Why are Black Caribbean boys underachieving at school? - Ajantha Ratnayaka
The issue of the relatively poor educational attainment of Afro-Caribbean male pupils in British schools is one that has been thoroughly contaminated by left-wing political thinking. Any examination of this question is constrained by orthodoxies that are stubbornly defended, usually by branding those seeking truth and possible solutions as ‘racists’. Despite the fact that decades of this type of thinking has not led to significant progress and is completely ignored, the orthodoxies still stand. As in many other areas, the left-wing blinkers are on.
The reasons for educational underachievement with any specific child can vary but statistically the reasons are common, predictable and recurring. These reasons can be distilled down to one main factor: family background. The unspoken predictions made by teachers, which we are told result in “unconscious bias which itself leads to educational failure, are informed by experience not prejudice.
The central pillar of left-wing thinking on this issue is, unsurprisingly, racism. Racism of the educational system, of the curriculum and of society in general. The simple fact that white male pupils from a working class background perform even worse than their Afro-Caribbean counterparts is conveniently left to one side. I would suggest that both groups of these pupils underperform for similar cultural reasons; most significant of these reasons being hyper-masculinity, learned opposition towards authority and a general under-valuing of formal education. Any examination of excluded children at pupil referral units clearly shows this.
A stark example of where the racism argument fails is when looking at the educational attainment of other children who come from various non-white backgrounds. Any inherent racism within the educational system seems not to inhibit their performance.
I have regularly heard the argument that children from an Afro-Caribbean background suffer from not learning enough (or any) ‘black culture’ or history, thus alienating them from formal education. Consider for a moment the position of the South Asian pupil, the lack of ‘Asian’ history or culture in the curriculum seems to be no hindrance to their overall educational success.
Another commonly stated argument is that the lack of teachers who are themselves from an Afro-Caribbean background leads to Afro-Caribbean pupils feeling detached from education as a whole. The greatest challenge to this argument can be seen in the performance of pupils from a South East Asian background. This group outperforms all others. These pupils seem to be immune from any detriment caused by the lack of teachers who “look like” them.
Whilst the left are keen to describe Britain as a racist society, they are reluctant to characterise most teachers as being racists. This has led to their assertion that the educational institutions are racist, and therefore, that these institutions are structurally putting Afro-Caribbean students at a disadvantage. When describing all the ways that educational institutions, from schools to universities, are the cause of poor outcomes for many Afro-Caribbean people, they cannot explain how this “institutional racism” seems to be able to distinguish between people of African heritage, those of Asian heritage, and indeed those of Afro-Caribbean heritage who do well.
In order to obscure this question, meaninglessly broad terms such as “BAME” are deployed. In a recent discussion with a friend who is an academic at a British university, the question of “outcomes” for “non-white” students came up. He informed me that research shows that the overall “outcomes” for non-white students were worse than for white students. I suggested to him that the term “non-white”, for the purposes of this research, is meaningless, and creates a false impression of the reality it seeks to examine. When all “non-white” students are grouped in this way it appears, for example, that the student from a Chinese background studying medicine, the Ghanaian science student and the Tamil student studying maths are all failing in the British educational system- this would be factually untrue. Detailed statistical evidence that does not see all people who are not white as a single group clearly shows this. Any measures to assist those who may be disadvantaged in various ways cannot do so by working with false assumptions created by flawed research. These arguments and the research to confirm them are created by white, middle-class, liberal leftists. The fact that educational failure can very often lead to a host of further personal and societal hardships does not directly affect them. The urgency in finding actual solutions, which can only come from honest examination, has been trumped, as with many other issues of race in Britain by the need for ammunition in their war against “white society”.
Solutions to this problem must be undertaken within the various working-class Afro-Caribbean communities. As I have said before, all immigrant communities that have done well in Britain have done so mainly by their own endeavours, this is undoubtedly the crucial factor. Relying on white “saviours”, who have a separate agenda, will not result in progress for the people concerned. However, there will always be strong resistance from both the “saviours”, who cannot envisage a solution that does not involve them, and those people who find it easier to look outward for solutions because looking inward is far harder. The only genuine contribution that could be made by white people is to treat all people in the same way- as most do. This is what most non-white people need and want. They do not require pity and false analysis.
The focusing on family culture and background as the real source of a solution to this problem is understandably difficult, as fundamental solutions often are. Whilst it may feel judgemental and even unsympathetic, if our aim is to reverse and eliminate this wholly unnecessary disparity between children of various “colours'', who are in receipt of the same education, we must grasp this nettle. It is crucial that left-wing race warriors are not allowed to infantilise people from Afro-Caribbean backgrounds by insisting that they are incapable of solving the problems that they encounter.
The recent report headed by Tony Sewell, which was roundly and predictably condemned by those who are ideologically addicted to victim narratives, examines the role family background plays in this issue around race in Britain. Those who vehemently criticised the report failed to acknowledge its balance, as it did not conclude that Britain had no racial issues to address. The “horror” expressed by many left-wing liberals was clearly insincere; they seemed delighted at the golden opportunity to publicly express their outrage. The competition between them to be more upset at the report than their peers was fierce. Once again, the white “anti-racists” strive to keep themselves at the centre of the debate, their “outrage” at this report is more about “virtue signalling” than any desire for progress of non-white people in contemporary Britain. The relentless emphasis on historical injustices committed by their ancestors is designed to continually remind non-white people that their history began at the point of contact with Europeans. In the context of education, this simply serves as part of a subtle message that ideas of discipline, effort and excellence are oppressive control mechanisms that “white society” uses to continue their subjugation. In British schools, it is not uncommon to hear black children accusing their black peers, who do well, of “thinking they’re white” or “acting white”. These sorts of limiting attitudes can only be eliminated when black adults take the control of their children out of the hands of ‘progressives’ and into their own.
It would seem that the remedying of educational underachievement is not the central objective of many left-wing educationalists, rather “black boys” are once again being used as a weapon in their fight against “white men”.