L8928 Inequalities and Social Policy Handbook 2026 | Strathclyde

L8928: Inequalities and Social Policy Handbook

Key information

The COVID-19 pandemic shone a light on and exacerbated inequalities within and between countries and led to even greater public, media and research interest in social and economic inequalities and the role of policy in ameliorating (or widening) these inequalities. Most of the modules taught in the School of Social Work & Social Policy touch on social and economic inequalities – this team-taught module will encourage students to explore the intersections between these inequalities, in terms of patterns, causes and policy responses (actual and potential). The opening session will introduce students to intersectionality as a core social science idea, providing foundations for the remainder of the module. Next, the module will explore three exemplar inequalities that have attracted research and policy concern worldwide: place, health and crime inequalities. For each exemplar topic, the first session will introduce some of the research and data highlighting the extent, trajectory and causes of these inequalities within the UK context, and will reflect on how these inequalities tend to be framed in research and policy. It will then consider policy responses (actual and proposed) to these inequalities, reflecting on how policy thinking is shaped by the way inequalities in this area have been framed. The second session will adopt a broader global perspective, discussing each exemplar inequality and their policy responses in at least one other international setting. As each new policy topic is introduced, we will consider intersections with policy topics and material introduced in previous weeks. Theoretically, the module will consider popular theories and frameworks developed to explain the specific types of social and economic inequality covered in the three policy topics alongside the intersectionality literature, encouraging students to compare and contrast these different ways of thinking about inequalities. 

Learning Outcomes:

• To develop an understanding of patterns of key social and economic inequalities in the devolved UK and at least one other international setting per exemplar inequality, focusing on three exemplar inequalities: health; places and housing; criminal justice.
• To have a critical awareness of key theoretical and empirical debates surrounding the causes of such inequalities. 
• To develop an understanding of the concept of intersectionality and be able to apply this lens to understanding these inequalities.
• To have an awareness of policy responses to address these exemplar inequalities and to be able to critically assess these from an intersectional perspective.   

Attendance

It is very important you attend all lectures and seminars. Attendance will be recorded for all students. If you need to miss a class through illness, self-isolation requirements, etc, you should let the Administrative Lead (Catriona.Murray@strath.ac.uk) for the Module know by email [and please cc the Module Convener into your email].
Longer-term absences should be communicated to the Programme Lead, Francesca Fiori (Francesca.Fiori@strath.ac.uk )

1. Self-Recorded Attendance on MyPlace  

To support student welfare and visa compliance where applicable, the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences (HasS) are setting a mandatory requirement to record attendance for all on-campus teaching activity. The recommended method of recording this will require students to use a QR code to self-record their attendance.  
Please make sure you familiarize yourself with the process by reading the following Guidance document (available on the Myplace page of the MSc Programme): Quick Guide Self-Recorded attendance on MyPlace (student guidance).pdf  

2.Lack of attendance and engagement (taught students)  

Attendance means your physical or virtual presence at in-person or online teaching and learning activities including timetabled lectures, seminars, tutorials, workshops, and practical work such as labs.
  
Departments will monitor and review the attendance of taught students in the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences (HaSS). The purpose of this is to ensure we can identify any students who may benefit from academic and/or pastoral support. Attendance is also monitored so we can:   

• provide appropriate advice and/ or support to students to engage with their studies regularly; 
• to comply with our responsibilities as a sponsor, and maintain this status;  
• and make sure we provide accurate information to external government bodies.  

If you have not attended classes for more than 10 consecutive working days, you will be contacted by email to ascertain the reason for your absence, and if appropriate, direct you to relevant student support services. You should respond immediately to any contact you receive from your Department.  

If you do not respond to the email communication, a staff member will try to phone you (via the telephone number you have logged on Pegasus). This will be an opportunity for you to discuss concerns and direct you to relevant student support services if appropriate. You may be invited to meet face to face with a member of staff, on campus or online, as appropriate to your degree programme.  

If you do not respond to this phone call and/ or concerns are raised about your wellbeing, staff will escalate the concern to the Head of Department and inform the Vice Dean Academic. Where there is significant concern regarding your wellbeing, a wellbeing check may be carried out as per the University Emergency and Wellbeing Contact Procedure.  
 
Support for disabilities or illness:   

If you are unable to meet your attendance requirements due to disability or illness, it is important you speak with relevant staff in your programme as early as possible. If you have any queries regarding this, please contact your Department to discuss.  
  
University holidays:

Typically, attendance monitoring does not apply during university holiday periods for students on undergraduate and postgraduate programmes. Holiday periods are outlined on the key dates webpage. Any students participating in work placement during university holiday periods may have their attendance monitored and this process will be outlined in specific Programme Handbooks. 

International Students – Graduate Visa Route 

Students studying on the Graduate Visa route must keep all personal details on Pegasus up-to-date. Regular attendance is particularly important for international students on the Graduate Route of the UK Student Visa (previously known as ‘Tier 4’) as regular engagement form part of the visa conditions. Further guidance for international students is available here: https://www.strath.ac.uk/studywithus/internationalstudents/whileyourehere/
Students on this route will also receive an email from Strathclyde’s Visa Compliance team setting the requirements and processes involved (e.g., it explains when and why visa alerts might be triggered, how to avoid this, what to do if this happens, etc). The Visa Compliance team can be contacted at visa.compliance@strath.ac.uk. 

