Since America continues to struggle with acknowledging and understanding the pervasive nature of racism and white supremacy, it’s often a good thing when institutions do their part to begin to address racial divisions and disparities. This is especially true for private schools—which are often predominantly white spaces that can be unwelcoming to students of color.
But sometimes even the best efforts can end up as mistakes, and that seems to be the case for the well-known and elite Little Red School House in New York City, which came under fire recently for a new policy that separated middle-school white students and students of color into homerooms by their race. Parents learned about what was happening in late June and were outraged by it. Subsequently, the school has decided to end the practice.
According to school director Phil Kassen, dividing the students by race was meant as an attempt “to better support our students of color.” According to NBC New York 4, Kassen said the following in a letter to parents:
“[The policy] came about after much conversation with the faculty and was prompted by a conversation with a number of recent graduates, reflecting on their experience at LREI and suggesting that we create greater opportunities for connection and support.”
Kassen also noted that the groupings were not meant to take rights or opportunities away from students and that the school will continue to look for ways to support all students while also creating opportunities for dialogue that allow all voices to be heard.
Doing work to further diversity, equity, and inclusion is no easy task. There is always tension as people and organizations move from theory to practice. In our society, almost everyone short of self-identified white supremacists will say that they support diversity and equal treatment for all. But the reality is that white supremacy is a potent drug and when power structures are changed and shifted to center the marginalized (in this case people of color), the very people who claim to support a fairer world are actually really uncomfortable with change.
This is worth mentioning because it is a very hard thing to even get private schools to understand and try to do something about their role in a racially unjust world. Many schools like Little Red School House are trying to do better and have hired directors of diversity, equity, and inclusion whose jobs are to oversee the schools’ efforts to be more inclusive and welcoming communities.
In a way, it’s somewhat understandable why the school administration thought this could be a good idea in theory. Why? Because it is true that in predominantly white institutions, just like Little Red School House, students of color often need intentional and specific opportunities for connection with each other. They may be the only one in their classes, or one of just a handful—and so the creation of spaces where they can be with each other, talk about their experiences, and support each other is important. This is often something that white teachers, students, or parents—who have likely always been in the majority wherever they are—cannot understand. But it is a need that can be vital for identity development and learning for students of color.
In fact, from Kassen’s own words, it appears to be something that former students at the school specifically mentioned. There is also research that says this has benefits for minority students. That’s why many schools have affinity groups and/or student organizations specifically for black students and other students of color that have moderators, which allow students to self-select into them (in other words, they are not required and students freely decide which ones to go to) and that meet during or after the school day.
Where this gets sticky is in the execution. Certainly, this policy would raise red flags for many white parents. And it should. Students of all colors benefit from racially diverse classrooms. And from a racial justice perspective, we shouldn’t normalize all-white spaces for white kids (even though they most certainly exist) especially as America becomes more diverse and we strive for a country where people of all colors are treated equitably—unless there is specific anti-racist work being done in those spaces.
It’s hard to imagine that students would understand this policy on their own, unless there was a lot of dialogue about why this was happening. And as the parent of a child of color, what conclusions would you draw about your child being segregated into the homeroom for children of color, without knowing why? Especially at a school that costs nearly $50,000 a year for what is supposed to be a quality education. Likewise, what assumptions can students of color make about themselves if they are being lumped all together like that? Especially in a white supremacist world that posits that students of color aren’t as smart or hard-working or well-behaved as white students. Unless done transparently and with much conversation, this can further the sense of isolation and discomfort students of color have at predominantly white schools.
At the end of the day, the school’s effort to better support students of color is important—even if folks disagree about how it was done. While this feels shocking and divisive to white kids and families, students of color are already having racialized experiences in these spaces that are impacting their learning and their sense of self-esteem and identity. It’s important to name these dynamics and do something to change them. But ultimately, what needs to happen is that we need greater diversity in these schools, both in terms of the student body and faculty.
If these kids are going to have the benefit of a world-class education, why not use these schools to carry out the important racial and social justice we need in the world? After all, education doesn’t exist in a vacuum. And preparing these students for the “real world” means not hiding from these conversations, but instead tackling issues of race (and class) head-on.