Helping mixed heritage children develop ‘character and resilience’ in schools

Challenges in mixed heritage children’s lives

Existing research suggests that mixed heritage children experience adversity while at school. Williams (2009) suggests that there is confusion surrounding the classification of mixed heritage individuals. Physical characteristics are often used to identify ‘race’, meaning that individuals are often categorised differently to the ways in which they categorise themselves. Many are viewed as ‘black’ (Chiong, 1998; Ifekwunigwe, 1999; Song, 2007; Tizard & Phoenix, 2002), which renders their mixed identities invisible. This means that teachers are unaware of any needs or challenges children experience in relation to their mixed identities. Focusing on the variable ways in which mixed heritage individuals feel about how they are seen by the wider public, Song and Aspinall (2012) describe the emotional and psychological toll experienced by some, especially those viewed as ‘black’, who not only have their mixed identities misrecognised, but also experience the negative imagery and meanings attributed to being ‘black’ by the wider public. Tikly, Caballero, Haynes, and Hill (2004) note this while researching barriers to educational achievement experienced by mixed White/Black Caribbean students, suggesting that this group shared the low teacher expectations and negative stereotyping experienced by many Black Caribbean students at school. Mixed heritage children’s absence from school policy, achievement monitoring and the school curriculum acted as a further barrier as it made any educational underachievement difficult to be challenged (Tikly et al., 2004).

Inaccurate perceptions about their home backgrounds can also cause frustration among this group (Tikly et al., 2004; Wilson, 1987). Tikly et al.’s (2004) research suggests that teachers assumed mixed White/Black Caribbean children in their schools to be residing solely with White mothers who found it difficult to raise racial self-esteem among children, and that boys lacked positive role models when fathers were ‘off site’. Teachers believed that living with a lone parent led to ‘identity issues’ or that children might suffer from a ‘culture clash’ (Edwards et al., 2008). However, Twine (2010) suggests that lone parents often build extensive networks that nurture their children’s identities and support themselves and their children with a myriad of issues. Furthermore, Phoenix and Husain (2007) suggest that the notion that fathers are absent from their children’s lives if they are non-resident is no longer assumed as readily as it was in the past, and that there are various ways in which fathers might still contribute to their children’s lives.

Describing how mixed heritage individuals experience discrimination differently to people with two Black or two White parents, both Tizard and Phoenix (2002) and Dewan (2008) suggest they suffer similar kinds of insults levelled at Black children as well as more specific names related to their own skin tone and appearance such as, ‘yellow belly’ and ‘half breed’. Racist name-calling is used by some children to exclude mixed heritage peers from Black or White friendship groups, in order that they might assert their difference and gain social status and power over them (Ali, 2003; Phoenix & Tizard, 2002). This is reflected in Quilliam and Redd’s (2009) study which suggests that although there is no strong evidence supporting the idea that mixed heritage children are rejected to the point of becoming socially isolated, they may face occasional social rejection from members of single race groups. The effects of this may also be exacerbated for individuals who suffer discrimination within their own families (Barn & Harman, 2006; Dewan, 2008). While some are ridiculed for looking different from other family members, others are kept in ignorance about their family heritage. There may well then be limited opportunities for them to explore issues of identity within their family contexts.

Existing literature (Caballero, Haynes, & Tikly, 2007; Dewan, 2008; Mirza, 2008) also contends that teachers lack confidence when engaging with diversity issues in educational contexts, suggesting that while they might possess an ‘abstract awareness’ of racial and cultural difference they do not talk about ‘race’, fearing that if they use terms such as ‘mixed race’ and ‘mixed heritage’ they might be ‘putting their foot in it’. A tendency to misrecognise mixed heritage individuals as Black, to hold inaccurate assumptions about their home lives and to generally lack confidence in discussing matters relating to race, suggests that teachers are not aware of the challenges these children face and are therefore not able to support them. The following section outlines the methods used to discover factors necessary in supporting children to manage these various challenges and discover whether their schools support them to do this.

