“Africans Do Not Fail”: Examining the Model Minority Stereotype and Anti-Blackness at a New York City Public School

Literature Review: The Model Minority Stereotype

The term “model minority” refers to a “monolithic group with shared achievement levels and shared attitudes toward schooling” (S. J. Lee, 2009, p. 64). It is a stereotype that attributes the success and social mobility of a minority group to perceived cultural values and work ethic. Often viewed as a positive stereotype and commonly associated with Asian Americans, it insists that this racial group has a culture that promotes self-sufficiency and success, all while overcoming racial discrimination and other social difficulties by being diligent, hardworking, quiet, and high achieving (Chao et al., 2013; S. J. Lee, 2005).

Although sociologist William Petersen’s (1966) The New York Times article, “Success Story, Japanese-American Style,” is often credited as the inception of the model minority stereotype, the discourse had been in the works since World War II and the early Cold War. Materializing during the Civil Rights Movement, it was used to push back against African Americans’ claims of racial inequalities and their request for government-sponsored programs to alleviate their centuries of race-based struggles (S. J. Lee, 2009; Lew, 2006; Ngo, 2010; Wu, 2014). The same year of Petersen’s publication, U.S. News & World Report published “Success Story of One Minority Group in U.S.” (December 1966) in which Chinese Americans were praised: “At a time when it is being proposed that hundreds of billions be spent to uplift Negroes and other minorities, the nation’s 300,000 Chinese-Americans are moving ahead on their own—with no help from anyone else” (p. 6). At the expense of African Americans, the stereotype acts as a “hegemonic device” (Lew, 2011, p. 618) that places Asians as the superior minority and African Americans as the inferior minority, further justifying and perpetuating social and systemic racism against African Americans—all while keeping attention off the white racial system that continues to subjugate both groups (Chang & Au, 2008; S. J. Lee, 2009; Kim, 1999). The stereotype positions Asian Americans as not quite white but “definitively not-Black” (Wu, 2014, p. 145), a position that comes with its own sets of privileges and disadvantages for Asian Americans.

Scholars have argued that the model minority stereotype overlooks the role that factors such as social class, immigration policies, and foreign relations have played in the creation of the stereotype and the social mobility of Asian Americans (particularly those of Chinese and Japanese descent) (J. Lee & Zhou, 2015). For example, in The Good Immigrants, Hsu (2015) illustrated that even during the anti-Asian immigration exclusions and restrictions from the 1880s to mid-1900s (which mostly rejected laborers), lenient selective admissions were given to privileged and well-educated Chinese professionals and students to immigrate and gain citizenship in the United States. This selectivity privileged these elites because they were deemed useful immigrants who could “enhance[e] the national economy” (Hsu, 2015, p. 2) and its competitive global standing during World War II and the Cold War. Hsu (2015) concluded, “The encoding of economic priorities and recoding of racial stigmas into immigration laws and employment preferences that began during the Cold War have transformed Chinese and other Asians into model immigrants” (p. 237).

Moreover, by focusing on the accomplishments of East Asians such as Chinese and Japanese Americans, the model minority stereotype ignores the ethnic diversity and diversity of achievements among Asians and their effect on Asian students and their schooling experiences. In Unraveling the “Model Minority” Stereotype, S. J. Lee (2009) found that while students were viewed as Asians by school faculty and peers, they categorized themselves into four identity groups that had different relationships with the model minority stereotype; some accepted it while others rejected it. S. J. Lee (2009) also found that being viewed as model minorities by teachers was beneficial to some Asian students because it operated as a form of motivation for these students. But, for students who could not live up to the stereotype, it was a source of anxiety, especially for newly arrived and limited English proficiency Asian students. These students felt reluctant to seek help when necessary, and teachers were less inclined to offer them the support they required because they were perceived as intelligent and assumed to be self-sufficient.