SYLLABUS

Week 1

Core academic skills workshops
(See MSc Programme for details)

Week 2

An introduction to the module and to the concept of intersectional inequalities

The first session will provide an overview of the organizational aspects of the module, and will introduce students to different understandings of inequality. We will explore practical examples of how structural and social contexts can render individuals and groups vulnerable to multiple forms of inequality, and consider what happens when these inequalities coalesce.  The lecture will place a particular focus on understanding: (1) intersectionality as a core concept; and (2) its application in research on the socio-economic and health inequalities faced by racialized minority women in Scotland. In introducing intersectionality as a key concept with potential applicability to understanding inequalities, the session will also look back to the origins of this concept in Black feminist scholarship in the US and consider how the concept has subsequently evolved across disciplines and contexts. Theoretically, the session will demonstrate how intersectionality, power, positionality, identities and agency are all useful theoretical tools and concepts for understanding the causes, consequences and experiences of intersecting inequalities. 

Seminar: For the seminar this week, please watch the introductory videos and read the Essential Readings. In the seminar, we will reflect on how we might each apply intersectionality to our own positionality (in terms of how we are each privileged and disadvantaged). We will then use these reflections to start thinking about what an intersectional lens means for key social policy issues. 

Learning outcomes: This session will assist students to:

• Understand the foundations, origins and evolution of ‘intersectionality’ as a core social science concept.
• Demonstrate a critical understanding of some key inequalities affecting the UK population (notably inequalities by ethnicity/’race’).

Introductory videos:

Learning for Justice Intersectionality: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6dnj2IyYjE
Peter Hopkins – What is Intersectionality? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1islM0ytkE 
The Institute of Art and Ideas - The Big Idea: Kimberlé Crenshaw on Intersectionality: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BnAW4NyOak

Introductory podcast

Undersong - Race and Conversations Other-wise Ep. 1 - Intersectionality across & between the Global South and North by Undersong - Race and Conversations Other-wise (soundcloud.com)

Week 3

Theme 1a: Unequal places (housing and neighbourhoods) in UK – Patterns, Causes and Policies
The recent fires at Grenfell Tower and Napier Barracks, and the murder of Sarah Everard starkly illustrate urban landscapes of inequality and injustice in the UK. This lecture explores how the spaces that are often closest to us can become sites of social exclusion, disadvantage and harm. We will examine how structural inequalities, discrimination and exclusionary policies underpin patterns of classed, racialised and gendered inequalities within homes and neighbourhoods in and across the UK. The lecture addresses the mutually reinforcing relationship between social and spatial inequalities through considering the ways individual’s social location can influence their security and safety, social networks and access to services and resources across their life course. Through introducing the key concepts of social segregation, exclusion, citizenship and social cohesion, the lecture examines how home and neighbourhood spaces are both shaped by inequalities, and a causal factor for engendering further intersectional disadvantage and harm. The session will also explore how policies can both tackle and further social and geographical marginalisation and stigmatisation, and will consider the gendered, racialised and classed consequences of policies that respond to place-based inequalities. 

Seminar: For the seminar this week, please watch the video and read the two assigned seminar preparation readings. In this seminar, we will explore the role of policies and wider factors in reproducing inequalities at home, neighbourhood and city level.

Seminar preparation:

• Watch this video Grenfell Fire: The tower became a symbol of social inequality in the UK https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fEtuWTAuIE 
• Read this piece in the Conversation “Home is the most dangerous place for women” but private and public violence are connected https://theconversation.com/home-is-the-most-dangerous-place-for-women-but-private-and-public-violence-are-connected-171348 
• Read this journal article: McDowell, L., & Harris, A. (2019). Unruly bodies and dangerous spaces: Masculinity and the geography of ‘dreadful enclosures’. Urban studies, 56(2), 419-433.

Learning outcomes: 

This session will assist students to:

• Develop a critical understanding about how urban spaces can both reflect and give rise to social inequalities and difference.
• Identify a range of social and structural factors that can increase individual’s vulnerability to intersecting inequalities and harm at home, neighbourhood and city level.
• Apply theoretical concepts as useful tools for analysing the role of space and mobilities in the reproduction of social inequalities.
• Critically consider how recent policies that seek to contain, disperse, place and displace groups increase people’s vulnerability to spatialised socio-economic inequalities and harm.

Week 4

Workshop on Assessment 1 & Assessment 2. Preparing for formative assessment

There will be no lecture this week. 

Instead, we will use the two hours to discuss the two Assessments of the modules. Detailed guidelines on Assessment 1 (a critical review of the literature on a chosen example of health inequalities through an intersectional lens) and Assessment 2 (a critical analysis of a policy addressing a specific inequality through an intersectional lens) will be provided.

There will be the opportunity for Q&A. 

In the last part of the session, students will start working in pair to prepare for the formative assessment – which will consist of paired/group presentations to be delivered in Teaching Week 8. The Formative Assessment is the first step towards Assessment 1 and provide an opportunity to receive timely verbal feedback on your work.
In preparation for this session, please familiarise yourself with the list of topics and country contexts that will be object of the formative assessment and of your first summative assessment (you will find the list of topics, country and associated readings in the Assessment section)

Week 5

Theme 1b: Unequal places in International Context

Short description of the lecture:

This lecture explores how social, spatial, and economic inequalities are shaped by geography, history, and institutions. Using case studies from Peru, it examines the drivers of place-based inequality—including migration, inadequate urban planning, informal economies, and environmental degradation—and highlights their consequences for health, security, and access to services. An intersectional lens shows how multiple forms of disadvantage intersect in specific contexts, with examples such as Lima’s “City of Cages” and Huanchaco’s surfing communities illustrating everyday impacts. The session also discusses strategies for tackling inequalities through sustainable infrastructure, education, healthcare, and inclusive governance.
 