Data collection 1: interviews

Data were collected through a series of qualitative interviews with a small sample of individuals who provided detailed accounts of their experiences. Although the use of questionnaires might have generated data from a wider sample, face to face discussions proved important as many participants stated that they rarely reflected on or discussed their experiences and therefore needed time to ‘think aloud’. Discussions were also sensitive as participants discussed racism and family rejection. In total, 39 interviews were conducted with teachers, parents and children who attended the two schools.

At the beginning of the project nine in-depth exploratory interviews were conducted with an opportunity sample (Woods, 2006) of parents and guardians. Each was asked to talk about their child’s experiences and in some cases their own experiences of growing up as mixed heritage individuals. During these discussions a list of common experiences emerged which were used to design a schedule for the subsequent 26 semi-structured interviews with head teachers, teachers, learning mentors and teaching assistants, and four focus group interviews with 14 mixed heritage children aged 14 and 15 years. Questions focused on eliciting detailed discussions in relation to children’s identities; heritage; friendship groups; gender and the school curriculum. At the request of the two head teachers, detailed handwritten notes were taken during interviews with children, while those with adults were digitally recorded.

In both schools, the head teacher provided a schedule of ‘useful people to see’, often staff members who had expressed an ‘interest in the subject’ or were, in fact, of mixed heritage themselves. This meant that not only did they offer a perspective on the experiences of mixed heritage children in the school, but also compared it to their own or in some cases their children’s experiences. Form tutors approached children for focus group interviews. If they were willing, further permission was sought from those who acted in guardianship. Anonymity, confidentiality and the right to withdraw at any time were stressed. Guardians were also told that children would be interviewed in friendship groups, for no more than an hour in a familiar environment within the school. The children selected for interview were described as those who would be ‘willing to talk’. It is important to note however, that their views might have been unrepresentative of those considered ‘unwilling’ and that these children too might have had interesting experiences to share. Furthermore, while being acquainted with each other might have helped children feel more relaxed in a focus group, their friendships might have involved ingrained interactional patterns that led to overlooking or hiding personal information which might have proved useful to the aims of the research (Wirsing, 2008). It is not possible to generalise conclusions across this group as a whole, either in the two schools, in London, or indeed nationally. Mixed heritage children who live and attend schools in mainly White areas, for example, might well experience schooling quite differently from their contemporaries in more diverse schools. The purpose remained purely to gather detailed comments about children’s experiences at school, and in doing so, to ‘give them a voice’ (Conteh, Gregory, Kearney, & Mor, 1995, p. ix).

Initial data analysis

Data were coded manually throughout the research process. Recorded interviews were transcribed fully and handwritten notes typed in detail. As the interviews progressed, a ‘repeated reading’ of the transcripts and field notes ensured familiarisation with the breadth and depth of the data (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Careful analysis and annotation of interview notes began to reveal common patterns and shared experiences in the data suggesting that saturation (Bunce, Guest, & Johnson, 2006) had been reached. Handwritten lists of common patterns and experiences thus became initial codes. As the interviews progressed, the entire data set was worked through, giving full and equal attention to each data item (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Subsequently all data were initially coded, sorted and added to the list of different codes that had been identified and copied into separate computer word files. By following this process, 10 key themes were identified detailing the experiences that mixed heritage children had at school. The 10 themes including, ‘Teachers’ perceptions about children’s home lives’ and ‘Mixed heritage and gender’, were named in order to clarify what each theme was about, to identify the story that each theme told and consider how each theme fitted into the overall broader story.

