kind might be involved [class?] The 'black imagination via counter storytelling' might be made central (54) [and lots of official statistics presented?] A three-year study by Harris (2012) in the UK found difficulties but that the 'quality of supervision and facilitation by the ...provider'was crucial (55). Some participants have never seen racism, others have experienced frequent micro-aggressions and othering. And that is more common for BAGM. Some trainees used softer terms, racial codes [hints of race talk] and were reluctant to report incidents or to decide. They used terms that involved some '"unspecified, nebulous culture, race or religion"'. Colourblindness is a 'sincere fiction… Supported by the entire social fabric', appearing sincere and preventing questioning. He goes along with denial defence and distraction. Defence can involve claiming that racism is a joke, or distraction might be illustrated by the MacPherson report which was a diversion. Other researchers found tools of whiteness. Generally there is a need to fully embed anti- racist pedagogy. Effective antiracist pedagogy is finally surveyed, using ‘a CRT framework combined with CWS, counter storytelling, and the centring of the black imagination’. It uses ‘video-cue ethnography as a form of counter storytelling, claiming to expose analyse and challenge majoritarian stories as in Solorzano and Yosso. There are only preliminary findings about the technique, however but it is worth greater implementation. The experiences of parents might also be used. There is a claim that the technique reveals ‘participants “poor beliefs” through elicited responses’ [a reference to Campbell and Valauri 2019] who have used student teachers in four phases — (a) recording three parents of colour, and asking them about how they address race and how they feel the school addresses race; (b) predominantly White preservice teachers were given a parent transcript in groups and then discussions ensued. ‘Anxieties and concerns from several students were expressed’ these discussions were transcribed; (c) the parents were given these transcripts to discuss and provide feedback; (d) the feedback from parents was given to the groups of student teachers to discuss and they could then make visual representations and share them. Apparently the researchers detected two shifts in their response: they saw the need to participateIn racial conversations ‘to end racial oppression’ (57) and could not avoid race; they saw the importance of challenging structural and institutional equities, for example contradictions in school policies over colourblindness or critiques of the school curriculum. The technique particularly allows POC to talk without fearing voyeurism or having to relive racial trauma. An Australian study identified resistance among a long-term project with 3 ½ thousand preservice teachers. They identified tools of whiteness and tried to adopt an intersectional approach to antiracism or privilege. They believe that ‘changing behaviours is more useful than focusing on changing attitudes’ (58) [invites role-play]. They like intersectionality which is more nuanced as an approach to oppression and it does reduce resistance, especially when they discuss class and gender. The students did not like ‘a one axis approach’ And particularlyFound it hard to recognise their privilege. However the risk is that they will focus on the more comfortable issues and avoid race. Rattansi argues that racism is never simple but obviously exists with other dimensions and requires a strategy to reduce those inequalities as well [ambitious]. Some researchers think that we should work on the recognition of privilege rather than oppression[Although the quote seems to suggest that they quickly get onto explaining suffering]. This team begins with apparently neutral construct such as identity status and so on and then move into class race and gender. They use the knapsack and have additional examples incorporating class gender religion and ability [I bloody thought that]. Another approach involves theoretical explanations of privilege mechanisms after watching ‘a girl like me’ [documentary about the lives of African-American  teenagers]. Emotional reactions can produce ‘a significant breakthrough in understanding’ [doubt it]. Harris has focused on curricular topics and the rationale for teaching them ‘Using questions based on scenarios that focused on an aspect of diversity and history’ (59). He has identified different stances which provide reasons for the study of history — ‘”identification”, “analytical”, and “moral response”’ and claims that diversity is ‘incumbent’ in each of these — we need to understand the past and the familiar [slavery and colonialism, no doubt]. This claims to offer common ground on diversity allowing for different ideas about history, and offers a way to accommodate different ideas ‘within their existing beliefs’ [including racist ones?]. Harris thinks it’s important to connect with police attitudes and values and focus on purpose rather than adopt confrontation [quite unlike the rest of this article then]. His research [Harris 2012] found that students who were initially engaged with diversity remained committed to it, They were able to challenge their preconceptions by reflecting on their past, but they struggled to identify purpose, sometimes with negative conclusions — it felt like something non-essential. However, it did reduce resistance and seem to offer a productive way forward. History is particularly important when it comes to decolonising, but these assertions are worth reporting in other areas. Conclusion [at last] [back to orthodoxy] we ‘need to embed antiracist pedagogies in ITE’ (61) especially as racial diversity increases. ‘Tutors can and should use critical race theory and critical white studies’ to do this, using the themes identified in this review.  Harris, R., 2012. ‘Purpose’ as a Way of Helping White Trainee History Teachers Engage with Diversity Issues. Education Sciences, [online] 2(4), pp.218-241. Available at: <http://dx.doi.org.libproxy.ncl.ac.uk/10.3390/ educsci2040218> [Accessed 3 March 2021]   Joseph-Salisbury, R., 2020. Race and Racism in English Secondary Schools. [online] London: Runnymede trust. Available at: <https://assets.website-files. com/61488f992b58e687f1108c7c/61bcc0cc2a023368396c03d4_ Runnymede%20Secondary%2  Matias, C. and Zembylas, M., 2014. ‘When saying you care is not really caring’: emotions of disgust, whiteness ideology, and teacher education. Critical Studies in Education, [online] 55(3), pp.319-337. Available at: <https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2014.922489> [Accessed 1 March 2021].  Matias, C. and Mackey, J., 2015. Breakin’ Down Whiteness in Antiracist Teaching: Introducing Critical Whiteness Pedagogy. The Urban Review, [online] 48(1), pp.32-50. Available at: <http://dx.doi.org.libproxy.ncl. ac.uk/10.1007/s11256-015-0344-7> [Accessed 6 March 2021]