Seminar: 

The seminar activity encourages students to apply their understanding of place-based inequalities to a different case study, that of Cape Town in South Africa. Students will discuss the paper Social Inequality and Spatial Segregation in Cape Town by Turok et al. (2021) – see below and in the Reading list. Please do the reading in advance.
As part of the seminar activity this you will look at maps from this paper and other sources and discuss what place-based inequalities you can identify, where these may originate from, how they intersect with each other, and what solutions you can put forward.

Week 6

Theme 2a: Unequal health in the UK – Patterns, Causes & Policies

Lecture

This session will explore how researchers in the UK define and study health inequalities and the main approaches used to explain differences across social groups. We will look at the patterns of unequal health outcomes across regions and communities in the UK and reflect on the structural drivers behind them. A central focus will be the value of an intersectionality perspective and why it matters for documenting, understanding, and addressing health inequalities. The session will also critically review evidence on policy responses, highlight what has (and hasn’t) worked, and open discussion on future directions for tackling health inequalities.
Seminar

Understanding Scotland’s Drug Death Rates and Rethinking Solutions: An Intersectional Perspective

Overview

This seminar builds on the lecture “Unequal Health in the UK: Patterns, Causes & Policies” and focuses on Scotland’s high rate of drug-related deaths, one of the most severe health inequalities in the UK. Using an intersectional lens, we will reflect on the historical, cultural, socio-economic and policy factors that drive these inequalities and their interactions with people’s positions across the hierarchies of gender and class. The session will also invite you to reflect on the current national policy response and design new policy responses that consider structural, social, and political dimensions of health inequality.

Preparation

Before the seminar, please read the following two documents.

• Novara Media (2025), Why Are There So Many Drug Deaths in Scotland?
• Scotland’s National Drugs Mission: Mission Plan 2022–2026 (Scottish Government)
  Reflect & note down (brief bullet points):
• What explanations or causal drivers does each document emphasize (economic, housing, stigma, justice, etc.)?
• Which institutions and social policies are implicated, and which are omitted in each document?
• Considering the analysis presented in the Novara media article, what are the strengths and limitations of the national plan?
  During the seminar you will work in groups to map the problem, critique the current plan and suggest new improved policy ideas.

Learning outcomes

Through this lecture and seminar, you will:

• Develop an understanding of health inequalities and relevant concepts including social determinants of health, health equity, and health gradient.
• Become familiar with the most studied patterns of health inequalities in the UK.
• Critically engage with the mainstream explanatory approaches of health inequalities including material, behavioural, psychosocial, and life-course perspectives.
• Develop an understanding of the relevance of intersectionality in health inequalities research.
• Critically reflect on policy responses for addressing health inequalities and consider the potential of intersectionality for shaping effective policy strategies.

Week 7

Theme 2b: Health inequalities in international contexts

This session will focus on health inequality from an international perspective by drilling down into some of the complexities when comparing high income countries (HIC) and low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). Access to safe, quality, and affordable medical care is sadly only experienced by the privileged few. In HIC countries the majority of people die of old age, while in LMICs people die much younger, of preventable communicable and non-communicable diseases. Globally social divisions are widening, not lessening and poverty has become normalised. A just and sustainable world must be based on principles of social justice, with values of equity which include respect, trust, dignity and reciprocity. The harsh reality is that health systems are embedded not only in local and national political systems but global ones, that do not always reflect these values.
  
This session will unpack some of these complexities and demonstrate the value of health systems strengthening by working in partnership with intersectoral stakeholders who sit with the knowledge regarding biological, social, behavioural, political, and environmental determinants of health within their context. We will make use of real-life, international examples of how these complexities, challenges and successes have played out globally. A recent example, which we will explore in the session, is Mpox which has been a cause of morbidity and mortality in Africa for several decades with poorly supported and not very impactful research and development. It suddenly became a global priority in 2024 for international research and funding when soaring number of cases were reported out of Africa affecting people in high income countries.

Seminar: 

This interactive seminar will use a couple of lived experience examples of health systems failings from within Africa. The group will be presented with the anonymous patient’s presenting problem at the local hospital and take you through some questions regarding what you might have done pre- and/or post-treatment to have strengthened the health system given its limited resources.

Learning outcomes:

This session will assist students to:

• Demonstrate a critical understanding of the range of factors that influence population health and health inequalities across a range of settings.
• Identify, interpret and critically appraise information on inequalities in health.
• Critically examine debates regarding the causes of inequalities in health, and how these varies across different settings.
• Demonstrate a critical understanding of how health systems strengthening can impact on health inequalities 
• Begin to identify some of the barriers facing policy actors seeking to address health inequalities and the social determinants of health across different settings.
• Critically examine debates regarding optimal policy responses for addressing inequalities in health, and their variation across contexts.

Recommended Readings:

Vallgårda, S. (2015) Governing obesity policies from England, France, Germany and Scotland, Social Science & Medicine, 147: 317-323.
Machado, C.V., Silva, G.A.e. Political struggles for a universal health system in Brazil: successes and limits in the reduction of inequalities. Global Health 15 (Suppl 1), 77 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12992-019-0523-5

Week 8

Formative assessment: Students’ presentations

This session will be dedicated to students’ presentations. Students can present individually or in pairs/groups, and are expected to use this as an opportunity to work towards their 1st assessment and to receive some verbal feedback.

Week 9

Theme 3a: Unequal Crime & Justice in UK – Patterns, Causes and Policies

This session will consider how practices in the UK’s criminal justice system perpetuate unequal crime and justice outcomes. In particular, we will consider whether ‘Stop and Search’ is a vital tool of police work or whether its disproportionate use against some social classes and ethnic groups underlines ‘crime control’ as a mode of oppression. Specifically, we will explore McAra and McVie’s argument that Police Scotland’s targeting of young offenders based on socio-economic status “may serve to sustain and reproduce the very problems which the institution ostensibly attempts to contain or eradicate” (McAra and McVie, 2005: 5). We will also draw on Bowling and Phillips (2007), exploring their suggestion that the combination of racial prejudice in the police paired with broad discretionary powers leads to criminal justice practices that continue to be “disproportionate and discriminatory” (Bowling and Phillips, 2007: 958). 

