OPINION: Systemic Racism in Higher Education

By: Jenai Howard

Throughout my education, I was often the only Black student in my classes. I watched my Black peers drop out and accept defeat. I used to believe that they were lazy. That they did not try hard enough and gave up too soon, that they equated education with exclusivity, that they did not feel like they belonged.

I later realized they were right. The education system is exclusive. It was designed to perpetuate white success. Black students who dropped out of school did not indicate the system was broken. It meant the system was working.

The education system was first constructed to exclude, then modified to integrate, but was never meant to ensure the retention and success of Black students. White supremacy and education formed a symbiotic relationship that flourished at the expense of Black students--especially in higher education. To adapt to a changing society, universities implemented inclusivity agendas. The acceptance of Black students into these institutions became evidence that systemic racism is a myth. This is simply not true. The higher education system was modified to integrate with a caveat: there is a cap on the number of Black students it can hold. And those of us who were selected somehow should be grateful. We pay these institutions. They admit us, expect us to be thankful, but because they operate within the confines of a racist system, we should not expect them to ensure our collective success as Black students. This structure provides fertile grounds for self-doubt.

It has been fervently denied, but systemic racism permeates the higher education system. This is apparent when you look at the calculated actions universities take. They are quick to address racism defensively (when they are exposed) but are reluctant to act proactively. They repeatedly refuse to delve deeper to combat structural inequities but will use Black students to promote surface level “inclusivity” agendas. Universities are notorious for claiming the few Black alumni as prime (but notably limited) examples of Black success. It is all about optics. They are not anti-racist simply because they release promotional videos or brochures with a few Black students. The facade that depicts higher education as inclusive is meant to divert attention from a larger issue.

This begs the question: are we (Black students) here to corroborate a false narrative or are we here because we are qualified? It can be debilitating having these internal debates. And this is not to suggest imposter syndrome is limited to Black students. But when you look around and realize you are the only Black student in most, if not all, of your classes, these negative thoughts inevitably surface. Universities need to acknowledge that admitting Black students does not mean they are anti-racist. It is like people who claim they are not racist because “they “have a Black friend.” Addressing structural racial inequities in the higher education system requires administrations to be actively, not performatively, anti-racist. The burden should not fall on Black students to hold the school accountable. This system was not designed to ensure Black success. Thus, it is up to each university to address issues with retention by implementing new (and meaningful) policies. While this may not be an overhaul of systemic racism in the education system, these actions will help chip away at the fundamentally flawed foundation.

I hope all Black students (from kindergarten to graduate students alike) understand that a system rooted in white supremacy planted, and intentionally continues to nurture self-doubt in our minds. Abolishing that toxic mindset is a critical step to first expose then dismantle systemic racism in the education system. This, however, is not meant to absolve Black students from responsibility. Our absence does not fix a system designed to keep us out. You need to show up. You need to put in the work. But schools need to do their part to ensure our efforts are not futile. For those of us in higher education, we are here because we are qualified. But we cannot continue to settle for surface level solutions that equate inclusivity with anti-racism. It is deeper than that.

(Editor's Note: This article was originally published in the October 2020 [Volume 51, Issue 1] edition of The Advocate.)

Previous
Previous

New California Law Aims to Correct Unconscious Bias in Jury Selection

Next
Next

Q&A: L.A. District Attorney Runoff Candidate George Gascón Shares His Progressive Plan