‘ Race ’ , Difference, and the Inclusive Society

‘Race’, Difference, and the Inclusive Society Teresa Staniewicz Office: R3.09 Email: T.Staniewicz@Warwick.ac.uk Office Hours in Term 1 Wednesdays 11.15am-12.15pm Thursdays 12.15pm-1.30pm Please email me before so that we can arrange a suitable (free) timeslot! Thank you! Centre for Rights, Equality and Diversity

EDUCATION & THE LABOUR MARKET It is absolutely clear that education is pivotal in the quest for a more inclusive society. Without a more ‘level playing field’, material inequalities cannot decrease, and without a greater sense of common purpose and citizenship values, racism and xenophobia will continue to infect the body politic.

Introduction The first point to make here is that the education debates cannot be divorced from the earlier discussions about migration and settlement patterns. Social background and location are key factors in determining the nature and quality of education one receives. Furthermore, the latter tend to be worse both through the direct effects of location and the indirect effects of receiving a poor standard of education.

Introduction (cont) We need to isolate and identify those specific features of the education system which enhance inequality. The only way to do this properly is to trace the educational debates historically, as policies and the problems they seek to address need to be viewed as embedded in particular social, economic and cultural milieux.

KEY PROBLEM AREAS (1)For ease of presentation the focus will essentially be on the UK, and more specifically England, though many if not most of the arguments, are transferable to other societies. There are a number of key problem areas:1) ‘Underachievement’2) Curriculum and School Ethos3) (Racist) Violence and bullying4) Exclusions and suspensions

KEY PROBLEM AREAS (2) My preferred approach is to deal with these issues historically, in the British/English context, and at the same time to address the strategies which have thus far be used to deal with them. The latter essentially means reviewing two dominant theoretical and policy paradigms: • Multicultural Education (MCE) • Anti-racist Education (ARE) (some would however, add a 3rd approach: 3) Selective/Segregated schools

EDUC Policy prior to the late-1960’s (1) As you know, the dominant concern of politicians in the 1950s and 1960s was whether ‘coloured immigrants’ would fit into British society. These concerns influenced immigration debates, and were present in prominent academic accounts of ‘race relations’ (cf. Patterson’s book Dark Strangers about the ‘West Indian’ population in Brixton). The important point here, is that educationalists viewed the offspring of such ‘Strangers’ - as a problem for the system. The problem in turn was linked to their parents’ culture. As Errol Lawrence argued in the second of his two articles in The Empire Strikes Back on ‘black pathology’, black families and their lifestyles were stereotyped.

EDUC Policy prior to the late-1960’s (2) In African Caribbean households, the absence of a strong male father figure was linked to the problems of young males. Rather later, the failure of some Pakistani and Bangladeshi to progress, was put down to long family holidays to the country of origin. In the former case, the result was a form of what would now be termed ‘institutional racism’ whereby a high proportion of Black kids found themselves in SEN schools. Past CRE research (published as Swimming Against the Stream) pointed to the segregation of Black children within mainstream schools.

EDUC Policy prior to the late-1960’s (3) The preferred solution to these problems (other than the political right represented by people like Enoch Powell – who advocated repatriation) was assimilation (the last point of the race relations cycle). Schools were seen as the obvious vehicle for the absorption of newcomers into the British way of life. And here we get our sense of déjà vu. The argument was that housing segregation was leading to school segregation. If schools were segregated, the argument ran, the children of immigrants couldn’t learn to be British. The dominant view of the (then called) Dept of Ed. and Science (DES) was that the only solution to this was bussing, an idea borrowed from the US where problems of segregation were even more severe.

EDUC Policy - prior to the late-1960’s (4) As to the elements of Britishness then (as now) the importance of language was stressed. The teaching of English became a top priority. For those who spoke an unacceptable form of English (e.g. Jamaican patois) this was also deemed to be a problem. Many saw this ‘gibbering’ as a form of resistance, and therefore something to be dealt with. Black kids were seen as having ‘special needs’ as was the case with children who had some form of disability. This was subsequently enshrined in the 1981 Education Act, but much earlier (in 1966) the Local Government Act generated the notion of ‘Section 11’ staff. If a local authority had a sizeable minority population they could argue that they needed extra support staff.

