Mark Halstead, Education, Justice and Cultural Diversity: an Examination of the Honeyford Affair, 1984-85 (London: The Falmer Press, 1988)

Our note:  The following excerpts are from a book which relates the content of an extended debate in the British press over multi-cultural education in British public elementary and secondary schools. The book's central interest is a series of articles published by Ray Honeyford, a headteacher at a public school in Bradford. Eventually, Honeyford was suspended from his position, but re-instated five months later. There was an especially loud public outcry over his participation in a seminar with the Prime Minister, cabinet ministers and education leaders over the longterm goals of the educational system. After much protest at his continued presence in his position as headteacher, Honeyford took early retirement at his own suggestion five months after his re-instatement. The 'Honeyford Affair' provides excellent examples of the various positions taken and philosophies adhered to in the broader debate over multi-cultural education.

See also Mark Halstead on the different types of racism.

Preface:

"Following the publication of Ray Honeyford's article, 'Education and Race -- an Alternative View' in The Salisbury Review early in 1984, a protracted campaign was launched against him, calling for his dismissal from his post as headteacher in Bradford, which culminated almost two years later in his acceptance of early retirement settlement. The case became an educational cause celebre in the UK; it received extensive media coverage, and had political, legal, social and administrative repercussions both locally and nationally. It is the argument of the present volume that the case also highlights, in a particularly interesting way, a number of issues which are, and are likely to remain in the near future, of crucial importance to contemporary educational policy and practice. The present volume falls into two parts. The first attempts to provide an objective account of what actually happened in the Honeyford affair and the background against which it took place. The second seeks to encourage some serious thinking about the most important of the issues raised, especially racism, free speech, teachers' accountability and multi-cultural education. The book thus combines elements of a case study with elements of applied social philosophy. It is written in the belief that a close examination of a particular educational incident leads quickly and inevitably to questions of concept and fundamental educational principles that the practical lessons of the incident can be understood. This book has its foundations in the author's twelve years' teaching experience in Bradford and three years' research in philosophy of education at the University of Cambridge, where he has been looking particularly at educational provision for Muslim children in the UK" (vii).

Part One: The Background to the Honeyford Affair

Chapter One: Ethnic Minorities in Bradford

"Bradford's population is among the most ethnically diverse to be found outside London. It provides a rich source of information about patterns of immigration and interactions between cultures. The city contains sizable groups with ethnic origins in Ireland, Germany, Poland, the Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, Bielorussia, Yugoslavia, Lithuania, Italy, Greece, Cyprus, Hungary, the West Indies, Hong Kong, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Vietnam, as well as smaller groups from many other areas of the world. This microcosm of contemporary Britain is ripe for investigation, not least because we can gain a better understanding of the current situation of ethnic minorities by looking at how that situation arose, and because future planning, in the field of education as elsewhere, is dependent on accurate knowledge about the present" (3).