The session will then also touch on Foster et al’s (2005) review of policy changes made by the Metropolitan Police following the 1999 Stephen Lawrence Inquiry, which famously deemed the Metropolitan Police to be ‘Institutionally Racist’. In this second part of the session, we will consider chapter 5, ‘Relationship with minority communities’, to explore what policy changes have been successfully implemented and what failings still persist today. We will reflect on whether these approaches do enough to interrupt the powerful labelling processes described by Becker and whether changes in police practice to date adequately combat structural racism. We will then discuss alternative approaches to social justice problems that employ social welfare solutions over and above criminal justice measures. 

Seminar: More information on the seminar activity to be provided ahead of the session.

Learning outcomes:

This session will assist students to:

• Critically reflect on how policing and institutions of the criminal justice system contribute to the marginalization of intersecting social groups, particularly by class and race (and their intersections)
• Critically consider the definition and application of labels such as ‘crime’ and ‘deviance’, exploring their role in stigmatization and inequalities
• Assess some high profile policy proposals aimed at tackling racism in the police and consider their adequacy in the context of what we have learned about ‘labelling’, ‘stigma’ and ‘marginalization’
• Understand the broader political context around criminal justice policy making in ‘Late Modern’ society 
• Consider what barriers regularly hinder policy-making which would actively tackle the intersectional oppression perpetuated by the criminal justice system 

Week 10

Theme 3b: Unequal Crime & Justice in International context

Guest lecture: State Policing of Poor, Young Men in Kenya (Dr Kamau Wairuri, Edinburgh Napier University)

This lecture will examine the over-policing and under-protection of poor, young men living at Kenya’s urban margins. Drawing parallels with other marginalised groups in the society, we will examine how they are disproportionately targeted by the police and subjected to police abuse, paying particular attention to the use of lethal force. We will explores how they are discursively constructed as a security threat . In particular, we shall explore how crime data has been weaponised to serve this purpose. At the same time, police use of lethal force, under the guise of crime control creates a spectacle that the police can rely on to sustain their image as crime fighters and thereby bolster their legitimacy. This, as we shall see, not only predisposes young men to police abuse but also constrains their ability to pursue police accountability following victimisation. That is, we shall examine how the view of poor, young men as dangerous makes it difficult for them to pursue justice following victimisation. For many poor, young men in Kenyan cities, life then becomes primarily about avoiding death. We explore some of the strategies that poor, young men in Kenya are adopting to ensure their continued survival and the limits they encounter. Still, many of them die at the hands of the police. In some cases, after they have been killed, some of their families are able to pursue accountability in ways that the young men who have been killed by the police would have struggled to do while they were alive. We explore what this tells us about crime, policing and justice.

Reading

Wairuri, Kamau. "‘Thieves Should not Live Amongst People’: Under-Protection and Popular Support for Police Violence in Nairobi." African Affairs 121.482 (2022): 61-79.
Fassin, D. (2019). The Police Are the Punishment. Public Culture, 31(3), 539–561. 
Choongh, S. (1998). Policing the dross: A social disciplinary model of policing. The British Journal of Criminology, 38(4), 623-634.
McAra, L., & McVie, S. (2005). The usual suspects? Street-life, young people and the police. Criminal justice, 5(1), 5-36.
Wacquant, L. (2003). Toward a dictatorship over the poor? Notes on the penalization of poverty in Brazil. Punishment & Society, 5(2), 197-205.
Van Stapele, Naomi. "‘We are not Kenyans’: extra-judicial killings, manhood and citizenship in Mathare, a Nairobi ghetto." Conflict, Security & Development 16.4 (2016): 301-325.

Week 11

Session 6: Putting intersectionality into practice: applying intersectionality to policies and practices to tackle inequalities.

In the final session, we will reflect on efforts to employ intersectional approaches in social policy and practice, considering both the successes and challenges that are recounted. We will have a guest lecture from Khutso Dunbar whose work explores how racialized minority women in Scotland face particular socio-economic and health inequalities. The lecture will discuss the various ways existing policy contributes to these intersecting inequalities, and whether and how an intersectional approach to policymaking could be beneficial.
Seminar: We will use an intersectionality lens to revisit the core module content, drawing out both: (1) the value of intersectional approaches to understanding each exemplar inequality; and (2) the intersections between these four exemplar inequalities. Students will be encouraged to think about how these insights might apply to areas of social policy in which they have experience or expertise (e.g., from other modules in their programme). The final session will also include time to discuss and plan the final assessments. For this week’s seminar, please read and view all material marked ‘essential’ plus at least two readings from ‘Recommended Reading’ list (or any others that you can identify that focus on operationalising intersectionality in policies and practices aiming to tackling social inequalities). Please come prepared to talk to the material that you have read.

Learning outcomes: This session will assist students to:

• Apply an intersectional analytical lens to a range of social and economic inequalities.
• Consider intersections between various types of social and economic inequality.
• Critically reflect on emerging lessons from efforts to apply intersectionality to social policy and practice.

Assessment

Formative assessment: Students presentations

As part of their formative assessment, students are asked to work (individually or in pairs/groups) to create a 10-minute presentation on the topic of their Assessment 1. 

The list of topics and country contexts for Assessment 1 is provided below, in the next section. 

The aim of this assessment is to encourage you to start reading for your assessment early, and to start practicing using intersectionality as your lens through which critically reviewing literature.