Cultural Pluralism – towards Multiculturalism But the political tide changed by the mid- to late 60s. The idea of assimilation was losing out in favour of the notion of cultural pluralism. The Labour government of Harold Wilson, had tightened immigration control but started to push for anti-discrimination legislation. Hazel Carby in her essay Schooling in Babylon sees the consequent changes in educational policy more critically. She says that the shift represented a move towards greater social control via • A monitoring of the problem. • The development of the means to compensate for the alleged inadequacies of Black parents.

Towards Multiculturalism (2) But what does the shift from assimilation to cultural pluralism actually mean in practice? What it does effectively is to divorce the issues from power structures, and suggest that problems are merely the result of cultural difference. The solutions are therefore to be sought within the sphere of culture….. but still starting from Black pathology or, more theoretically, cultural deficit theory. What was needed in schools was a general climate of understanding. In the words of the Select Committee on Race Relations ‘much can be done…. To create better understanding of the national and cultural background of immigrants’. It therefore advocated….

Towards Multiculturalism (3) …specific teaching about the countries from which the immigrants in a particular town come. Here material direct from those countries can be displayed in the classroom by immigrant children. Children in primary schools in Hackney or Brixton, for example, could be taught West Indian songs, or children in Wolverhampton be shown Indian Art, jewelry and costumes. This would help bring the immigrant children into the life of the school. So was born the 3Ss policy – Saris, Samosasand Steel Bands. The assumption, then, was that racism was merely a matter of ignorance, it could be educated away by a greater understanding of certain shallow images of others’ cultures.

The Development of ARE The MCE strategy did not remain unquestioned, even by those in government. There was an increasing body of opinion that ‘institutional racism’ was also a problem. This was even the view of the Rampton Committee set up in the late-1970s by the then Labour government to investigate the roots of ‘underachievement’ (of ‘West Indian’ children in relation to their ‘White’ and ‘Asian’ peers). There was by now a feeling amongst many (outside government circles) that a more radical solution to inequality was needed. This explains the shift from MCE to ARE. But what exactly is the difference between them? [Carby admits to not distinguishing between them, but rather implies that in practice they’re much the same.]

The Development of ARE Clearly they’re very different in theory. MCE sees the issue as one of cultural difference (and ignorance), whilst ARE suggests that racism has to be tackled, i.e. the problem is about power and structural inequality. The former is easier to do, of course. And it is certainly true that (following Carby) many authorities made an elision between the two approaches,which meant that virtually all that happened was a change in the re-labelling of existing MCE policies. Some authorities, on the other hand, went rather further, the most obvious being Brent. At the national level, however, there was now a new Commission into underachievement, this time led by Lord Swann (the Swann Report).

The Swann Report (1) This Report was in many ways a dangerous document, because it seemed (wrongly) to be moving the debate forward, not least by acknowledging that racism in schools was a key factor. GujendraVerma, for example, saw it as providing a focus for concern about racist harassment. Troyna and Carrington (1990) saw it as having two positive effects: • An increase in funding to assist in the development of multi-cultural curriculum • The training and recruitment of more Black teachers.

The Swann Report (2) On the down side however, the Report failed to deal with an institutional/collective problem. It sanctioned Racism Awareness Training (RAT), for example, because the problem was seen as one of weeding out the few ‘rotten apples’. What Swann basically did was to recognise that we needed to go beyond conventional MCE but didn’t say how (except by suggesting more Black teachers, of course). All it says is that separatism is not the way forward. But whatever changes might be proposed, the reality is that policies/practices tend to be gradualist rather than fundamental/ paradigmatic.

The Swann Report (3) There is one very important set of theoretical issues which comes out of the Swann report. It concerns the question of ‘underachievement’ and how we seek to explain differences between ‘ethnic groups’. Swann ‘demonstrated’, that ‘West Indian’ origin did less well than those of ‘Indian’ origin and Whites. This seemed to confirm in some people’s eyes conventional ‘cultural deficit theory’: that ‘West Indian’ underachievement was a function of pathological familial-cultural characteristics. So, culture/ethnicity came to be seen as the critical explanatory variable ‘replacing’ racism, on the grounds that ‘Asian’ perform on a par with Whites.

The Swann Report (4) It also even undermined the case of those who wished to promote multiculturalism as the key to rectifying inequalities, because it is seen as negating the premise that all cultures are equally valuable. But there were three fatal weaknesses in Swann’s analysis: a.) The measure of ethnicity was questionable (‘country of birth’ can prove a very poor surrogate measure). b.) Positing ethnicity as the key analytical variable ruled out alternative modes of explanation (global comparisons ignored that such factors as: age, gender, class, school attended, etc. might account for observed differences). c.) The conflation of many different peoples and nationalities under the generic term ‘Asian’ disguises major internal variations. In short: There are two fundamental problems stemming from the ‘underachievement thesis’ - It’s wrong, or at least fundamentally flawed - Its perpetuation leads to an (ongoing) self-fulfilling prophesy.