However, this stereotype dismisses the advantages of being viewed as a model minority group and the potential positive effects on Asian students and other groups labeled as model minorities. In The Asian American Achievement Paradox, J. Lee and Zhou (2015) reported evidence of stereotype promise attached to the model minority stereotype: “the promise that one will be viewed through the lens of a positive stereotype, which enhances performance by leading one to perform in a way that confirms the positive stereotype” (p. 124). In this case, being viewed as a model student comes with status that can boost Asian students’ achievement because it provides them with symbolic capital: a form of capital based on prestige, honor, recognition, and authority that a group or an individual accumulates within a society (Bourdieu & Wacquant, 2013). It is “an intangible resource . . . that accrues benefits because of its perceived legitimacy” (J. Lee & Zhou, 2015, p. 117). Some Asian students use the capital, that is, resources as leverage to improve their academic achievement, thus producing a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Still, the model minority stereotype is “patently false” (Hartlep, 2021, p. 2) and is considered a deficit perspective of Asian Americans’ academic performance and success (Tran & Birman, 2010). Yet, it persists. Chao et al. (2013) insisted that this stereotype is a shared reality in the United States and that, “regardless of whether the model minority belief is supported by facts, the perception that Asian Americans embody the model minority characteristics is seen as widely shared among Americans” (p. 85). That is, the perception of Asian Americans as “more hardworking and more disciplined, and [the assumption that] they have tight-knit families, respect their parents, delay gratification, make sacrifices, and value education more than other groups” (J. Lee & Zhou, 2015, p. 3) have been taken up by the American public as facts. This is because “the model minority stereotype upholds the ideals of the ‘American dream’ by legitimating deeply held beliefs of individual meritocracy that negate important structural forces such as race, class, and gender” (Lew, 2011, p. 614). Overall, the model minority stereotype has branded Asians as a minority group whose members, unlike African Americans, were able to pull themselves up by their bootstraps to obtain social, political, and economic advancement in the United States, even during times of war, discrimination, and anti-Asian immigration restrictions (e.g., the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act and the Asian Exclusion Act of 1924).

African Immigrants and the Model Minority Stereotype

Like Asian Americans, Africans in the United States have been dubbed a model minority group by newspapers and magazines because of the high educational attainment and labor force participation of African-born immigrants (Diouf-Kamara, 1997; Hamilton, 2019; Pierre, 2004; Ukpokodu, 2018). These media outlets stressed African immigrants’ positive cultural values and attitudes, strong work ethic, and lack of emphasis on anti-Black racism as the reason for their model success in the United States (see Kane, 1996; Page, 2007a; “Race in America,” 1996). Similar to the application of the model minority stereotype to Asian Americans, the valorizing of African immigrants’ so-called positive values was compared with that of African Americans—the latter group being positioned as having culturally and socially inferior values and aspirations compared with the former. For example, in “Black Like Me: Race in America,” The Economist (1996) claimed that foreign-born Black immigrants from Africa and the Caribbean fare better than Black Americans because they reside in two-parent, two-income households, are “highly motivated,” and have “strong will to succeed,” unlike African Americans. To support these claims, the newspaper magazine cited research findings of prominent social scientist Mary Waters. Waters (1994, 1999) has reported that Black immigrants, mainly focusing on those from the Caribbean, display unique cultural values and ethics distinct from their African American counterparts that have propelled them to gain success in the United States. ³ Academic scholarships have also supported the claims of Africans as model minorities. Controversial legal scholars Chua and Rubenfeld (2014) have reported that Africans in the United States, particularly Nigerians, are model minorities because of a combination of three factors that the authors deem as cultural: (1) a superiority complex that pushes them to be better than other groups, (2) personal insecurity about one's place in society that pushes them to work harder, and (3) self-discipline and impulse control that enable them to withstand temptation and delay gratification for potentially larger rewards in the future. ⁴

As Africans in America are seen as a high-achieving group because of their educational attainment levels and high rates of labor force participation and labor market outcomes, positioning them as a model minority group provides an incomplete picture and an oversimplification of their experiences in this country. Renowned social historian Diouf-Kamara (1997) described Senegalese communities in New York City as having characteristics that align with the model minority stereotype, a label that is imposed on this group. Diouf-Kamara (1997) praised the Senegalese for their entrepreneurial adaptability, economic contributions to their communities and home country, and strong communal ties. However, the author suggested that the model minority label overlooks the groups’ challenges, including being largely undocumented and operating in the informal economy. Their success is largely built on informal and sometimes illegal economic practices, such as selling counterfeit goods, because of their undocumented status, which results in a high chance of encountering legal risks.