Further data analysis using Ungar et al. (2007)

Data gathered during the wider research project revealed that many mixed heritage children suffered discrimination at school. While some were developing the ‘character and resilience’ required to cope, others were not. In order to understand why this was the case and how teachers might support them, a further analysis of data was conducted using Ungar et al.’s (2007) framework. In order to do this, the experiences of six children from the overall data set were isolated into six separate case studies. The details of the sample and the rationale for their selection are outlined below. It was hoped that applying Ungar et al.’s (2007) framework to the six case studies would support a deeper understanding of how and why the six children developed, or did not develop, the resilience necessary to deal with the challenges they faced. Two questions guided this further analysis:

Ungar et al. (2007) developed their framework in response to their findings from a 14-site, 11-country study among young people aged between 12 and 23 years. Findings showed that if young people had access to seven different factors, such as supportive relationships and material resources, they would be more likely to develop the resilience to cope with challenging life circumstances. These seven factors have been outlined below in Table 1. Although all seven factors were important to individuals, the ways in which they contributed to their resilience differed, depending on their different life circumstances. Ungar et al.’s (2007) framework also demonstrates the many different ways in which individuals from similar contexts coped with adversity. They claim that many international studies assume homogeneity within a country population and therefore ‘overlook’ the different ways young people, who live in the geographic proximity to one another, find to cope. They claim that case-by-case comparisons of quite similar young people in their research demonstrated unique aspects of how adversity is overcome. This could prove important if such a framework is to be useful for teachers in the United Kingdom. It might highlight that even though mixed heritage children attend the same schools and live in the same communities, assumptions cannot be made about the level of support and guidance they receive at home.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

The seven factors.

Tension	Components
Access to material resources	Financial resources – providing opportunities for young people to widen horizons, establish interests and nurture identities. Involvement of parents in young people’s schooling.
Access to supportive relationships	Relationships with significant others, peers, adults in one’s family and community which nurture identity, self-esteem and provide guidance.
Development of a desirable personal identity	Beliefs, values, a pride in cultural heritage. Self-esteem. Feeling acknowledged at school and in the community.
Experiences of power and control	Caring for oneself – knowing where and how to access support when needed.
Adherence to cultural traditions	Adherence to, or knowledge of, one’s local/familial cultural practices, values and beliefs.
Experience of social justice	Finding a meaningful role in one’s community/school that brings with it acceptance and social equality. Having your voice heard and having the opportunity to discuss issues of identity and discrimination
Experience of a sense of cohesion with others	Feeling a part of something larger than one’s self socially and spiritually – school and community. Participating in school life.

In order to answer the two research questions above, a careful analysis of data using the seven factors in the framework was needed.

Data collection 2: the case study sample

Six cases were chosen from the wider research project. They have been detailed in Table 2 below. In each case participants’ names have been changed to ensure anonymity. Lisa and Reuben were part of the opportunity sample (Woods, 2006) and the four others were selected by their form tutors to take part in focus group discussion. Although the ways in which they were selected might have brought limitations to the data, the six cases provided the most interesting insights into ways in which children were, or were not, able to access the seven factors necessary for coping with adversity. The sample was representative of the gender, socio-economic background and ethnicity of all research participants and was diverse enough to show variation in the ways in which children coped. As can be seen from the table below, the four females, and two males all claimed either a mixed White/Black Caribbean or White/Black African heritage. Although from different social backgrounds all six lived in the inner London Borough. In each case, the extent to which teachers supported them to cope with adversity was explored.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 2.

The case study sample.

Name of case	Self-categorisation	Gender/age	Sources of data	Social class (how determined)
Lisa	Mixed White mother/Barbadian father	Female	In-depth exploratory interview	Described her mother as White working class and father as working class Barbadian
Esme	Mixed White American mother/Black Ethiopian father	11-year old female	Focus group discussion	Mother described her as coming from a ‘professional home’
Reuben	Mixed White father/Black Kenyan mother	22-year old male	In-depth exploratory interview	N/A
Kim	Mixed White mother/Black Jamaican father	15-year old female	Focus group/individual interview. Semi-structured interview with educational professional	Described by teacher as ‘living with a White working class mother’
Joe	Mixed White mother/Black Jamaican father	14-year old male	In-depth exploratory interview with mother	Mother described him as coming from a ‘professional home’
Nina	Mixed White mother/Black Jamaican father	11-year old female	In-depth exploratory interview with mother	Mother described her as coming from a ‘professional home’