You are not expected to discuss all papers. Instead focus on one (or two, at the most) and review it critically.

In doing so, you may want to discuss the extent to which it engages with the analysis of inequalities at the intersection between place and health, building on what you learnt in your first lectures. But do also highlight any other relevant dimension of inequality that have or (should have) been considered, and the extent to which these are analysed in isolation or at their intersection. Throughout your presentation, try to think critically about the evidence and data you have identified – do these sources seem reliable and up-to-date? What are their strengths and/or their limitations?

Since your classmates may not be familiar with the context you have chosen, please start your presentation by providing some key information about the geo-political context you are focusing on and explaining why the specific form of health inequality is so important.  This seminar will be used to provide formative feedback that is intended to be useful to your Part 1 assessment.

Formative feedback means that you are provided with feedback (in this case, verbally) on your understanding, interpretation and ideas but you do not receive a grade. This kind of feedback is designed to be constructive and ongoing, allowing you to refine your understanding and insight as you progress through the module.

Summative Assessment

The summative assessment for this module is made up of two parts.

Assessment 1: Critical Review Essay (worth 50% of your final module grade).

Word count: 2500 words. 

Instructions:

Critically review academic literature on a selected example of health inequality from an intersectionality perspective. Choose from the list of topics/contexts below.

Whichever option you choose, you must:

• Review the five recommended studies.
• Include at least one additional article that you have identified as relevant to your case study (i.e. you cannot *only* review the suggested sources – you must be able to show that you can search for and identify relevant literature). 
• Introduce the concept of intersectionality, with reference to key sources (see Session 1 readings).
• Answer the question you have chosen, which means you will need to briefly synthesise the literature you are reviewing, to explain what these studies suggest are the causes of your chosen inequality. 
• Consider whether (and how) the concept of intersectionality has been employed in the literature you are reviewing. If not (or if only to a limited extent), consider whether (and why) research or analysis taking a more intersectional approach might be useful. 
• You may want to include studies that use different methodological approaches (e.g. include some that use quantitative methods and some that use qualitative methods) and consider how well aligned (or not) the findings of studies using different methods are (and why this might be); and how different methodological approaches may enable the adoption of an intersectional perspective. 
• To critically assess included studies, you may find it useful to start thinking about each study’s strengths and limitations. To help with this, you may like to consider applying some critical appraisal checklists. For examples, see: CASP Checklists - Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (casp-uk.net). Stronger essays will be able to make connections between single studies, comparing them and contrasting them, and appraising them collectively as well as individually.

Option 1: Inequalities in adverse birth outcomes in the U.S.

Langer, P.D., Patler, C., Hamilton, E. R. (2024); Adverse Infant Health Outcomes Increased After the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election Among Non-White U.S.-born and Foreign-born Mothers. Demography; 61 (4): 1211–1239. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/00703370-11477581
Harper-Hanigan, K., Ross, G., Sims, T. et al. (2017).  Women’s Perspectives of Needs Surrounding Adverse Birth Outcomes: A Qualitative Assessment of the Neighborhood Impact of Adverse Birth Outcomes. Maternal and Child Health Journal, 21, 2219–2228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-017-2343-7
Borrell, L.N. , Bolúmar, F., Rodriguez-Alvarez, E.,  Nieves, C.I. (2022). Adverse birth outcomes in New York City women: Revisiting the Hispanic Paradox, Social Science & Medicine, 315, 115527. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.115527
Curtis, D.S., Waitzman, N., Kramer, M.R., Shakib, J.H. (2024). Structural barriers to health care as risk factors for preterm and small-for-gestational-age birth among US-born Black and White mothers, Health & Place, 85, 103177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2024.103177.
Margerison-Zilko, C.E., Li, Y.,  Zi Luo, Z.  (2017) Economic Conditions During Pregnancy and Adverse Birth Outcomes Among Singleton Live Births in the United States, 1990–2013, American Journal of Epidemiology, Volume 186, Issue 10, 15 November 2017, Pages 1131–1139, https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwx179

Option 2: Inequalities in childhood immunisation rates in India

Krishnamoorthy Y, Kannusamy S, Sarveswaran G, Majella MG, Sarkar S, Narayanan V. Factors related to vaccine hesitancy during the implementation of Measles-Rubella campaign 2017 in rural Puducherry-A mixed-method study. J Family Med Prim Care. 2019 Dec 10;8(12):3962-3970. doi: 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_790_19. PMID: 31879644; PMCID: PMC6924217.
Nair, A.T., Nayar, K.R., Koya, S.F. et al. Social media, vaccine hesitancy and trust deficit in immunization programs: a qualitative enquiry in Malappuram District of Kerala, India. Health Res Policy Sys 19
Srivastava, S., Fledderjohann, J. & Upadhyay, A.K. Explaining socioeconomic inequalities in immunisation coverage in India: new insights from the fourth National Family Health Survey (2015–16). BMC Pediatr 20, 295 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12887-020-02196-5
A.L. Wagner, A.R. Shotwell, M.L. Boulton, B.F. Carlson, J.L. Mathew Demographics of vaccine hesitancy in Chandigarh, India Front Med, 7 (2021 Jan 15), p. 1062
Wahl, B., Gupta, M., Erchick, D.J. et al. Change in full immunization inequalities in Indian children 12–23 months: an analysis of household survey data. BMC Public Health 21, 841 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-10849-y