In her study on the experiences of second-generation Nigerian Americans in the United States and the United Kingdom, sociologist Imoagene (2017) also found that while Nigerians in the United States have a high educational and occupational attainment, they also struggle with the negative perception of Nigerians as scammers who engage in fraudulent and illegal financial activities. The author further argued that the success of Nigerian immigrants “cannot be fully attributed to culture”; instead,

the mechanisms that have made them successful . . . have their genesis in the extreme selectivity of the Nigerian first generation and the social capital generated from the ethnic resources within their communities that have helped create human capital and ethnic-group consciousness in the second generation. (p. 132)

That is, the success of second-generation Nigerians in the United States is greatly influenced by the selective migration of first-generation Nigerians with certain characteristics such as education, skills, and economic means.

As a matter of fact, Hamilton (2019) posited that the educational and occupational success of Africans such as Nigerians, Ghanaians, and Kenyans is due to selective migration and African immigrants’ ability to take advantage of the expanding opportunities afforded to African Americans after the Civil Rights Movement. Hamilton (2019) found that African-born immigrants in the United States have twice as much educational attainment as Africans in their country of origin. This is because Africans with more education in their home countries are more likely to have the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to navigate the immigration process, and therefore have more potential to gain entrance into the United States. This group of Africans is also likelier to have a high socioeconomic status and occupy power positions in their home countries. Thus, upon migration, African-born immigrants—arriving with the knowledge and skills afforded them because of their educational and social status back home—are more able to navigate their new homes and capitalize on opportunities gained by Black Americans.

K-12 African Students’ Academic Performance

Statistics on the educational attainment of Africans in the United States are almost exclusively about the African-born population, particularly adults who were raised in their home countries (Hamilton, 2020). Additionally, not only is the high educational attainment of African-born immigrants not inherently cultural, but it also provides very little information on the academic achievement and educational attainment of African students (both African- and U.S.-born) attending U.S. K–12 schools. Indeed, the academic performance of Africans in K–12 has been difficult to calculate because of the lack of data disaggregation within the Black population at local, state, and national levels (Smith et al., 2019, 2020; Ukpokodu, 2018). Based on studies on the academic performance of K–12 African immigrants, and national, state, and school districts’ assessments report cards in 20 states across the United States, Ukpokodu (2018) found that (1) there were limited data at the K–12 level to support the claim of African immigrants as model minorities because of the aggregation of all Black students into one racial category regardless of ethnicity, and (2) the limited disaggregated data indicate that although African immigrants on the K–12 level perform above African American students, they perform below their Asian and white counterparts. Ukpokodu (2018) considered the notion of African immigrants as a model minority group to be “disingenuous and a disservice” (p. 69) to African students because it carries “the implication that AIS [African immigrant students] can easily negotiate the school system and achieve high-level academic success” (p. 84), thus masking African immigrants’ academic struggles.

Furthermore, Smith and colleagues (2019) found that although Black students underperform on reading literacy assessment when compared with white students, subgroup outcomes differed (e.g., Black immigrants, including Africans, outperformed African Americans) based on factors such as language self-identification, socioeconomic status, and demographic variables. Therefore, Smith and colleagues (2019) advocated for disaggregating data to better understand the specific challenges faced by the different subgroups within the Black student population. In a society where the underachievement of Black students is often the topic of research, and the public discourse about the achievement gap between Black and white students runs rampant, separating the academic achievements of African immigrants from that of other Black students will provide a more precise picture of their performance within schools, between other racial groups, and among the overall Black population (Smith et al., 2019; Smith et al., 2020).

