Education has long been central for African Americans in the quest for equality and historically, what blacks sought was identical to what whites received. In the landmark case of Brown vs. Board of Education (1954) the plaintiff -- Oliver Brown -- went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court to enable his daughter, Linda, to attend the nearby all-white school, despite a state law prohibiting racial integration. That the all-white school’s curriculum probably offered zero about blacks was irrelevant. Linda Brown just wanted to attend the local school even if the school ignored her “blackness.” The goal was a decent education, and mastering long division hardly required pictures of eminent black mathematicians.

The very idea of school integration rejects the separate but equal doctrine and assumes that African Americans could achieve equality via attending “white” schools. Unfortunately, matters have now changed, and today nearly everything about education is race-based. A contemporary Linda Brown might refuse to attend a nearby school if it were “too white” and instead travel miles to a segregated schools to affirm her “blackness.” In many instances, American education has gone full circle from “Separate but Equal” to “Everybody is equal” to resurrecting “Separate but Equal.”  

This integration to segregation transformation began during the late 1960s at the university level with separate “Black Studies” department entirely devoted to “blackness.” Here black instructors assigned mainly books written by blacks exclusively from the black perspective. The scholarly apartheid soon spread to all-black dorms, student centers and separate graduation ceremonies. A distinct, race-obsessed Critical Race Theory provided an intellectual structure to this segregation.

The racial separation education approach has now filtered into K-12 where countless blacks want a black-centered education for their children, a curriculum totally unlike what whites want and receive. Prominent in this black centered education is the 1619 project with its emphasis on slavery and its harsh criticism of America’s alleged inherent racism. The Project even asserts (incorrectly) that the Revolutionary War was fought to preserve slavery, and slavery was fundamental to America’s economic prosperity.

But far more consequential than the 1619 Project is what is currently occurring in New York City Though it has attracted scant public attention, the City’s Black Studies as the Study of the World curriculum is truly revolutionary and it targets one million black students, Put bluntly, this “innovation” is comparable to Jim Crow separatism insofar as blacks and whites will now receive totally different educations.

This new curriculum offers a comprehensive and highly detailed insertion of blackness that begins in pre-kindergarten and ends in high school. The project required decades of scholarly research by dozens of experts together with input from community groups and local government. It is a transformative enterprise, a far cry from just occasionally noting prominent black contribution to America’s culture and economy. It includes multiple lesson plans, resource guides, reading lists, suggested activities, and much more. For example, each grade contains a detailed “Integrated Learning Plan” that, among other goals, examines the African Diaspora and the hidden voices of African Americans. Students will learn of an “African-centered perspective that predates slavery.” Eighth graders spend three days learning about investigative journalism, protests, and resistance to lynching.

This transformation aims to invigorate a strong sense of racial identity in each student all the while making learning positive, joyous, fun, exciting and engaging. According to one expert, this approach will allow students “to be able to better understand and celebrate and appreciate the contributions of individuals who came before them.” The “fun” element was noted by one eight-grade teacher who observed a new-found classroom engagement of once lethargic students. A particularly notable accomplishment was boosting classroom participation of young black males, a group that traditionally distained education. Now, thanks to celebrating their African ancestry, they’ve become more engaged and intellectually curious. Most of all, they stopped cutting classes to play basketball and instead are now active participants in their education.  

These positive reactions have encouraged proponents of Black Studies as the Study of the World to spread the message nationally, and black educators elsewhere have taken notice. Indeed, this black-centered comprehensive curriculum may work wonders in black majority schools plagued by chronic absenteeism and classroom disorder. There is even talk, and an initial grant of a half-million dollars from Columbia University’s Gordon Institute, for a comparable curriculum focusing on Latinos.

Will Black Studies as the Study of the World advance racial equality? No. First, while this curriculum might technically be “learning,” a more accurate characterization would be exercises in boosting self-esteem. To be sure, there is nothing wrong with enhancing self-esteem, but the task, especially when made central to the curriculum, is not what schooling is all about. Ironically, studies of self-esteem among adolescents show that blacks, especially black males, enjoy the highest levels of self-esteem (Asians the lowest).

Children attend school to learn how to read, write, do math and so on, and spending untold hours on feel-good lessons exclusively about one’s racial identity imposes huge opportunity costs. The hours spent on commemorating one’s African ancestors detracts from serious education. To insist that the primary mission of schools is to help students feel good about themselves profoundly misconstrue the mission of American education. Parents who wish to boost junior’s self-esteem can certainly accomplish the aim via non-school enrichment. Sending him to school for this purpose is a dereliction of parental responsibility. Are schools to be judged by the metric of self-esteem? These experts answer, “yes.”

In fact, spending hundreds of hours on race-related lessons (some of which are likely factually dubious) puts these students at a serious disadvantage when graduating. While whites, Asians, and Hispanics have spent hours on academic subjects, blacks will instead be learning everything favorable about blacks, a knowledge that may be psychologically comforting but is economically worthless. Employers are not interested in job applicants possessing sky-high self-esteem yet are barely able to read.

Even worse is that the emphasis on making everything fun, exciting, and personally relevant subverts the school’s critical role in building a work ethic. Yes, mastering math and reading may be arduous with repeated failure and will be avoided by those infatuated with entertainment and games, but learning difficult subjects is the ticket to future accomplishment. Which employer will hire youngsters inclined to tackle only “fun” projects or give up immediately at the first failure? Top schools have produced accomplished graduates by requiring students to struggle with subjects they hate. Yes, learning Latin may devastate one’s self-esteem but if accomplished, the rewards over a lifetime can be enormous. Learning is hard work, and no responsible educator should deny this reality.

Finally, this race-based curriculum will only further fragment American society. Self-imposed school racial segregation will soar, and thanks to this distinctive curriculum, the city’s black graduates will become strangers in their own land akin to foreign population with their own history and language. But, unlike many of today’s highly motivated immigrants, nobody will hire New York City’s black public school graduates.

The black educators and scholarly “experts” who profit financially from this awaiting disaster gives a whole new meaning to the idea of leaders happily selling out their own people. Imagine if Chinese community leaders demanded a similar “feel good” academically empty program for Chinese youngsters? Recall what happened with Ebonics and Afrocentrism  when they were suggested as a way to help academically struggling blacks. Both were disasters. Obviously, these educators have problems learning from past mistakes.  

Image: National Park Service