"I have already suggested that the increased competition for jobs and housing in Bradford, the rapid growth of the black population and the continuing visible differences of skin colour, culture and religion, could easily combine to create a climate in which racism could thrive. These three factors, together with the greater dissatisfaction felt by many young blacks because of the higher expectations that their education has given them, and the search by some sections of the white population for a scapegoat to take the blame for what they see as the declining quality of life in Bradford (CBMC, 1984a), have made some form of racial conflict almost inevitable. Racism in Bradford has taken several forms. There has been the racism of the extremist political parties which have sought to stir up resentment of immigrants and sometimes to demand their repatriation. There has been the overt racist behaviour of bullying and intimidation, gang fights, arson attacks, physical assaults (especially on bus and taxi drivers), verbal baiting, graffiti and general rudeness. And there has been what is now usually called institutional racism, resulting from the fact that the city's institutions were designed (or had developed) primarily to meet the needs of white people. The indirect discrimination and disadvantage suffered by black people as a result of this form of racism is now being tackled by the Council in a series of race relations initiatives. The three main anti-immigrant political parties that have been active in Bradford are the Yorkshire Campaign to Stop Immigration, which was founded in Bradford by J. Merrick in 1970 and which fought several seats in the local elections up to 1975, without much success (cf Le Lohe, 1979, p. 198ff); the British National Party, which received some publicity when it was joined in 1983 by a former Bradford headmaster, Stanley Garnett; and the National Front, which took over the main anti-immigrant mantle in Bradford in 1976. Although its official activities consist largely in organizing rallies, contesting elections and distributing anti-immigration literature, the main achievement of the National Front in Bradford has been to act as a symbolic focus for much of the intimidation and harassment of blacks by white youths. The activities of the BNP and NF in Bradford schools are discussed further in chapter two, together with the response to their activities by a variety of anti-racist groups. It is very difficult to estimate the amount of overt racist behaviour experienced by the minority communities of Bradford. It is fairly clear that what is reported in the newspapers is only the tip of the iceberg. Such groups as the Azad Kashmiri Muslim Association and the Asian Youth Movement have claimed that racism is rife in Bradford, and that some children have been too frightened to go to school because of racist attacks. It is true that the violence has not always been one-way, and that Asian gangs have sometimes sought to retaliate. But the trial of the 'Bradford Twelve' brought to light the cloud of fear under which many blacks in the city were living. The Bradford Twelve were a group of Asian youths drawn mainly from the Asian Youth Movement and the United Black Youth League (significantly a mixture of Muslims, Hindus and a Sikh) who were arrested in July 1981 after the discovery of petrol bombs they had made. The time was a period of racial unrest in various parts of Britain, not only involving attacks on and provocation of Asians in Southall and Walthamstow (cf Jacobs, 1986, ch.6), but also involving clashes between West Indians and police in Brixton, Liverpool and elsewhere (cf Cashmore and Troyna, 1983, p. 172ff). The defendants claimed that they had made the bombs to protect their community in case a threatened invasion by skinheads materialized. After a six-weeks trial, during which the picture emerged of a community which was under constant fear of attack yet was offered little protection by the police, all the defendants were acquitted in June 1982. . . . Partly in response to the heightened racial tensions, the Council embarked on its new race relations initiative in 1981. The expressed aim was to work for social justice for all groups by promoting policies and practices which would create:

i) equality of esteem between different cultures ii) equality of opportunity in employment iii) equality of access to council services iv) the development of services that were relevant to all sections of the community v) the elimination of discrimination on racial grounds (CMBC, 1984c, p.6)" (16-18).

"The guidelines issued by Bradford Council in 1982 regarding the education of pupils from ethnic minority groups were based on two fundamental beliefs. The first was that all sections of the community in the city had an equal right to the maintenance of their distinctive identities and loyalties of culture, language, religion and custom, and that so far as was compatible with individual needs, the authority's provision of services should respect the strength and variety of each group's cultural values. The second was that all children in Bradford were entitled to equality of treatment, equality of opportunity and equality of services and should be offered a shared educational experience. Both of these fundamental beliefs had been set out in the local authority's policy statement on race relations the previous year. Together, they gave rise to the following statement of the aims of education in Bradford: 1. To seek ways of preparing all children and young people for life in a multi-cultural society. 2. To counter racism and racist attitudes, and the inequalities and discrimination which results [sic] from them. 3. To build on and develop the strengths of cultural and linguistic diversity. 4. To respond sensitively to the special needs of minority groups.

The Authority recognizes the organizational difficulties of achieving these aims, while at the same time responding to the individual needs of children, and safeguarding the rights of parents under the terms of the 1944 Education Act. Nevertheless, it is convinced that, with sensitivity and a sympathetic understanding of cultural and religious issues, the educational needs of ethnic minority children can be met within the one educational system and within the framework of a common school curriculum. -- City of Bradford Local Administrative Memorandum No 2/82" (23).

ARTICLES ON RACE AND EDUCATION

Honeyford began writing about racial issues with two letters published in July 1982, one to The Times Educational Supplement and the other to the local Telegraph and Argus. The first expressed dismay that Dr. Mortimer's research into the fortunes of successful black children, which had been commissioned for the Swann Report, was being dropped as a result of pressure from West Indian organizations. Honeyford felt the research was being suppressed because it was likely to demonstrate a link between the achievement of West Indian children and their family values and backgrounds, whereas the preferred explanation was to link underachievement to racism. This was a theme to which Honeyford reverted in several later articles. The second letter was a response to the suggestion by a regular columnist that Bradford was spending money unnecessarily to placate its ethnic minorities: 70,000 pounds had already been provided for Checkpoint, the West Indian community centre, whose previous premises had been destroyed by fire, because the Council 'feared Toxteth-type riots might occur if they did nothing'; and now 150,000 pounds was to be spent on temporary accommodation for the pupils of a first school that was being repaired, so that the Council would not have to face charges of re-introducing 'bussing' if they followed through their original plan to take the children to a suburban school four miles away while the repairs were carried out. Honeyford's letter expressed concern, on the first count that the Council was yielding to intimidation, and on the second that money was not being spent for 'sound educational and social reasons'. He suggested that some citizen of Bradford should refer the matter to the public auditor. The letter was on school notepaper, and two months later he received a verbal warning from Bradford's director of education. Honeyford's first article on race and education was published in The Times Educational Supplement in November 1982. It remains perhaps the clearest explanation of his opposition to multiracial education. His main arguments are:

(1) that 'the responsibility for the adaptations and adjustments involved in settling in a new country lies entirely with those who have come here to settle', since their initial immigration was an act of free choice; (2) that their commitment to a British education (i.e. an education which is deeply embedded in British and European culture) was 'implicit in their decision to become British citizens'; (3) that the maintenance and transmission of the mother culture of immigrants 'has nothing to do with the English secular school but is a private matter for the immigrant family or community', and that it was a recognition of this fact which enabled earlier Jewish and East European settlers to survive and flourish in this country (cf chapter one above); (4) that any attempt to 'confer a privileged position' on minority groups, whether through positive discrimination or through attempts to 'enhance the status and self-respect of settler children by teaching the culture of their parents' mother land and a critical view of British imperialism', is misguided, patronizing, and ultimately against their own best interests; (5) that the main need of second generation Asian and Caribbean children, who have in any case already absorbed sufficient British culture for them to be considered primarily bi-cultural, is now to master that culture so that they can compete on equal terms in what is in fact 'a pretty ruthless meritocracy' in this country; (6) that what is holding black achievement back at the moment is not racism but a 'lack of support for school and its values among West Indian parents', together with the misguided 'cultural revisionism' of the multi-racial 'bandwagon' (as seen, for example, in the 'literary McCarthyism' of vetting school books for negative references to race and colour); (7) that only an emphasis on the 'common needs of all children' and an abandonment of anything promoting an 'artificial and harmful colour consciousness' will help to generate 'a truly equal and harmonious multi-cultural society'.

The article sparked off a considerable debate in the correspondence columns of The Times Educational Supplement and elsewhere, and was widely attacked for its insensitivity towards the genuine difficulties faced by the black families in Britain. Again, Honeyford was seen by his director of education, this time in the company of the chairman of Bradford's Educational Services Committee, though this did not constitute a formal disciplinary procedure over the article" (56-58).

UNDERLYING ASSUMPTIONS IN HONEYFORD'S ARTICLES

Perhaps the biggest problem facing any culturally pluralist society is how to resolve the tensions between the preservation of the distinct cultural identity of minority communities on the one hand and the encouragement of social integration and cohesion on the other. Honeyford's arguments are based on the firm conviction that the former is a private matter for the individuals of communities involved and that the latter is the only legitimate concern of public education in this country. It is this conviction which underlies, and gives unity to, his views on the best approach to education in a multi-racial context and which explains his misgivings about much contemporary practice. The cessation of 'bussing' in Bradford had led to a very dramatic increase in the proportion of ethnic minority pupils in his own school -- eventually over 95 per cent. One consequence was the decline in opportunities for the development of cross-cultural friendships, which can contribute significantly to the growth of tolerance:

It is very difficult for either English or settler children to view each other as odd, much less as inferior, when they have grown up together (Honeyford, "Multi-ethnic intolerance," Salisbury Review, 4, Summer, pp.12-13).

. . . . I shall argue in part two of the present book that Honeyford's approach to the education of ethnic minority children is ultimately unsatisfactory because it is dependent on too simplistic an analysis of the situation. His discussion of the 'bi-cultural identity' of young Asians does not take adequate account of the very real clash of loyalties experienced by many Asian children, who may be presented with one set of values and beliefs at home and in their local community and a quite different set at their state school. It fails to consider what legal and moral rights ethnic minority parents have to a say in the education of their children. It fails to explore the extent to which the taken-for-granted values and assumptions on which the British educational system is based are not only alien to many ethnic minority parents, but may force them into a position where they are expected to go against their own fundamental convictions. On the other hand, Honeyford's articles do . . . raise some pertinent questions about the nature and goals of anti-racist education" (64-65).

Return to the Race-Consciousness and Race-Blindness Page Page
Return to the Affirmative Action and Diversity Page

Carl Gutierrez-Jones
Department of English
University of California, Santa Barbara
E-mail:  carlgj@humanitas.ucsb.edu