The Racism of Rigor

I recently spoke at Benedictine College in Kansas City and I am still very touched by the students, staff, professors and leadership there. I am touched because it was one of the few liberal arts/classical educational spaces I have encountered that seemed to be intentional about balancing educational rigor with equity.

When Mortimer Adler formalized liberal arts education, he was clear that he felt that this type of education was for every person. In his PADEIA PROPOSAL, He says,

Equality of educational opportunity is not, in fact, provided if it means no more than taking all the children into the public schools for the same number of hours, days, and years. If once there they are divided into the sheep and the goats, into those destined solely for toil and those destined for economic and political leadership and for a quality of life to which all should have access, then the democratic purpose has been undermined by an inadequate system of public schooling.

Even though my visit to Benedictine College was not at the K12 level, there was a heart for welcoming students from high school into the school, no matter their background. In fact, there was a program there called “The Freedom Scholars,” which was created to help students feel a sense of community and support while they engaged in liberal arts learning. The leader of the program was African American, a doctoral candidate (at another university) and a former student of Benedictine. He and I discussed how reading a certain text from the canon (I cannot remember which one), captured him so much that he also came to love this type of study as much as I did. When I talked to the various students, they communicated a strong sense of belonging. I noticed how the professors knew students and related to them as if each student was “seen.” One professor even invited a small group of students to ride around with us. Not only was there an intention of drawing students in, but there also seemed to be intentionality around integration. This was not just a college with a “Jim Crowish” program for “Black students”, where students were segregated to participate in a less rigorous program either. There was a since of belonging and community there that sometimes seemed to cross color lines.

Why am I describing this school within a post about the Racism of Rigor? Because this school seemed to be able to provide rigor, while consciously trying to detach these efforts from racism or White supremacy. One struggle I do have within the classical and/or liberal arts community is that in an effort to provide rigorous study, there is no effort to make this type of learning obtainable for EVERYONE and some educational spaces pride themselves on being too rigorous for everyone to attend. Some of the stories I heard from students and even professors who also were students at Benedictine College, tell of how the education they received changed their lives. This is why I am in this type of education. I have seen classical/liberal arts education change the lives of every single student I have taught. I am not interested in an elitist education where some feel as if they are “not good enough” for it. Education at the K12 AND the university level should not be exclusive if we are going to create a society that is truly equitable. Mortimer Adler also says in his PADEIA PROPOSAL,

We are politically a classless society. Our citizenry as a whole is our ruling class. We should, therefore, be an educationally classless society

When my mom was a little girl growing up in North Carolina (she is in her 80s now), she talked about how she wished she could go to the neighborhood pool, but she was not allowed to. As a result she never learned to swim. Yes, she could have learned to swim in the closest pond (because beaches also were off limits to Black people), but she did not want to swim in dirty water. Somehow the society she grew up in, told her that she was only good enough for dirty water. Over the years an intense fear of water developed in her that she was not able to overcome. When desegregation happened and the local pool had to open to Black people, they closed the pool down, instead of welcoming ALL people to take a swim.

There is sometimes a way that classical/liberal arts education is done, which communicates that people of color and even those from low income families, don’t deserve the right to partake of the refreshing works of the canon. Only the “smartest”, “most articulate”, well-read, can make it in. Then the few who do make it in, those that DuBois calls “The Talented 10th“, may feel that the are somehow special, but what if no one is special? What if being let into those spaces is participating in a system meant to continue practicing segregation? These schools have the standards set so “high” that only a small percentage of students in the world are accepted. Some view these “high standards” as something to strive to reach, but the “high standards” are often a gatekeeper to limit the amount of students from diverse or challenged backgrounds who make it in. Sadly, these high standards also prevent some White students from the opportunity, but some educational institutions are willing to accept those casualties, if they can maintain their predominately White spaces, by making it hard for MOST to get in. Like my mom’s neighborhood pool, who would rather keep their own community from being blessed by a refreshing swim, than to make it so EVERYONE can take a dip in the water, these schools create a system of “high standards” so hardly any can get accepted into the program.

Students of color or those from challenged backgrounds who want to attend rigorous schools, but are rejected from these spaces are not less intelligent. Their life experience or their school district may have not equipped them with the background knowledge they needed, but their heart, human intelligenc,e and willingness to attend, should be something to consider. What I saw at Benedictine College reminds me of what I experienced at Howard University and what I have seen at other HBCUs (I think of Gloria Ladson Billings who attended Morgan State and went on to lead the AERA). HBCUs are known for accepting many of its applicants, because they understand the history of how education has been weaponized to keep Black students out of the university or college. Because of this, some assume that HBCUs give a less than rigorous education, but many of us graduates have gone on to be successful in all types of spaces. Also, some HBCUs, like Howard, include a liberal arts component. Rejecting students at a high rate may not necessarily increase a school’s chances of creating world changers, but being more open to diverse students may increase the number of world changers where that school can be named as the reason a student was given the opportunity to succeed in life. I am even thinking of the way that St Johns College accepts many of its applicants, even if they have struggled in high school. As a personal testimony, they have accepted every single student I have referred there and those students have thrived. Even though it is a predominately White space that does present its challenges, (like how can we promote equity that also facilitates community in a liberal arts space without creating the feeling of a traditional college, with all of its sororities, fraternities, and other student groups), it consistently tries to make this type of education accessible to all. If a student wants to be in the space, is willing to do the work, has the human intelligence, sees the value of the education being provided, and sincerely want it for themselves, then the opportunity should be given.