The Education Reform Act 1988 (ERA 1988) The Education Reform Act of 1988, served to further weaken both the ‘multicultural’ and ‘antiracist’ agendas. The ERA 1988 was seen as an attack on Labour-controlled council in urban areas, which went far beyond education (who were seen by Thatcher as engaging in ‘loony-Left’ policies and imposing a sort of political correctness on all areas of policy). In education the classic bete noir was Brent. Their ‘gender and race bureaucracy’ was singled out as the thing which the ERA would outlaw. Opposition to racism and sexism was seen as not properly part of ‘education’. Basically it aimed to denude the local authorities of power (and also teachers). Education was seen as too important to be left to the educationalists! At the core of the Bill was the introduction of the national curriculum…….

The Education Reform Act 1988 (ERA 1988) It introduced three key developments: • Setting up CTCs - City technology Colleges • Opting out provision • A move towards ‘Open Enrollment’ (parents’ right to choose). The impact on attempts to develop anti-racist strategies were as follows: • Power is now decentralised to local governing bodies • LEAs no longer have a regulatory function There is little guidance on how to implement these new curricular strategies. Once again, such measures had failed to address the ongoing underachievement by minorities going through the educational system.

EDUCATION & THE LABOUR MARKET Last week’s lecture saw the imposition of the national curriculum combined with structural changes in the management of the school system, which had dealt a severe blow to the anti-racist movement in education (and also undermined attempts to introduce a multicultural curriculum). But there were ambiguities in official government policy. The DES (now DSFC) directives gave explicit approval for a broad ‘multicultural’ ethos in schools (as well as endorsing the teaching of some subjects which the Right had seen as ‘soft subjects’.

EDUCATION & THE LABOUR MARKET Performance & Differentials (1). We are aware of the negative impact of the underachievement thesis. However, the label has now been applied to other minorities (e.g. Bangladeshis in areas such as Bradford). But, in fact, the performance of minorities differs massively both between and within groups. There are clear variations on the basis of class, gender and location:

Performance & Differentials. (2) • Black males still tend to do relatively badly (but not universally), and Black females do considerably better. • ‘Indian’ and East African Asian children tend to out-perform Whites (but once again not universally). • Pakistani and Bangladeshi children tend to perform less well (than Whites and Indians), and sometimes achieve less than Black youngsters. But again there are clear differences in patterns: Bangladeshis in Bradford are largely failed by the schools system, but the counterparts in Tower Hamlets (equally poor, and subjected to years of racism and harassment) do rather well.

Anti-racist Policies E.g.s: where they misfire in their implementation. The classic case here is Burnage High School in South Manchester. In the 1980s, an Asian youngster was murdered in the playground by a working class White fellow student. The Report of the inquiry into his death blamed the school’s anti-racism policy, or rather its implementation. The key issue was that already angry disaffected/dispossessed working class White kids were further alienated by a policy which seemed to devalue them yet further. The upshot is that the strategy needs to be well thought through, and give weight to the concerns of poor White youth.

School Exclusions (1) African Caribbean youth (a.k.a. ‘Black youth’) have for decades been ‘excluded’ from a decent standard of education. Segregation in schools, remedial classes and streams, was a reflection not just of the ideology of ‘underachievement’ but also the pathologising of Black cultures and lifestyles. They were also stereotyped by some sociologists. Twenty years ago, Cashmore and Troyna talked about ‘Black Youth’ as being ‘in crisis’ and having a ‘violent proclivity’: Rex and Tomlinson (a few years earlier) had talked about Rastas as ‘withdrawal oriented’. If they’re violent and/or self-excluding then what’s the point of educating them?

School Exclusions (2) Since the mid-1980s at least, it was becoming obvious that they were much more likely than any other group to be suspended or permanently excluded from school. There was a lot of talk but little or no action. This is almost inevitable as the ‘5 GCSE A-C economy’ has rationed education for Black kids. This is the argument in a recent book by David Gillborn and Deborah Youdell. Disruption in schools either by mis-behaviour or failure to learn (both assumed to be the child’s fault) undermines the schools league table position, so Heads are all too ready to use their powers of exclusion. (also, the treatment of Asian girls / marriage / education was a waste, etc)

The merits and demerits of separatism (1) The failure of the mainstream education system to provide for the needs and aspirations of minority children has resulted in the growth of the voluntary sector –social agency at work (e.g. Saturday schools for Black children and Koran classes at local mosques). [A point to make here, is that white minority ethnic groups – such as the Poles, have had very effective Saturday schools in place across the UK, since their arrival post-WWII.]