Option 3: Inequalities in non-communicable diseases in Iran

Bahadori M, Ravangard R. Analysis of the Systematic Relationships among Social Determinants of Health (SDH) and Identification of Their Prioritization in Iran Using DEMATEL Technique. Iran J Public Health. 2013 Dec;42(12):1457-64. PMID: 26060648; PMCID: PMC4441943. 
Fattahi, N., Azadnajafabad, S., Mohammadi, E. et al. Geographical, gender and age inequalities in non-communicable diseases both at national and provincial levels in Iran. J Diabetes Metab Disord (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40200-020-00713-y
Khorrami, Z., Rezapour, M., Etemad, K. et al. The patterns of Non-communicable disease Multimorbidity in Iran: A Multilevel Analysis. Sci Rep 10, 3034 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-59668-y
Rezaei, N., Moghaddam, S.S., Farzadfar, F. et al. Social determinants of health inequity in Iran: a narrative review. J Diabetes Metab Disord 22, 5–12 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40200-022-01141-w
Parvizy, A.,Kiani, K. & Ivbijaro, G. (2013) Women's Health Bridges and Barriers: A Qualitative Study, Health Care for Women International, 34:3-4, 193-208, DOI: 10.1080/07399332.2012.740108

Option 4: Inequalities in maternal health in Nigeria

Suggested case study specific sources:

Ajayi, A., Akpan, W. (2019). Maternal Outcomes in the Context of Free Maternal Healthcare Provisioning in North Central and South Western Nigeria. In: Anson, J., Bartl, W., Kulczycki, A. (eds) Studies in the Sociology of Population. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94869-0_12
Nwosu, C.O., Ataguba, J.E. Socioeconomic inequalities in maternal health service utilisation: a case of antenatal care in Nigeria using a decomposition approach. BMC Public Health 19, 1493 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-7840-8
Okoli, C., Hajizadeh, M., Rahman, M.M. et al. Geographical and socioeconomic inequalities in the utilization of maternal healthcare services in Nigeria: 2003–2017. BMC Health Serv Res 20, 849 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-05700-w
Okoli, C.I., Hajizadeh, M., Rahman, M.M. et al. Socioeconomic inequalities in teenage pregnancy in Nigeria: evidence from Demographic Health Survey. BMC Public Health 22, 1729 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-14146-0
Sanni Yaya, Friday Okonofua, Lorretta Ntoimo, Ogochukwu Udenige, Ghose Bishwajit, Gender inequity as a barrier to women’s access to skilled pregnancy care in rural Nigeria: a qualitative study, International Health, Volume 11, Issue 6, November 2019, Pages 551–560, https://doi.org/10.1093/inthealth/ihz019

Option 5: Inequalities in life expectancy in Scotland

Garnham, L. (2014) Understanding the impacts of industrial change and area-based deprivation on health inequalities, using Swidler’s concepts of cultured capacities and strategies of action. Social Theory & Health, 13:1-32. 
Kapilashrami, A & Marsden, S. (2018) Examining intersectional inequalities in access to health (enabling) resources in disadvantaged communities in Scotland: advancing the participatory paradigm. International Journal for Equity in Health, 24;17(1):83.
Lorimer, K., McMillan, L., McDaid, L., Milne, D., Russell, S. & Hunt, K. (2018) Exploring masculinities, sexual health and wellbeing across areas of high deprivation in Scotland: The depth of the challenge to improve understandings and practices. Health & Place, 50: 27-41. 
N. Miall, G. Fergie and A. Pearce (2022) Health Inequalities in Scotland: Trends in deaths, health and wellbeing, health behaviours, and health services since 2000, Institution: University of Glasgow 2022 doi: 10.36399/gla.pubs.282637/
D. Walsh, G. McCartney, C. Collins, M. Taulbut, G.D. Batty, History, politics and vulnerability: explaining excess mortality in Scotland and Glasgow, Public Health, Volume 151, 2017, Pages 1-12, ISSN 0033-3506,

Assessment 2: Critical Policy Review (worth 50% of your final module grade).

Word count: 2500 words. 

Instructions:

Assessment 2 is a critical assessment of a policy strategy for tackling one of the module’s three exemplar inequalities, which employs an intersectionality perspective. This requires you to choose a particular policy setting that you are familiar with (either because you lived there, or worked and researched on this context before) and a selected time-period to critically assess one of the following:
-Policy responses to health inequalities
-Policy responses to place-based inequalities
-Policy responses to criminal justice inequalities

Once again, you need to demonstrate that you have a good understanding of intersectionality as an analytic concept but this time you need to show that you can use this to critically assess policy outputs/texts.  
To help inform your approach to Assessment 2, here are a couple of examples of policy analyses that employ intersectionality, and show how researchers have used intersectionality to undertake policy analysis.
Fagrell Trygg, N., Gustafsson, P.E., Hurtig, AK. et al. (2022) Reducing or reproducing inequalities in health? An intersectional policy analysis of how health inequalities are represented in a Swedish bill on alcohol, drugs, tobacco and gambling. BMC Public Health 22, 1302.

Lombardo, E., & Rolandsen Agustín, L. (2016). Intersectionality in European Union policymaking: the case of gender-based violence. Politics, 36(4), 364-373. 

You will be provided with guidance for Part 2 assessment in Week a and with a Q&A session in Week 11, though (by this point) you should already have begun planning (and reading) for this assessment.

Instructions to submit assessment

Format of assignments

Assignments should use size 12+ font and line spacing that is either 1.15 or 1.5. Normal borders should be used. Referencing should use a consistent author-date format (e.g. Harvard referencing style – see: https://guides.lib.strath.ac.uk/referencing_guide/harvard  

Submission of Assignments

Assignments should be submitted online via the relevant MyPlace module page.  You must submit your assignment with the front cover sheet as the first page as one file, which is available from MyPlace:  http://classes.myplace.strath.ac.uk/
Please remember that assignments are marked anonymously so you must only put your registration number on your work.