Studies on the K–12 school experiences of African immigrants have emphasized the academic struggles of this group rather than presenting them as model minorities. These challenges include teachers’ and peers’ negative stereotypes about Africa and the academic abilities of Africans, social and cultural differences, and language and communication difficulties (Awokoya, 2012; Harushimana & Awokoya, 2011; Kumi-Yeboah et al., 2020, 2021; Kumi-Yeboah & Smith, 2016; Nalubega-Booker & Willis, 2020; Traore & Lukens, 2006). For instance, in This Isn’t the America I Thought I’d Find, Traore and Luken (2006) reported that recently arrived African students at Jackson High (a pseudonym), a predominantly Black Philadelphia high school, faced a hostile school environment that caused downward assimilation among these students (Harushimana & Awokoya, 2022). African youth endured bullying brought on by negative stereotypes and sometimes experienced physical violence at the hands of their African American peers. Teachers and school administrators at Jackson High also did very little to acknowledge the conflict between these two groups in a way that addressed the troubling stereotypes that were at its core. Instead, when there was a confrontation between the two groups, students were suspended or given detention, or the police were called. This caused students who were experiencing bullying and harassment to remain silent. Feeling disrespected and rejected at school and by their parents’ unwillingness to believe their struggles, some of the African students engaged in activities that Harushimana and Awokoya (2022) deemed as assimilation in the rainbow underclass, which included low and failing grades, withdrawal from school (also see Kiramba et al., 2020, 2021), selling and using drugs, prostitution, and other unlawful behaviors.

The research on African immigrants’ achievement has provided critical information about the success, and especially the struggles, that these students experience in school. Yet, the perception of them as a model minority group still prevails. And while some of these studies have mentioned the model minority stereotype, little is known about how African students engage with this stereotype in K–12. This article examines teachers’ and counselors’ perceptions of African immigrants as a model minority group and highlights how these perceptions shape African students’ day-to-day experiences and interactions with adults in school.

Theoretical Framework

To understand the model minority stereotype, we must understand the roles that discourse and representation play in the creation and othering of those deemed model minorities. Thus, this study draws from postcolonial theory, particularly the postcolonial concepts of discourse, representation, and othering, to examine the West African student experience in the United States (Agyepong, 2018; Ashcroft et al., 2013). Postcolonial theory examines the long-term effects of Europe’s imperial and colonial domination of other nations across the globe and ways to transform these effects for the benefit of those previously colonized (Ashcroft et al., 2013; Young, 2016). Rooted in Foucauldian use of the concept, Hall (1996) defined discourse as “a group of statements which provide a language for talking about—i.e., a way of representing—a particular kind of knowledge” (p. 201) that “shapes perceptions and practices” (p. 225). Through discourse, power relations are established, enforced, and perpetuated, and representations and identities are created, performed, and reinforced. Hall (1997) defined representation as “an essential part of the process by which meaning is produced and exchanged between members of a culture. It does involve the use of language, of signs and images which stand for or represent things” (p. 15). Representation is a dynamic process in which language mirrors preexisting societal meanings, with cultural significance imbued by those who propagate it. Consequently, akin to discourse, representation not only mirrors society but also actively shapes it, contributing to the construction of meaning within society. Discourse and representation work together to create the “other.”

“Othering,” coined by Gayatri Spivak, “describes the various ways in which colonial discourse produces its subjects” (Ashcroft et al., 2013, p. 188). While Spivak and other theorists differentiate between the use of “Other” (colonizer) and “other” (the colonized) in her writing, this article uses both simultaneously to refer to the colonized “other.” Othering occurs upon contact between colonial powers and colonized bodies, and through the social, economic, political, and physical abuse of the colonized. “Othering” is considered a dialectical process in that, through the creation of the colonized “other” as barbaric and unintelligible, the colonizer develops an opposing image of itself as civilized while engaging in barbaric actions against the colonized (Cesaire, 1972/2000). The “othering” of the colonized through dominant discourse and representation continues to have detrimental social, cultural, political, and economic impacts on previously colonized people (Hall, 1996). For Africans and their descendants in the diaspora, discourse and representation during colonialism created a perception that positioned them as the savage “other”—a perception that still exists in today’s representation and understanding of Black people across the globe.

