In recent years, the pernicious emergence of antiracism has infiltrated many schools. Presented as indisputable fact, school leaders, ubiquitous Equality, Diversity and Inclusion teams (EDI), along with many activist-minded individual teachers, uncritically accept the view that the education sector is institutionally racist. Indeed, the antiracist disciple will refer to alleged ethnic disparities in educational achievement as evidence to support this claim. However, this antiracist assertion is not only false but is also a crude misunderstanding - possibly even intentionally designed to discredit long establish cultural norms and values, commonly associated with Enlightenment principles. Worse still, the growing threat of antiracist policies, which are designed to rectify ethnic inequalities in educational outcomes will merely serve to create division between pupils, stifle ambition, and engineer a culture of dependency and victimology amongst minority groups.

Central to the role of education is for all students to maximize their individual academic or vocational potential. Indeed, any liberal, inclusive and meritocratic society must be committed to equality of opportunity. It follows that education ought to enable learners to improve their life-chances, and for many from modest backgrounds, it can be a genuine vehicle for upward social mobility. One only has to look at a report by the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) back in 2013, which discovered the value placed on education within first-generation immigrant families. The research showed nine ethnic minority groups (including Bangladeshi, Ghanaian, Indian, Nigerian, Sierra Leonean and Vietnamese) all performed above the national average at GCSE grades.

The education system in England is far from perfect because wide gaps between students eligible for free school meals (FSM) and those who are not eligible continue to exist. Equally notable is that girls continue to largely outperformed boys. However, ethnic differences in educational attainment are more unpredictable, mostly because there is a mixed picture of success and failure amongst certain groups.

Boys from Black Caribbean, Mixed White/Black Caribbean and White British students on free school meals (FSM) appear to be underachieving. Despite this, levels of attainment for the vast majority of ethnic minorities have been steadily improving. Failure to recognise this fact is not only ignoring the evidence that equality of opportunity is real, but is alarmingly presenting a false narrative in order to promote a political ideology - namely, the antiracist view that schools operate either consciously or unconsciously to reinforce ethnic minority educational failure.

If it is true that schools are institutionally racist, one would expect to see white pupils among the highest achievers, and the vast majority of ethnic minority groups languishing at the bottom. If one is to believe the claim that racism and discrimination are systemic within compulsory education, it would logically follow that such victimisation would inevitably have a detrimental impact on achievement. The reality is strikingly different. In fact, the latest 2022 government data on average GCSE ethnic attainment 8 scores show clear evidence of success for pupils of colour, with just a few groups underperforming. Admittedly, White British girls (53.1%) are more successful than those from Gypsy/Roma/Irish Traveller (24.5%), Black Caribbean (47.8%), Black Other (52%), and Mixed Black/Caribbean (48.1%) ethnic groups. However, Bangladeshi (58.7%), Pakistani (53.4%), Indian (65%), Asian Other (62%), Black African (55.9%), and Chinese (70.8%) girls are all outperforming White British girls. Indeed, the picture is similar with boys. Granted, White boys (47.7%) have higher scores than Gypsy/Roma/Irish Traveller (21%), Black African (48.5%), Black Caribbean (40.2%), Black Other (44.8%), and Mixed White/Black Caribbean (41.7%) students. However, those who are Mixed White/African (47.9%), Black African (48.5%), Pakistani (47.9%), Bangladeshi (53%), Asian Other (55.6%), Indian (59.2%), and Chinese (67.4%) all outperform White British pupils. In fact, out of all ethnic groups, Black Caribbean pupils have the lowest score for girls at 47.8 per cent, yet this is still higher than White British boys on 47.4 per cent. Within groups, Chinese boys and girls show the smallest gap at 3.4 per cent, whereas the largest difference is amongst Black Caribbean boys and girls at 7.6 per cent. Clearly, Chinese pupils are the highest achievers at GCSE, whilst (apart from Gypsy/Roma/Irish Traveller) those who are Black Caribbean are the lowest achievers.

Nevertheless, given that many ethnic minorities experience high rates of poverty and material deprivation, it is useful to test the antiracist view that those experiencing the greatest deprivation are likely to be the victims of discrimination in school, just as they are in wider society. According to 2022 government data, students who are eligible for free school meals (FSM) do not experience parity of achievement with those who are not eligible for FSM. Unsurprising, Bangladeshi, Pakistani and Black Caribbean pupils on FSM represent some of the lowest attainment scores, given the poverty rates experienced by these ethnic minority groups. Yet poverty is not always a predictor for educational failure.

For example, Chinese students on FSM are considerably more successful than all other ethnic groups regardless of eligibility for FSM. Incredibly, the difference between those on FSM and those who are not eligible within the Chinese school population is merely 2.9 per cent. Concerningly, Black Caribbean students who are not eligible for FSM are outperformed by Bangladeshi, Indian, Asian Other, Black African and Chinese groups who are eligible for FSM. Therefore, with a narrow focus on Black Caribbean pupils, antiracists might still perceive attainment data as clear evidence of institutional racism. However, apart from Gypsy/Roma/Irish Traveller, the lowest achievers across all ethnic groups on FSM are White British pupils on 35.8 per cent, thus debunking the antiracist claim.

These results expose the absurdity of any argument that judges schools to be institutionally racist. Indeed, whilst no doubt there still exists some individual, overt racism in schools, it cannot be the only factor accounting for ethnic disparities in attainment. A more sophisticated understanding is to recognise the significance of poverty, and more importantly, culture as determinants of inequalities in educational outcomes. Thus, the antiracist theory of the education system intentionally working against ethnic minorities is incorrect. Regretfully, as antiracism appears to be in the ascendency, too many schools are embracing a false narrative, which not only elevates belief over fact, but also fails to celebrate the educational progress made by most ethnic minorities. Rather than persisting with nebulous concepts such as implicit bias or phantom systemic racism, energy should be spent examining the factors which enable many ethnic minorities to achieve. In doing so, one suspects those in positions of authority will recognise the importance of close relationships between schools and communities, parental and teacher encouragement, material support, high expectations, individual pupil responsibility, discipline, meritocracy, and above all - colour-blindness.