Penalties for the Late Submission of Coursework

Coursework is deemed to be late when it is submitted after the published deadline without an agreed extension, and in the absence of personal circumstances. Please see the Policy and Procedure on Late Submission of Coursework provides a detailed account of the policy and procedures for the late submission of coursework for further details. Staff will communicate any such instances to students. However, in all instances, the range and timing of penalties will be applied according to a commitment to fairness and supporting all students in their studies alongside agreed procedures. Staff will monitor the late submission of assessments in order to identify any students who may require additional support. For regular coursework, a “sliding scale” penalty system will be applied to minimise occurrences of late submission of coursework. Assignments that are submitted late, but within 24 hours of the submission deadline, or approved extended submission deadline, will be subject to a 10 point deduction on the percentage mark being applied to the original mark. For each subsequent day, or part day, that a coursework is submitted late up until seven calendar days from the deadline, a penalty of 5 percentage point deduction per day or part day will be applied to the original mark. The maximum number of percentage points that can be deducted for late submission is 40.

Requesting the application of the grace period

If you experience unexpected circumstances before the time set on the day of the deadline and it results in a delay to your submission of less than four hours, you can request that the grace period is applied to your coursework submission via the late submissions tool in MyPlace. If the reason provided is acceptable for use of the grace period, this will mean that a penalty is not applied to your mark.  Requests for the grace period to be applied must be submitted within 4 hours of the published date and time and no longer – we strongly suggest that you submit your request as soon as you have submitted your coursework.  To request that the grace period is applied:

1.Submit your coursework

2.In the assignment page containing information about the status of your submission and the deadline, click on the Late Submissions section to expand it

3.From the ‘Reason for grace period’ dropdown list, select the reason that best describes why you are requesting the grace period

4.Submit your request

The grace period will be automatically applied to your submission.  However, if it becomes apparent that the grace period has been misused, a member of staff may revoke it and apply the appropriate late penalty.  
NOTE: where the late submissions tool in MyPlace is available, it should be used.
Where a penalty is applied in MyPlace, you can view the grade awarded to your work, the late penalty deducted and the final grade received after the deduction of the penalty.  You can do this by expanding the ‘late submissions’ section on the assignment page, once the grades have been released.  

In the case of coursework to be submitted through MyPlace, issues with MyPlace which prevent students from submitting their coursework before the deadline will not result in late penalties.  In this situation, staff will amend the deadline to allow enough time for students to successfully upload and submit their coursework after the issue has been resolved.

If you think you are unlikely to meet a coursework deadline due to medical issues or personal circumstances, please apply for an extension as early as possible.

We would strongly encourage you, when circumstances apply, to engage with the extension procedure and attempt to avoid a situation where you accrue deductions due to work being submitted late without an agreed extension. 

Extensions

Before requesting an extension, students should read this section in full.  The extension request requirements vary depending on the length of extension requested and the method by which the request is submitted.  There is also some guidance on what might constitute grounds for an extension request to be granted. Students requesting an extension to the deadline for a piece of coursework must apply via the extensions tool in MyPlace. Further guidance about using this tool is contained under the heading ‘MyPlace Extension Request’ below.  Please pay attention to the examples found under the Section 3 heading ‘Grounds for Extending the Deadline for Coursework Submission’ in the Policy and Procedure on Extensions to Coursework Submission.  The policy is intended to be supportive of students, and staff will monitor students’ use of extensions in order to identify students who may require support. The policy provides examples of what might be grounds for granting an extension and what is unlikely to be grounds for the granting of an extension. The list does not try to cover every possible scenario so students should discuss with staff any circumstances that are negatively impacting their studies.

Extension requests should normally be made in advance of a coursework submission deadline.  In exceptional cases, students may apply for an extension retrospectively.

Extensions of fewer than seven calendar days

Requests for an extension of less than seven calendar days do not require formal supporting evidence (e.g., a doctor’s letter).  However, students are encouraged to communicate to staff any circumstances that are negatively impacting their studies as early as possible, especially where other assessments or aspects of their studies are also impacted.  This can be done by submitting a Self-Certificate form on Pegasus.
Extensions of longer than seven days

There is information about the Personal Circumstances Procedure on the website.

Failure to submit evidence of medical or personal circumstances for extension requests of seven days or more could result in the extension request being rejected or revoked and/or any subsequent academic appeal being regarded as inadmissible.

Students should note that certified cases of medical and/or personal circumstances will be considered sympathetically and the rules will be applied in a caring manner.  Where there are sensitivities or difficulties in obtaining evidence (for example, a death certificate), a compassionate approach will be taken. The rules are designed to be as clear as possible, to help students plan their work sensibly and ensure parity in the service provided to all students.

Grounds for Extending the Deadline for Coursework Submission

The list below does not try to cover every possible scenario but provides examples of what might be grounds for granting an extension and what is unlikely to be grounds for the granting of an extension.  Students should not be discouraged from submitting a request if they do not see their situation described below.

Examples of Medical Circumstances

Medical conditions or illness, including physical and/or mental health problems that negatively impact a student’s preparation for an assessment.

Advice on Personal Circumstances

Full details on processes and procedures relating to Personal Circumstances are available here. Please read these in full so that you are clear on the kinds of information to record on Pegasus and on what happens with this information (including how Exam Boards can consider personal circumstances). 