In addition to postcolonial theory, this study employs anti-Blackness from an Afro-pessimist lens to unpack, analyze, and explain the specific forms of racism that Black students experience in the United States. Afro-pessimism is a thesis that is concerned with the impact and “afterlife of slavery” (Hartman, 2007) on the existence of Black people today. Afro-pessimism argues that “Africans emerged from the middle passage and slavery as blacks, a racialized group of not quite humans and the permanently subjugated property of whites” (Ray et al., 2017, p. 150); since then, Blackness has always been tied to and continues to exist within slaveness (Ray et al., 2017). Patterson (1982) defined slavery as “the permanent, violent domination of natally alienated and generally dishonored persons” (p. 13) and argued that slavery caused the social death of Blacks by using gratuitous violence to strip them of their ancestry and their connections to Africa, their families, and their communities. Afro-pessimism argues that slavery has, therefore, positioned Blacks as “the very antithesis of a Human subject” (Wilderson, 2010, p. 9) and has provided Black people with an ontological position that is incomparable to that of whites or other people of color (Dumas, 2016; Patterson, 1982; Ray et. al, 2017; Wilderson, 2010). The postcolonial concepts of discourse, representation, the notion of the “other,” and anti-Blackness offer a framework for analyzing how Africans are positioned both as a model minority group and as part of a racial category perceived as socially inferior.

Research Design and Methods

This article draws from a larger critical ethnographic study conducted from November 2016 to August 2017. The study examined the experiences of West African immigrant high school students in the Bronx, New York, known to be the site of settlement for Western Africans, the largest group of Africans in the United States (Lorenzi & Batalova, 2022). Critical ethnography provides a practical, value-driven approach that challenges historical and contemporary hegemonic conceptions of the world, power relations, and the status quo, while advocating for the oppressed and forgotten (Carspecken, 1996; Creswell & Poth, 2018). The study privileged and brought to the forefront the voices and experiences of African students in K–12—a group that has been overlooked in educational research, policies, and practices, and challenges assumptions about African students and the model minority stereotype.

Recruitment and Participants

This study employed purposive sampling “based on predetermined criteria about the extent to which the selected subject could contribute to the research study” (Vaughn et al., 1996, p. 58). This study’s participants consisted of West African students, teachers, and a guidance counselor. The main criterion in the selection of West African participants was country of origin: African students or at least one of their parents had to be from, by birth or ancestry/claim, West Africa.

Of the approximately 500 students at Wilson High School during the 2016–2017 school year, about 40⁵ either were West African-born or had at least one parent from West Africa. In fact, according to the principal, assistant principals, guidance counselors, and teachers, almost all of the African students at Wilson were West African. Ten of these students were recruited to participate in this study: nine boys and one girl from Grades 9–12 (see Table 1). Six of the students were first-generation African immigrants, three were second generation, and one was 1.5 generation.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

Profile of West African Immigrant Students.

NAMES	AGE	GENDER	COUNTRY	ANGLO/FRANCO	GENERATION	GRADE
Ahmed	19	Male	Ghana	Anglophone	1st gen	12th
Elijah	18	Male	Ghana	Anglophone	1st gen	12th
Afam	18	Male	Nigeria	Anglophone	1st gen	11th
Daniel	17	Male	Nigeria	Anglophone	1st gen	11th
Mary	16	Female	Guinea	Francophone	1.5 gen	11th
Rashad	16	Male	USA (Mali)	Francophone	2nd gen	10th
Francois	18	Male	Burkina Faso	Francophone	1st gen	10th
Raheem	16	Male	USA	Anglophone/Francophone	2nd gen	10th
Kwabena	16	Male	Ghana	Anglophone	1st gen	9th
John	15	Male	USA (Nigeria)	Anglophone	2nd gen	9th

In this study, first generation refers to a person who migrated to the United States after the age of 12 (Harushimana et al. 2013); second generation refers to American-born children to at least one African-born parent; and 1.5 generation is defined as immigration by or before the age of 12 The study also includes nine teachers from different grades and content areas, and one guidance counselor (see Table 2). Overall, 20 WAISs, teachers, and counselors were recruited.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 2.

Profile of Teachers and Counselor.

