David Thomas

Anti-racist education within the Academy holds the potential to truly reflect the cultural hybridity of our diverse, multi-cultural society through the canons of knowledge that educators celebrate, proffer and embody. The centrality of Whiteness as an instrument of power and privilege ensures that particular types of knowledge continue to remain omitted from our curriculums. The monopoly and proliferation of dominant White European canons does comprise much of our existing curriculum; consequently, this does impact on aspects of engagement, inclusivity and belonging particularly for Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) learners. This paper explores the impact of a dominant Eurocentric curriculum and the Decolonising the Curriculum agenda within higher education and its influence upon navigating factors such as BAME attainment, engagement and belonging within the Academy. This paper draws on a Critical Race Theory (CRT) theoretical framework to centralize the marginalized voices of fifteen BAME students and three academics of colour regarding this phenomena. Aspects examined consider the impact of a narrow and restrictive curriculum on BAME students and staff and how the omission of diverse histories and multi-cultural knowledge canons facilitates marginalization and discriminatory cultures.

This series of three articles describes the history of land law shared by the British and American legal systems, and how and why these legal traditions have diverged from each other in modern times. This Article - part 1 in this series - describes the emerging customs and laws regarding land rights among early inhabitants of Britain, and how succeeding invasions and occupation by Celtic, Roman, Germanic, and Norman peoples altered these customs and laws. The Article details the profound changes in land law worked by massive economic changes in early British society, including sociological occurrences such as the Black Death, and the adoption of laws, such as the Statute of Uses in 1536.

This Article examines the genesis and evolution of the Restatements of Property. The author argues that, while the Restatement (First) of Property took as its original purpose to restate the law, in the course of its creation it was turned to reform. Subsequent Restatements of Property are dedicated almost wholly to reform. The author concludes that this shift in objectives has sparked criticism and rendered these works of less value and interest to the legislatures, bench and the bar, which have largely ignored the property Restatements.