Examples of Personal Circumstances may include

• Serious illness or death of a person close to the student
• Family break-up
• Being a victim of crime
• Being in a serious car accident
• Jury service
• Significant relationship breakdown
• Unexpected caring commitments
• Homelessness
• Home Office requirements
• Fire
• Flood
• Adverse weather conditions
• Exceptional travel circumstances outwith a student’s control which prevented them from meeting the published submission date
• Other exceptional circumstances that can be reasonably considered to negatively impact a student’s ability to submit coursework on time

Examples of Insufficient Grounds for an Extension

The following circumstances would not be acceptable grounds for granting an extension:

• Poor planning and time management
• Error made in understanding the published dates of assessment submissions
• Having another assessment due on or around the same date
• Minor IT issues such as computer failure
• Failure of third parties to deliver the assessment
• Holidays, social events, moving house, or any event planned in advance of the submission deadline
• Failure to make alternative travel plans when disruptions were advised in advance

MyPlace Extension Request Process

Instructions for the submission of an extension request via MyPlace are below.

1.Go to the MyPlace site for the class in which you wish to request an extension to the deadline of a piece of coursework
2.Click on the assignment link for the piece of coursework.  This will open a page containing information about the assignment, the status of your submission and the deadline
3.Click on the Extensions section and select ‘Request Extension’
4.You will be required to fill in three parts of a form:

• Select a reason from the dropdown list
• Propose a new deadline (date and time)
• in more detail your reason for requ

5.Submit your extension request

You will receive a MyPlace notice and an email to confirm that your request has been submitted.  If you have downloaded the University’s Mobile App and have logged in using your DS username, you will also receive a push notification on your device.

Your request will be considered, resulting in one of the following two outcomes:

1.Your extension request will be granted – either based on the date and time you proposed or based on an alternative date and time specified by the appropriate member of staff
2.Your extension request will not be granted*

The outcome of your extension request will be communicated to you via a MyPlace notice and an email.  If you have downloaded the University’s Mobile App and have logged in using your DS username, you will also receive a push notification on your device.
If you submit an extension request and decide that you no longer require it, you can cancel the request up until the point at which it is approved.  After it has been approved, you cannot cancel the request but you can, of course, submit the work in time for the original deadline.
*If your extension request is not granted and you would like to access support please contact Catriona Murray (catriona.murray@strath.ac.uk) for details of central University support services, please see the ‘Support’ section below.

What happens if you fail an assessment?

As with many other modules, this one has two-parts to the assessment (assignment, exam etc) and you need to ensure you achieve a mark for the module, when assessments are combined, of over 50%, the pass mark. If you don’t achieve this, it is necessary for you to pass such assessments in which you scored under 50%. 
These resits, where they apply to semester one work, will be set for you to complete in semester two. Where resits apply to semester two work, they will need to be completed during the summer. Resit assessments will be marked in the normal way (i.e. they will be not be capped at the pass mark), with the mark awarded by the marker returned to the Board of Examiners. The credit-weighted average (CWA), which is used by the Board of Examiners to make any progress or award decisions, is always calculated using the mark(s) for the first attempt. 
We do not normally allow more than two attempts at any assessment, although if you have special circumstances and under exceptional circumstances, a further opportunity may be allowed.
Given the large workload, doing resits alongside first assessments for other modules can be difficult, and you should aim to pass first time.

Plagiarism

All submitted work must be the student’s own.  Plagiarism of other people’s writing, whether passages are ‘lifted’ directly or with slight rewording and irrespective of whether the work in question is listed in the bibliography, is wholly unacceptable and will be penalised.  Particular care should be taken that internet-based sources are paraphrased in the student’s own words rather than cut and pasted and referenced appropriately. Students should seek advice from their supervisor if they are in any doubt about appropriate use of sources. Further advice can be found here. Student work is electronically checked via Turnitin plagiarism detection software, and any work found to be plagiarised will be referred to a hearing to investigate its originality. Offences, if established, is likely to attract substantial penalty.   It should be stressed that the sanctions for academic dishonesty extend to all forms of submission, whether written or oral.  When plagiarism or any other academic offence is detected the School, in assessing the merit of the work submitted, will take the fact of the dishonesty into account.  At the very least, plagiarised material will attract a mark of zero.  If it is extensive the whole submission may attract a mark of zero. If the plagiarism is serious, of a substantial, brazen or flagrant sort, the penalty may be a mark of zero for the whole class no matter how well the student performs in other parts of the class.  Before making any such decision, the School will give the student an opportunity to explain themselves, or to defend the charge. A meeting will be arranged involving the class co-ordinator, Convenor of the Student Affairs Committee (or representative) and the student together with any representative. The most serious forms of academic dishonesty amount to a disciplinary offence which will be referred to the Senate Discipline Committee.  The final decision is then outwith the hands of the School.  On a finding that a student has been in breach of discipline, the Senate Discipline Committee might impose one or more of

(a)    An admonition
(b)    A reprimand
(c)    A fine
(d)    Disqualification from use of University facilities
(e)    Deduction of marks, requirement to resubmit, or to retake class, deferment of award
(f)    Suspension from attendance at the University for a stipulated period
(g)    Expulsion from the University
The normal appeal process operates in relation to the decisions of the Discipline Committee. The above is based on the University Regulations, Regs. 5.4–5.6, to which reference should be made.

Self-plagiarism / duplication

Students should also take care not to re-use the same work across different assignments and modules within the programme  (i.e. not to duplicate their own work – sometimes referred to as self-plagiarism). This is because the university does not allow students to gain multiple credits for the same work within programmes. The plagiarism detection software the University uses will automatically identify student duplication of work across modules.
More information, including on avoiding self-plagiarism/duplication can be found on your Programme MyPlace page.

How your work is graded

Taught Postgraduate Marking Criteria

The marking criteria set out below give a guide as to the standards expected at different grade bands. Individual modules may provide supplements to this but need to take these into account to produce marking decisions are consistent, fair and transparent to both staff and students.