PSEUDONYMS	GENDER	GENERATION	RACE/ETHNICITY	OCCUPATION
Ms. Nash	Female	U.S.-born	Black/African American	Teacher
Mr. Donovan	Male	U.S.-born	Black/Haitian American	Teacher
Mr. Luther	Male	Foreign-born	Black/Guyanese	Teacher
Mr. Evans	Male	Foreign-born	Black/Antiguan	Teacher
Ms. Lewis	Female	Foreign-born	Black/ Antiguan	Teacher
Ms. Hill	Female	Foreign-born	Black/Antiguan	Teacher
Ms. Lopez	Female	Foreign-born	Latinx (non- Black)/Dominican	Counselor
Mr. Lee	Male	Foreign-born	Asian/Chinese	Teacher
Ms. Tanner	Male	U.S.-born	white	Teacher
Mr. Russo	Male	U.S.-born	white/Italian	Teacher

Author’s Reflexivity

A crucial aspect of any study lies in the individual who conceptualizes it and how their identities and beliefs influence various aspects such as the research question, theoretical framework, and analysis employed within the study. As a Black individual born in West Africa, raised in New York City, and educated in its public school system, my positionality sparks discussions surrounding the insider/outsider dynamic and its influence on both my research process and outcomes. That is, my social identity characteristics and life experiences could be viewed as positioning me as part of the group whose experiences I am examining and could therefore lead to bias in my research. However, as stated by Kusow (2003),

We must not see the insider/outsider identities as predetermined roles but rather as a result of the nature of the research topic under investigation, the status characteristics and biographical particularities of both the researchers and the participant(s), and the local conditions in which the fieldwork takes place. (p. 598)

Simply being African and Black does not make me an expert on the lived experiences of my Black and African participants. Most of the participants in this study come from different African and Caribbean countries, with many customs and cultures that shape their existence and perceptions that I do not have knowledge of or experience in. My role as a critical researcher is as a subjective being entering the field with a value-laden orientation that influences the research, regardless of the extent of my reflexivity (Bailey & Fonow, 2015). Therefore, as I become aware of them, it is my duty to reflect on these thoughts, actions, reactions, and interactions within the field and with the data. Triangulation of data, analytic memos, and member checks were used to capture and understand disconfirming and alternative perceptions.

Findings

Symbolic Capital and Beneficial Treatment of WAISs

Through my observations and interviews, it became apparent that WAISs’ status as model minorities impacted how adults treated them. In an interview with Mary, a 1.5-generation Guinean junior, she admitted that while she often has the first or second highest grade in all assignments in her classes, she ranked third on an exam that she recently completed in her AP U.S. History class with Mr. Russo. When discussing what she thought cost her the number one and two positions on the exam, Mary claimed, “I will be honest, last marking period I did slack off. It has to do with the fact that I am taking advantage of the way people perceive me as a smart kid, so I am getting too comfortable.” Mary added that Mr. Russo “called her out” for socializing more than she often does and offered to help her study for the next exam.

Not only was Mary (and students like her) using classroom time however she saw fit or receiving help from teachers when she actively “slacked off,” but my data also showed that WAISs were excused and not penalized for their lack of classroom participation, and this lack of participation was not adequately addressed by teachers to understand possible reasons why these students were not participating. During classroom observations of my West African participants, it became evident that most of them rarely participated in class. Five out of the six first-generation students in this study at Wilson indicated that they minimally participated in class, and only if it was necessary. Teachers such as Mr. Evans, Ms. Lewis, Ms. Hill, and Mr. Tanner, and Ms. Lopez (the counselor) all emphasized that they hoped more newly arrived African students would speak up in class, because they could lose participation points, which could impact their grades negatively. When questioned about what they were doing to support their African students, especially their newly arrived ones, regarding participation in class, none of these teachers provided any resources, pedagogical practices or tools, or mechanisms to assist these students. Instead, they attributed the lack of participation to the students being newly arrived Africans and being shy or uncomfortable in the classroom.

Mr. Evans exemplified teachers’ overall responses regarding WAISs limited classroom participation. Using Elijah, one of his WAISs, as an example, Mr. Evans stated,

They [WAISs] come in and do what they gotta do. They do the work, they submit it, but participation is minimum or none, you have to actually call on them. Giving you an example. We had students paired up in AP Government . . . we are doing nominations and campaigns for government. One student was supposed to be the [campaign] manager, one was the candidate. So, Elijah happens to be the candidate, and the other the campaign manager. The campaign manager said everything [during the classroom presentation of the group assignment]. I don’t know if they worked together, put it together, but the campaign manager was given the task of doing the presentation, even if I’m sure Elijah contributed to it. . . . You know what, I think students like him don’t participate because they don’t feel, they haven’t adapted, they haven’t integrated, or they don’t like what they see in terms of the students’ behavior coming from somewhere else. . . . So I think just not wanting to be a part of it.