In order that this article sufficiently demonstrates the usefulness of the framework for generating detailed information about children’s experiences at home and school, three cases were chosen from the original six. It was hoped that three cases, explored in depth, would give teachers an understanding of how to assess children’s needs and plan for their support at school. The three cases were selected purposively because they represented the extremes of what happens when a child is not able to access the seven factors necessary to developing resilience, and what happens when they are. Reuben was part of the opportunity sample (Woods, 2006) used in exploratory discussion and Esme and Kim had been selected by their form tutors to take part in focus group discussion. Kim had no guidance from adults at home or school about how to manage discrimination. The consequences for her were the most extreme because she was regularly excluded from school because of her frustration and inability to cope with the discrimination she faced. Conversely Esme had the support and guidance of both immediate and extended ‘family’, including aunts and family friends, and therefore developed strategies to deal with discrimination. To represent the experiences of boys, Reuben’s case was considered more useful than Joe’s as it gave an overview of his entire school experience, whereas Joe’s focused on his time in 7, 8 and 9 years of age. It also provided the most extreme example of teachers’ perceptions of, and expectations about ‘black’ children’s attitudes to learning, and how mixed heritage children are similarly vulnerable. It is hoped that the findings from extreme cases will, in this case, be relevant in explaining the more typical cases and highlight to teachers the importance of their role in supporting all children. The words of the participants are quoted at length to enable the reader to develop as detailed an understanding as possible of children’s perspectives on their experiences.

What factors support mixed heritage children to cope with adversity?

Research suggests that the family is the immediate care-giving environment for children (Brooks, 2006). Esme possessed various familial relationships that shaped her personal identity, her cultural belonging and connections with others. She lived with her Black Ethiopian father, White American mother and three siblings and had developed a close relationship with her extended family, particularly her Ethiopian Auntie, whom she saw every day after school. Esme’s mother described her as, ‘being raised by two mums’ and suggested that her attachment to Auntie had given her, ‘an Ethiopian identity’ and strong affinity with the traditions of Ethiopian culture:

She craves the food; she eats what her uncle eats. Auntie has no children of her own and it has already been decided that Esme will look after her when she’s old – a big thing in Ethiopian culture. They’ve already divided up the jewellery. She wanted to get her ears pierced – I said in two years but Auntie let her do it, it would have been a lot earlier in Ethiopian culture.

Esme’s closeness to her Aunt was exacerbated by the fact that her Aunt felt rejected by Esme’s younger sister, who looked like and identified with her mother. Auntie reinforced this by referring to her as, ‘mummy’s girl’. Esme described how she had been frustrated with her hair when she was younger as it was, ‘too puffy’, a fact made worse by her little sister’s straight hair which was, ‘like mum’s’. Her Aunt’s support with managing her hair had been important because it had given her pride in her appearance and a feeling of acknowledgement both in school and in the community. She had an, ‘Ethiopian hairstyle’ which she enjoyed showing to family cousins while on holiday in Boston.

Despite her close relationship with her Aunt, Esme had been very demanding of her mother’s attention when her little sister was born. Her mother was sensitive to this and they had, ‘special days’ together. This gave Esme a sense of control over how she accessed her two closest relationships to develop her own personal identity, a choice of, ‘what parts of her identity she takes from what relation’. Her mother described how:

Auntie doesn’t like to go to the cinema/theatre so I do that with her. Esme wants jeans like me, boots like me and also to be like her cousin on my side. That’s the part of her identity that wants to be like me. She doesn’t want to dress like Auntie who’s a bit middle-aged in this respect. I suppose she is drawing what she wants from different mums.