The merits and demerits of separatism (2) But what about faith schools? The argument made, for example, by some Muslim parents is: • that the form of education provided by secular schools conflict with Islam, and • a precedent has already been set by C of E, Catholic and Jewish schools. They are effectively arguing that if ‘inclusivity’ is to mean anything, it should permit citizens to fulfill their aims and aspirations (if these don’t conflict with the rights of others). But, do they? New Labour, and Tony Blair in particular, have a lot of sympathy for these arguments, for two principal reasons:

The merits and demerits of separatism (3) • The ‘loss of religion’ is seen as having led to a general decline in moral and ethical standards, and in the average person’s ‘sense of community’. Religion is seen as providing a basis for social cohesion (or is it social control?) • Statistical data reveal that faith schools perform better in terms of the ‘5 A-C economy’. On the down side of course there is the argument, especially after September 11, that this form of segregated learning environment is likely to exacerbate existing tensions between communities.

The Labour Market: background issues (1) The labour market experiences of post-war migrants, was far from representing a ‘lumpen proletariat’ in a universal sense (as so many sociological accounts wrongly suggest), many arrivals (especially from the Indian subcontinent and later East Africa), were highly qualified professional or skilled people. Even in 1971 the level of professionals amongst Indian-born men was higher than amongst the White population. But, they didn’t always get the jobs their qualifications justified, and many of those who were channeled into semi-skilled and unskilled work were in declining industries.

The Labour Market: background issues (2) As with housing, the employment picture is extremely complex. There are massive variations in experience both between and within groups. Within group differences are onthe basis of age and gender, and also class background. The problem with the latter in analytical terms, of course, is that it is strictly a function of other factors which are also subject to exclusionary processes (education, family background, housing market location, etc.). Broadly speaking the picture is as follows:

The Labour Market: background issues (3) • Those of Indian and East African Asian origin, along with the Chinese, tend to do best in employment terms. The Chinese are especially concentrated in the catering sector. • The other South Asian groups do far less well, with the Pakistani and Bangladeshi communities suffering from extremely high levels of poverty and deprivation (e.g. in Bradford, Oldham, Burnley, etc.) • In the African Caribbean population, women tend to perform higher status jobs than their male counterparts. The latter are concentrated in manual occupations, and low grade supervisory posts.

The Labour Market: background issues (4) Unemployment rates amongst the first generation are high.This has been explained by economic restructuring, but some have said it’s due to the disregarding of overseas qualifications, and the ignorance of effective job search strategies. Discrimination looms large as an explanatory factor. To those who attempt to deploy the ‘overseas qualifications arguments, we simply have to note the experiences of the second generation. For those either born in the UK or coming here as young children these cannot hold. They were educated here, socialised here, and trained in job search strategy by local careers services. [This is not to say, of course, that they benefited in the ways they should have from these experiences.]

The Labour Market: Background issues (5) The facts show that: Unemployment amongst minority communities, taken as a whole, is running at around twice the national average for men, and around two and a half times the average for women. One might have expected that the figures would be different for the 16-24 age group. They are not - if anything they are worse for some groups [check, qualify/add this latter point, for written work] Here are some recent figures: • A report by the Institute of Public Policy Research [2010]: Almost half of black people aged 16-24 were unemployed, compared with 20% of white people of the same age [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8468308.stm] • See: Work and Ethnicity [http://www.poverty.org.uk/47/index.shtml] • Key Point: One in 7 adults aged 25 to retirement from ethnic minorities, are not working but want to, lower than a decade ago but still much higher than that for White people. [See graph, next slide] • c) Improving employment outcomes for ethnic minorities • [http://www.idea.gov.uk/idk/search/system-search.do?k=Improving+employment+outcomes+for+ethnic+minorities&x=20&y=7] • d) The impact of student and migrant employment on opportunities for low skilled people • http://www.ukces.org.uk/publications/er32-impact-student-and-migrant

TOP Graph 1: Over time

‘ Race ’ , Difference, and the Inclusive Society