Abstract
As I read these two books on black male students, my mind recalls two incidents at the intersection of race and education: (1) the Atlanta Public School cheating scandal, where eleven black educators were convicted for altering student scores on standardized exams, and (2) the more recent scandal at T. M. Landry College Prep, a school that gained national recognition for sending black students to elite colleges and is now under investigation for abuse and falsifying transcripts and college applications. While these real-life incidents are not centered on all-black schools that cater specifically to black boys, these unfortunate situations are rooted in race and today’s neoliberal model of schooling, emphasizing standardized tests, teacher accountability, and high-stakes competition related to college acceptance. Although different in focus, Black Boys Apart and In a Classroom of Their Own, both share an interest in this connection between a neoliberal model of education and the recent rise in all-black male schools (ABMS).
In Black Boys Apart, Oeur examines two predominantly black all-male public schools within the same city. One of the schools was a college-preparatory charter school (Northside Academy) and the other was a traditional (noncharter) public high school (Perry High). Oeur focuses on the challenges and successes these schools had in promoting respectability among their students as a way to lift up black men. In his analysis, Oeur draws heavily on the work of DuBois, and how many proponents of these schools refer to DuBois’s work on the Talented Tenth and racial uplift via respectability politics.
Although the two schools differed in approach and had varying levels of success, both attempted to address the so-called black male crisis in education. And by framing the lack of opportunity faced by black boys in inner-city schools as a “crisis”—which suggests a short-term issue as opposed to a more institutionalized long-term or chronic problem—reformers aimed to promote a form of black masculinity that promoted racial uplift. In doing so, both schools sought to reform black boys.
For starters, both schools saw all-boys schooling as critical to this reform process as they framed young (black) women as potential distractions. The administrators at Northside Academy encouraged students to separate themselves from negative stereotypes of black men by promoting lessons in Latin, school uniforms, and college attendance, while drawing moral and symbolic boundaries between their students and those black men deemed undesirable. In contrast, the administrators at Perry High emphasized the need for their students to become community role models, good husbands and fathers, and sought to limit the high rates of school punishment that have plagued black students nationwide. In the end, however, Oeur shows that this exercise in respectability politics does little to hinder white supremacy and the structural issues disadvantaging black and low-income students more broadly. Instead of encouraging a few select young men to be the “Talented Tenth” in their communities and the global economy, Oeur argues that schools and communities should move toward a more holistic approach where these men, along with community leaders, move toward promoting a “guiding hundredth” fighting for an abolition democracy.
Although ethnographies must walk a fine line between the voices of those observed and the author’s analysis, I was hoping to hear more from the young men of Perry High and Northside Academy. I was excited to read Black Boys Apart as it seemed that Oeur’s work on young black men and brotherhood mirrored much of my work on the topic. But there was little of the boys discussing this brotherhood. The same goes for other topics discussed in the book, such as the conversation on prison rape, which seemed less centered on sexual assault in prison and more so on homophobia. But without more of the boys’ voices, it is hard to tell. Despite this, the discussion of “being unknown” in chapter 5 among the young men at Perry High does an excellent job of bringing in their viewpoints to stress the larger points within this section.
Whereas Black Boys Apart uses ethnographic data, my read of In a Classroom of Their Own is that it is a theoretical discussion on intersectional discourse and epistemology with ABMS as a case study. Lindsay highlights how proponents of ABMS make use of both anti-racist and anti-feminist discourses. Proponents in support of ABMS schools correctly point out that black boys are disadvantaged in school settings due to their race and gender—an intersectional argument. At the same time, however, several of these supporters fail to note that black girls are also disadvantaged in these settings and that black boys and men can and do practice gendered power and privilege. Further, they also claim that white women as teachers impede the education of black boys by feminizing the classroom and failing to understand and accommodate black boys.
Lindsay highlights how the fluidity of intersectionality fails to identify who is disadvantaged based on their respective social categories and identities, which categories and identities should receive special focus or be regarded as more important, or how best to remedy disadvantages associated with such categories and identities. As a result, intersectionality can be used to promote divergent political agendas. To demonstrate this, Lindsay shows how advocates of ABMS are able to make both liberatory and oppressive arguments based on their own experiences. But, as Lindsay writes, schools that seek to serve black students work best when they promote self-determination in ways that are both anti-racist and feminist and when coalitions account for both the emancipatory and constraining potential of one’s own and others’ experiences.
Although the two books have different focal points, there is some overlap. Both note that despite a lack of any supporting evidence, proponents of ABMS make the problematic claim that black girls are a distraction to the education of black boys. Lindsay discusses this point as a way to show how school supporters promote anti-feminist ideas. Oeur emphasizes that this opinion promotes heteronormativity and assumes something along the lines of respectable boys and deviant girls. Further, both authors highlight how a neoliberal model of schooling hurts the education of black children by promoting color-blind approaches within a school system that is very much color conscious. As such, discussions of school reform fail to address centuries of institutionalized racism. Instead, issues such as school choice are promoted, while black students are told to focus on respectable behavior instead of liberation. Finally, and related to this last point, both Oeur and Lindsay remind us that real school reform includes a critical lens aimed at the quality of schools available to black students, both boys and girls.
Both of these books are well researched and invite readers to understand their respective topics in ways they may not have considered before. Although I do wish In a Classroom of Their Own brought in more case studies as examples, much like Lindsay did in chapter 4, I don’t see this as a weakness, but instead a result of my own bias as a qualitative researcher. However, both Oeur and Lindsay do an excellent job revealing the shortcomings surrounding current conversations regarding school reform. Further, as both books interrogate the intersection of race and gender, they work well as complimentary reads.