Esme described how her relationships had provided her with the support to manage any discrimination relating to her mixed identity. She reported that she had been very upset and confused when her Black girlfriends rejected her friendship at school. Her mother had explained that it might have stemmed from Esme’s, ‘ability to attract attention from a black boy and two mixed heritage boys that were in her class’ and explained how, ‘jealousy might present in a negative way’. She had given Esme various strategies to deal with it.

Esme utilised all seven factors presented in the framework. Her range of supportive relationships nurtured her personal identity and provided her with an understanding of discrimination and the tools to combat it. Relationships ensured adherence to cultural traditions; these provided her with shared beliefs and values with her family and a sense of cohesion with others. She also demonstrated an ability to care for herself by using the support of different relationships for her different needs.

Kim faced a number of challenges both at home and at school, but lacked various factors outlined in the framework. She lived with her White ‘working class’ mother and her brother. Their father, who was of Black Jamaican heritage, did not live with the family and was reported, by a teacher, to be in prison. Teachers suggested that her family’s lack of material resources was in some part responsible for domestic violence within the home and that this was ‘acted out’ through her mother’s aggression towards Kim’s teachers, and Kim’s physical reaction to the discrimination she faced at school. One suggested,

Poverty is behind a lot of it; dad is in prison. Kim over sticks up for herself. When this (name calling) happens she lashes out, asking questions later. She is constantly being sent home. All these issues from home have an impact on her happiness and progress at school.

Kim spoke about the names that she and her friends were called at school. They included,

Yellow, mongrels; rich tea biscuit; muffins; yellow – we have to put up with cussing. They call us grey too – black and white makes grey- we’re elephants. They know where black people come from. And white people, they’re just ‘neeks’ (someone who works hard at school), but they always want to know where mixed race come from.

She suggested that although, ‘we find the cussing funny amongst ourselves’, it made her angry. Kim lacked a close relationship to support her manage challenging circumstances. She did not, ‘talk to her mum’, about name-calling. Neither did her teachers acknowledge it, dismissing it as, ‘just part of the vernacular’. She therefore ‘lashed out’ as a way of dealing with her frustration. Furthermore, one teacher suggested that Kim, and her friends, lacked cultural experiences, a view which conflicted with Kim’s own experiences:

They have never said they’ve been to Jamaica. They’re all Caribbean. They don’t really have a sense of being mixed. Kim has constant issues around friendships and bonding with others in school. She has issues around her ethnicity. She is confused; she makes racist comments against other mixed race girls.

Yet Kim described how:

I have both cultures, sometimes my mum cooks Jamaican food and we listen to Jamaican music. My granddad lives in Jamaica but he comes to see us even though we’re with my mum.

She also described how some of the teachers, ‘think I’m black’. She found this very frustrating, as she did the fact that people spoke of President Obama as black, ‘it bothers me that mixed race is classed as black’. This suggested that she did have a sense of being mixed heritage, despite the perceptions of her teachers. Nonetheless she was keen to assert that it was, ‘good to have a chance to talk about our identity and stuff like this; this is the first time that anybody’s ever asked me about it. We never talk about it at school’.

Kim was keen to talk about issues relating to her mixed heritage and was keen to assert that students lacked the chance to talk about being mixed heritage at school. She suggested that, ‘Portuguese and Somalis get everything – group meetings; this school pays more attention to them. We don’t get treated equally’. Although her friends in the focus group felt that it would be good to talk about their history as mixed heritage people, Kim focused on the need to have, ‘an assembly about the cussing that we have to put up with’, the need to book a room where,

We could go and talk about stuff like this – how’s your month been? Anybody called you a cuss word this month? White people have the library – black people have the canteen – we don’t have anywhere. The Somalis have their own corridor – they learn their language even though they know it anyway.

