Nelson Mandela famously stated: ‘Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.’ But to weaponise education for change, people from all backgrounds must be able to access and own their educational experiences and successes. The looming shadow of imposterism may prevent this.

In this final contribution to this BERA Blog special issue, we consider ways to disempower imposterism in higher education (HE), framing it as an ill that is perpetuated by intersectional, class-based norms which demands resistance as a form of working-class activism. We encourage celebrating ‘otherness’, giving imposter syndrome the middle-finger and drawing on shared cultural wealth to heal divisions.

The problem: Environmental, not individual

The vastness of HE allows individual experiences to be ignored, gaslit and belittled. This disengagement from individual experiences – perhaps rooted in neoliberal notions like rigour, reliability and replicability – enables concepts such as ‘imposter syndrome’ to thrive, individualised as our own problem to ‘get over’ (Breeze, 2018). Recognising its toxic capacity to shift blame to and exacerbate the exclusion of marginalised individuals, many reject imposter ‘syndrome’, returning to its original articulation as a ‘phenomenon’ (Simpkin, 2019); that is, an environmental rather than individual defect.

‘Imposterism’ is a tool through which the classed history, traditions and norms of an environment demand individuals to fit, or else risk exclusion, rejection or banishment. But unlike The Traitors reality TV show, this banishment isn’t just the unfortunate consequence of participating in a game. There are rules to learn and play (Bourdieu, 1977), and to ‘lose’ may have devastating consequences for prospects, health and identity. In HE, for example, a working-class academic might feel pressured to modify their accent, vocabulary or cultural references to ‘fit in’ with academic norms, erasing parts of their identity so they appear to belong in order to maintain their job. How do we collectively prevent this damaging response to imposterism?

‘“Imposterism” is a tool through which the classed history, traditions and norms of an environment demand individuals to fit, or else risk exclusion, rejection or banishment.’

Empowering others to speak their truth

People must feel able to show up authentically in academia. Demanding conformity, either expressly or implicitly, may diminish our ability to connect. As educators, researchers and colleagues, a powerful act can be reclaiming the first-person narrative. Within academia, some people, particularly students, may feel they need permission to use words like ‘I’, ‘me’, ‘mine’. These personal perceptions are seen as ‘anecdotal’. Universities should explicitly support people to own their narratives; for example in teaching and assessments, meetings, appraisals, and workplace interactions. This can support others to recognise the power of their lived experiences, dismantling the idea that individual experiences differing from ‘norms’ make us imposters. This could take the form of encouraging students to draw on personal examples in assignments or creating space in meetings where colleagues share perspectives without judgment.

Celebrate others’ successes

Activist Harry Bridges suggested that: ‘The most important word in the language of the working-class is “solidarity”’ (Glass, 2016). Contrastingly, the HE sector often pits us against one another, competing for resources, labels and normative indicators of success. Communities that unite those with classed and intersectional characteristics can validate and corroborate individual and collective experiences. But universities must go beyond this if diverse individuals are to thrive in highly competitive HE environments. Carving out regular space and time to celebrate each other’s successes within the academy can be an essential antidote to imposter feelings, creating a culture of solidarity.

Think before you label and exclude

Individual identities are often subsumed by oversimplified groupings such as ‘professional services’ versus ‘academics’, ‘research’ versus ‘teaching’, or ‘faculties’ versus ‘the centre’. Focusing on titles, accolades and labels can create or reinforce divisive silos that diminish people to roles. This sends an implicit message about who is and isn’t in different HE spaces.

‘Focusing on titles, accolades and labels can create or reinforce divisive silos that diminish people to roles.’

Shared spaces are vital to disrupting these divisions and creating collective wellbeing. However, we must continuously strive to diversify the voices heard and people involved. For example, if you run a class-focused network, advertise some events as open to all, regardless of class identity. Avoid initiatives framed solely for ‘academic’ colleagues with the assumption that other colleagues are unwelcome or uninterested.

When universities and the individuals within them empower authenticity, mark successes and refuse binary divisions, we stand a chance of collectively dismantling imposterism in higher education and truly embracing and celebrating the diversity of our people.

References

Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge University Press.

Breeze, M. (2018). Imposter Syndrome as a Public Feeling. In Y. Taylor & K. Lahad, (Eds.), Feeling academic in the neoliberal university. Palgrave Studies in Gender and Education. Palgrave Macmillan.

Glass, F. (2016). From mission to microchip. University of California Press.

Simpkin, T. (2019). Imposter Phenomenon and how to survive it. [LinkedIn page]. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/imposter-phenomenon-how-survive-terri-simpkin-phd/