Mr. Evans eventually insisted that Elijah did not participate in class because of “shyness.” Mr. Evans’s assumption was that while Elijah did not speak during the presentation, he must have contributed to the preparation of the presentation itself, although he did not know if Elijah contributed to the assignment and, if so, in what capacity. Additionally, in saying that Elijah had not yet adapted to or integrated into the social milieu of the school, Mr. Evans referenced the idea that Elijah had yet to be “Americanized” and therefore had not adopted the disruptive behaviors of his peers. Interpreting Elijah’s lack of participation as his unwillingness to engage with his peers and become Americanized allowed Mr. Evans to disregard the fact that Elijah was not following class instructions. More important, Mr. Evans failed to address the issue that Elijah was not participating in class and that classroom participation and engagement with peers and teachers within the classroom were a necessary part of learning.

In all my time with Elijah (through interviews and hallway conversations about Ghana, Wilson, and college), I did not get a sense of shyness from him. Quite the contrary. Elijah had a confidence that could sometimes be interpreted as arrogance. He believed he was better than the students in the school, which is why he did not engage with them socially or in class. Later, I asked Elijah if his reluctance to participate in class stemmed from shyness; he insisted that he was not shy and that participation was not necessary, given his high grades.

During my observation at Wilson, the only WAISs in this study who voluntarily and regularly participated in class were newly arrived first-generation Ghanaian Kwabena, 1.5-generation Mary, and second-generation Rashad. For some first-generation students, their lack of participation was due to their limited proficiency in English, the newness of content and environment, or their attempt to avoid being ridiculed for having accents, as seen in past literature (Agyepong, 2013; Harushimana et al., 2013; Imoagene, 2017; Mthethwa-Sommers & Harushimana, 2016). Other WAISs believed that they did not have to participate because they had good grades and good classroom behavior (i.e., they did not disrupt class like other students did) and therefore would only participate when they had to.

Mary’s and Elijah's experiences demonstrated that teachers' perceptions of WAISs as intelligent and industrious translated into symbolic capital that certain students leveraged to their advantage, akin to the Asian students discussed by J. Lee and Zhou (2015). The prestige associated with the model minority stereotype provided West African students with access to resources and opportunities that could benefit them. However, the transformation of the model minority discourse into symbolic capital for West African students also contributes to mechanisms of inequality (Lewis & Diamond, 2015). Lewis and Diamond (2015) defined mechanism of inequality as

the many daily moments when schools and school personnel, intentionally or inadvertently, reward such “non-meritocratic” resources through extra reminders to turn homework in, encouragement to try a higher-level class, a gentle reminder to have a hall pass next time, or lighter sanctions for rule breaking add up. (p. 168)

In the case of WAISs, teachers displayed favoritism toward this group of students and consequently assisted them in ways that produced differential treatment between them and non-African students. For example, while Mr. Evans and other teachers made invalidated excuses for West African students such as Elijah who did not participate in class, they did not afford non-African students the same benefit of the doubt, instead criticizing and potentially penalizing them for the same lack of engagement in class. Because of their model minority status at Wilson, WAISs had access to teachers and counselors in ways that other students perhaps did not. Over time, these cumulative advantages could, and would, contribute to unequal access to resources, opportunities, and help for non-African students at Wilson.

WAISs Academic Achievement: Perceptions Versus Reality

Adults considered WAISs to be well behaved and high achieving, but further investigation of school documents told a different story. During interviews, teachers indicated that African students were well-behaved, particularly when compared with their “disruptive” African American peers. However, it was clear that while West African students were generally well behaved (e.g., being quiet and nonconfrontational with peers, teachers, and other adults), they were not academically high achieving. I asked teachers what they considered high achievement, and their answers ranged from a grade point average that was 80% to 90% or higher. Even though Wilson students’ GPAs of 75% or higher were publicly displayed on honor roll lists on both floors of the school, and most WAISs did not make it onto these lists each marking period, teachers in this study continued to see WAISs as high achievers. Out of approximately 40 WAISs at Wilson during the 2016–2017 academic year, only about 10 made the honor list during every report card release. A more accurate assessment of African student achievement would have shown these adults that (1) African students’ achievement varies, and (2) most African students are not high achievers by their own accounts of what they consider high achieving.

