White privilege is present in our education systems

The argument

The argument begins from a general claim about belonging before applying it to schools. Our sense of belonging in society and feelings of inclusivity stem from societal attitudes towards our culture. Those that belong to demographics whose culture is celebrated in society feel a much greater sense of belonging and warmth, while those who belong to a demographic whose culture is left out or mocked feel less welcome in that society. Belonging is not, on this account, a matter of individual temperament; it is produced by what the institutions around a person treat as worth attending to. Education is then identified as the institution where this operates most systematically, because a curriculum is an explicit statement of what a society considers worth knowing. Western education systems are highly Eurocentric: they teach a European version of history and culture which excludes many cultures associated with non-whites. The exclusion does not have to be deliberate or announced in order to take effect. A student who never encounters their own history, or meets it only as a footnote to somebody else's, receives a consistent message about whose past counts as the shared one. The conclusion applies the general principle to that fact. White students find their own culture at the centre of what they are taught, and so are given a greater sense of belonging and affinity for the education system that people of color are not afforded. What makes this privilege rather than simply bias is its invisibility to those who benefit: the advantage consists partly in not having to notice it, since a student whose culture is assumed has no occasion to register that an assumption is being made at all. That, proponents argue, is a clear example of white privilege operating inside an everyday institution.

Context

People feel respected and included in society when their culture is celebrated and included. Many Western education systems follow a Euro-centric approach. This approach unduly benefits white populations by making white history and white culture the sole culture studied in our education systems. Therefore, our education systems suffer from white privilege.

Premises

Counter-arguments

Critics of this argument respond that a Eurocentric curriculum, where it exists, may reflect the history of the society doing the teaching rather than a racial privilege as such, and that curricula in many countries have diversified substantially. They argue a 'sense of belonging' is difficult to measure and that educational outcomes are shaped by class, family resources and school funding at least as much as by cultural representation, so attributing a belonging gap specifically to whiteness is contested. Some contend that 'privilege' mislabels a curriculum-design problem that can be — and increasingly is — addressed through inclusive content, without implying a system-wide racial advantage.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P2] Curriculum content reflects the host society's own history and has diversified in many school systems, so Eurocentrism where it persists is not necessarily a fixed racial privilege. [Rejecting P3] A 'sense of belonging' is hard to measure and is shaped by class, family and school funding as well as cultural representation, so a belonging gap is not cleanly attributable to whiteness alone.