President Barack Obama signed the first-ever initiative aimed to improve the academic success of African-Americans in higher education this past summer. Announced in July during Obama’s speech at a National Urban League conference, the initiative stimulates an ongoing debate surrounding African-Americans facing unequal opportunities in the academic sphere.
RELATED: Obama creating African-American education office
While this is an interesting development, what officials at the White House failed to do through this act was specify exactly which types of African-Americans the program would benefit. Which blacks are benefiting most from programs meant to help them in the sphere of education is sparking controversy. According to a study produced by Princeton and the University of Pennsylvania, immigrants, who make up 13 percent of the nation’s college-age black population, account for more than a quarter of black students at Ivy League and other select universities.
In fact, “census data show that the children of these immigrants were more likely to be college-educated than any other immigrant or U.S.-born ethnic group, including white Americans,” a September 2012 Washington Post story states.
The result of this phenomenon is that policies created to compensate the descendants of American slaves for the deprivations caused by slavery and Jim Crow segregation are benefiting blacks of recent African and Caribbean origin disproportionately. Researchers of this discrepancy have varying theories as to why this trend has developed and continues to grow.
“[Black immigrants] are hard workers who have played by the rules of the system and succeeded,” Nigerian-American anthropologist John Ogbu wrote of this actuality in his seminal 1998 study Involuntary and Voluntary Minorities.
Others believe it is not just a matter of a cultural work ethic. Lani Guinier, a Harvard Law School professor, told The Washington Post in 2007 that, “in part, it has to do with coming from a country, especially those educated in Caribbean and African countries, where blacks were in the majority and did not experience the stigma that black children did in the United States.” She sees a dark psychological background as a large impediment to native-born blacks’ ability to academically succeed.
Perspectives differ, but the roots of this phenomenon date back to education policies established in the late ’60s. Enacted by first President John F. Kennedy, then continued by President Lyndon Johnson, affirmative action has been identified as the main catalyst for the growing numbers of blacks at institutions of higher learning.
Initially intended to level the playing field for native black Americans — just as Obama’s initiative could — some argue that the policy has changed shape over the past several decades, with college administrators boosting racial and ethnic diversity using foreign-bred blacks. Instead of offsetting the socioeconomic inequalities faced by slaves’ descendants by providing educational restitution, it is alleged that schools prefer black students who do not come from this group.
In a 2006 study exploring the proliferation of Caribbean and African immigrants in U.S. colleges, University of Pennsylvania professor Camille Z. Charles and her fellow authors considered that social biases could play a large part in the admission process.
“To white observers,” they wrote, “black immigrants seem more polite, less hostile, more solicitous and ‘easier to get along with.’ Native blacks are perceived in precisely the opposite fashion.”
Yet, there are some who dispute the findings of these studies, deeming their calculation processes invalid.
In a 2007 response article to The Washington Post report, Dr. Rebecca Goldin, Director of Research at Statistical Assesment Service, argued that the campus diversity study missed certain demographics and questioned whether the admissions data was adequately examined.
RELATED: President Obama talks education, school reform, with NBC News’ Savannah Guthrie
“Comparing this group to African-Americans is like comparing apples to oranges,” wrote Goldin. “The Washington Post should exercise a little more restraint in making claims of bias. Especially when many of the ‘elite foreigners’ are actually American.”
As Goldin touched on in her remarks, a larger debate that stems from this comparison of black natives and immigrants is the fluctuating label of “African-American.” Who qualifies as such?
“Some black Americans argue that black immigrants… and the children of immigrants, like [President] Obama and [Colin] Powell, are most certainly African-American,” reads a 2004 New York Times article addressing the evolving definition. “Yet some immigrants and their children prefer to be called African or Nigerian-American or Jamaican-American, depending on their countries of origin. Other people prefer the term black, which seems to include everyone, regardless of nationality.”
While the attendance of blacks of foreign ancestry at universities through affirmative action may be politically complicated, perhaps the expansion of the definition of African-American to include all people of the African diaspora could be for the benefit of American society at large. Washington Post reporter Curtis Valentine encourages us to see a connection between the groups, instead of seeing blacks attending college as an ethnic competition.
“The answers to our generation’s greatest problems are within reach if we are willing to learn from one another,” Valentine writes in his recent Post story about the black education gap. “We can close this gap if we recognize that those who came before us left a plan for success that is being executed by both U.S.-born and first- and second-generational blacks every day.”
Follow Patrice Peck on Twitter at @SpeakPatrice and Tumblr