I have met St Johns students who came into the college without the proper background knowledge, but an intense curiosity and a desire for this type of learning and in their 4 years at the college, their whole life was changed. Those students went on to do amazing things. They had to work hard, but with the willingness to do it and the support of various faculty, many were able to overcome the rigor and they became a better person through the process. Rigor can sometimes be a façade for White supremacy. Rigor can also be synonymous with not welcoming ALL human experiences into the process of learning. I reflect on the article written by Dan-el Padilla Peralta a couple of years ago, where he outlined his journey into classical studies. He was able to be successful, but he had to distance himself from his own heritage to survive the rigor (his reflection on that experience has sadly caused him to become frustrated with the classical world, but we must not lose hope friends!). Our society makes even people of color feel that to achieve academic success, we have to only embrace rigor by European standards and our language, literacy, world view are somehow not good enough to be let into the swimming pool…I mean school. In fact, sometimes we have to meet those European standards with almost 100% perfection to be considered “worthy.” I will never forget a former supervisor I had, that whenever I wrote something, she nit-picked it so much and then would say, “Oh I’m sorry this isn’t good enough.” After I began to pick up on her tactic of using the English language as a form of White supremacy, I began to do a test where I would share my writing with another scholar at the same time as when I shared my work with her. Every single time, she used her critique as a way to try and make me feel inadequate. The other scholar however, was encouraging, would make suggestions and I would go on to get published somewhere. I remember my first advisor in grad school, would read my writing and then say, “I don’t think you’re PhD material.” After I requested a new advisor, I was able to finish my PhD and instead of the English language being used to convince me of my inferiority, I grew as a writer of the English language, however that growth did not diminish the value of my own language and way of communicating my human experience. The new advisor supported me staying true to who I am, while also helping me integrate the necessary elements for writing a scholarly work.

I share these personal examples to demonstrate how rigor can look like a K12, college, or grad school student or applicant being rejected because of minor mistakes in writing, communicating or even if their human experience prevents them from comprehending a text or concept from a European perspective. It looks like high standards, but it’s really a way to only provide education for certain classes or races of people. We have to rethink education from K12 to the university level. If we are going to change society, we have to remove the elitism within education. Another powerful point from Mortimer Adler’s PADEIA PROPOSAL says,

Specialized or particularized job training at the level of basic schooling is in fact the reverse of something practical and effective in a society that is always changing and progressing. Anyone so trained will have to be retrained when he or she comes to his or her job. The techniques and technology will have moved on since the training in school took place.

Why, then, was such false vocationalism ever introduced into our schools? As the school population rapidly increased in the early decades of (the 20th) century, educators and teachers turned to something that seemed more appropriate to do with that portion of the school population which they incorrectly and unjustly appraised as being uneducable – only trainable. In doing this, they violated the fundamental democratic maxim of equal educational opportunity.

As compared with narrow, specialized training for particular jobs, general schooling is of the greatest practical value.

Many Liberal Arts Colleges (capitalized because these spaces are so important) were originally created to embrace the philosophy of Mortimer Adler and his friend Robert Hutchinson, Stringfellow Barr and others. The word “Liberal” means freedom and the purpose of these schools is to provide education for free people. We are all free people. This country has spent centuries shedding blood to solidify its purpose of being “The land of the free.” Our schools and colleges should reflect that by how we educate in a way that opens up a massive feast of knowledge that can be used to equip and provide the skills needed so ALL people can be successful at any career AND to become a better human. One more quote from Mortimer Adler’s PADEIA PROPOSAL says,

Our concern is double-edged. We have two fundamental goals in view. One is equipping all the children of this country to earn a good living for themselves. The other is enabling them to lead good human lives.

Any child, college student, graduate student…any person, should be able to have access to a liberal arts education, and any schools that are creating an obstacle for ALL students to obtain it, who sincerely want it, are not liberal. These so-called rigorous spaces are merely clandestine tools for continuing America’s tradition of using education as a weapon against the progress of people of color and the lower class and I want no part of it.

As a Christian and follower of Jesus Christ, one of the most powerful examples I have of equitable education is the way Jesus educated his followers. I sadly see this type of elitism in Christian classical/liberal arts K12 schools and colleges and when I see it, I shake my head in disappointment because this attitude about who should have access to classical/liberal arts education is so far from the heart of God. Jesus welcomed everyone and did what he could to draw everyone in. From the Woman at the Well to Matthew the Tax Collector to Zacchaeus, he maintained the standard, but also met them where they were. We recognize that classical education in itself is rigorous. Nothing else needs to be added to it. No special attitudes of superiority need to be part of this type of education! However, following the equitable practices of Christ, we have to begin to think of ways that all students who desire it can access it. The disciples shocked people by their boldness and knowledge because they had been taught by the Master Rabbi and when people saw them, they could not believe that they were listening to “unlearned men (and women).” The disciples were fishermen and from all types of other backgrounds, yet Jesus gave them each an equal opportunity to gain access to his knowledge. This is how classical/liberal arts education should be done. We shouldn’t be seeing who is worthy or good enough for it, but we should be seeking ways that we can bring more and more into it. This is the heart of God-the same God that died for the WHOLE world so that ALL can gain access to him. This should be our hearts when seeking to bring classical education to EVERYONE. It’s not easy. It’s easier to be elitist so you can just work with those where your unconscious biases and prejudices aren’t challenged. It’s easier to work with those who had the upbringing and education to be able to meet the standard. Jesus did not choose the easy way. He chose the route that got him rejected and eventually crucified by his community, but yet what he did changed and continues to change the lives of so many people. May we also be willing to have the same sacrificial, humble and gracious heart in how we bring classical/liberal arts education to as many K12 and university students that we can.