Kim lacked supportive relationships to nurture her mixed identity and empower her with strategies to deal with discrimination. She developed a sense of cohesion with other mixed heritage girls who were able to empathise with each other’s frustrations, but she was not able to vent her frustrations other than with an aggression which was responsible for so many of her exclusions from school. While Ungar et al. (2007) highlight that feeling a part of something larger than one’s self socially and spiritually is essential to coping with adversity; Kim lacked any experiences of social justice, feeling both marginalised and misunderstood. This led her to resent others in the school community. One teacher suggested that more should be done to support this group of children at school, as many of their parents did not talk to them about their identities at home. Yet, at the time of the research, their identities and the challenges that they faced were not acknowledged at school.

Reuben’s personal circumstances changed at the age of 12 when he moved to London with his Black Kenyan mother, White English father and his sister. His father died soon after they arrived. He described how he had two experiences of being mixed heritage: at school in Kenya and in London. In Kenya his parents never talked to him about being mixed heritage because, ‘I was happy, I never thought about it’. Yet, when the family moved to London his mother became anxious because they were the only ‘black’ family in the area, and she assumed that they would be, ‘blamed for any trouble’. He explained how the, ‘neighbours were really unfriendly – I was used to Africa where everyone was friendly’.

When he first arrived in London, Reuben, ‘got picked on a bit’, but thought that this was because, ‘he was short – or because he was from Africa’, not because he was of mixed heritage. To begin with he progressed well at school, getting ‘A’ grades in his first 2 years. Although his mother expected him to do well at school:

It was my dad who had sat down and done my homework with me. When he died, mum had to put food on the table but expected me to get on with my schoolwork. I lost motivation and didn’t work as hard as I could have.

Reuben recalled how the science teacher would discriminate against the Black children in the school:

The class was split – black and white – the white kids were at the front and the black at the back – she would say to come and sit at the front because you want to learn, they don’t want to learn back there. There were racist comments flying around. I was caught in the middle. I didn’t know where to sit – if I sat at the front I was a ‘neek’. I was in the top tier for science but then got moved down because of my behaviour.

The division between the Black and White children in the school demanded that he, ‘choose between the two groups’. He recognised that while in 7 and 8 years of age everybody was friendly with each other, in 10 and 11 years of age boys started dividing into groups along ‘racial lines’. The emotional gap left by the loss of his father forced Reuben to seek comfort, trust and belonging from a peer group but he was confused about which group to join. He believed that girls have their mothers throughout their upbringings, ‘they can talk and stuff whereas many boys, without a role model, have to figure it all out on their own – they have no one’. He described how he was lost and that as a boy of mixed heritage he had two choices:

To go with the white group . . . be a skin head – a yob or they can be with the black boys, be a ‘rude boy’ – become all trendy/cool. I had a main group but I hung with the white group for a while and got into a lot of trouble and then with a black group where it was, us against the world. I stopped telling my mum stuff; I don’t tell her stuff now.

He suggested that, ‘generally my mixed race friends are all troubled – society is out to get them’. Like Kim, Reuben described how he was usually, ‘seen as black’ despite the fact that ‘my mum brought me up as mixed race’. Reuben admitted that he had not progressed in the way he would have wished at school due to the number of challenges that he faced. A lack of material resources within his family led to his mother’s preoccupation with providing the necessary resources for her family. Without her support for his schoolwork he lost the motivation to succeed. The death of his father, his role model, forced Reuben to look to his male peer group for emotional support, which would develop his identity and provide guidance on ‘how to be a mixed race man’. As with Kim’s experience, this provided a sense of cohesion but it was based on a shared anger mainly against the police and his school.

He did not discuss his experiences with his mother nor seek her support. This was in contrast to his time in Kenya where he had supportive relationships and his mixed heritage, ‘was not an issue’. However, Reuben suggested that as he became older he obtained emotional support and guidance from a variety of relationships; a range of mentors, his girlfriend and close male friendships, which meant that, ‘I don’t think about all of this very much now’.