When I became aware that teachers’ views of WAISs’ grades did not coincide with these students’ GPAs, I brought it to their attention and inquired why they held such perceptions. Ms. Hill claimed, “I think that the reputation is just there. The ones who stand out, really stand out . . . I think that the reputation just precedes them.” Mr. Tanner stated, “I think the high proportion of African students among my very strongest students skewed my perception of the group as a whole. If I had to name my top five students over the past two years, three of them would be African.” Like Mr. Tanner, all teacher participants asserted that their highest achieving students over the years often included African students. The hypervisibility of a few high-achieving WAISs contributed to cementing and perpetuating the perception of West African students as academically successful students at Wilson. In addition, teachers' inability or unwillingness to adequately assess African immigrants’ academic achievement as generally average to below average even though their GPAs were all around the school speaks to how their views on and preferences for African students’ behavior influenced their assessment of these students.

Discussion

Findings from this article show that adults attributed WAISs achievement to a perceived “African culture” that values education and academic success. Moreover, they agreed that African-born students and African-raised students were better behaved and more academically successful than American-born and American-raised West African students. Adults perceived that as African students became more Americanized—meaning that they adopted more “Black American cultural traits”—they became less academically inclined. Adults’ claims that WAISs performed better than their non-African peers (particularly African Americans), their views about the generational differences in academic achievement and behavior, and their opposition to the African Americanization of African students further supported their perceptions around “African culture.” The data show that adults’ perceptions of WAISs as model minorities did not reflect WAISs GPAs and were therefore inaccurate.

Adults at Wilson feared that African youth would engage in the process of African Americanization, that is, these students would adopt African American/Black American cultural practices, values, norms, and behaviors. It is critical to note that the characteristics that teachers deemed “African American” were steeped in negative stereotypes (e.g., disobedient, unmotivated, having low educational aspirations) that they held about a portion of the African American population (i.e., low-income African Americans who live in New York City). Adults viewed African Americans as a monolith and associated them with negative racialized discourse of what being African American is. They perceived these stereotypical traits as endemic to this group.

African Americanization has been observed globally through the popularity of hip-hop music and culture, the adaptation of African American Vernacular English by non-African American individuals and communities, and the influence of African American style and aesthetics in fashion (Mocombe, 2015; Ntarangwi, 2009). Discussions about and the practice of African Americanization mostly characterize African American culture through the aforementioned language, music, and fashion: specifically, listening to hip-hop and rap music, dressing like the artists, and speaking African American Vernacular English—all of which are cultural expression that derives from low-income Black communities like that of Wilson. Unfortunately, these creative cultural expressions have been marketed through media and research as oppositional to academic success because somehow having baggy pants, for example, could prevent one from learning (e.g., see Davis, 2023; Fordham & Ogbu, 1986; Mocombe, 2015; Ogbu & Simons, 1998; Waters, 1994). In doing so, discussions about African American culture have ignored other major positive social, cultural, and political behaviors that have shaped their survival in the United States. This includes social activism, strong community support, high educational aspirations, expressive communication style, resiliency, adaptability, and many more. By ignoring important factors such as these, discussions about non-African Americans adopting African American cultural practices will continue to be based on stereotypical, surface level, and anti-Black understandings of what it means to be African American.

Furthermore, the negative perceptions of African Americans by Black Caribbean teachers at Wilson reveal the persistence of internalized anti-Black discourses and ideologies. In a study on the relationship among Africans, African Americans, and Afro-Caribbean people, Jackson and Cothran (2003) found that individuals from these groups held pervasive negative stereotypes about one another that included views of Africans as suffering from the effects of colonialism and war, African Americans as possessing a “slavery mentality,” and Caribbean people as apathetic. This perpetuation of negative stereotypes underscores the insidious nature of racism and colonialism, and its impact on people of African descent, as elucidated by Mills (1997), Fanon (2008), and Jackson and Cothran (2003). Fanon's (2008) concept of “epidermalization of inferiority” explains how colonial oppression has deeply ingrained beliefs of Black inferiority within the psyche of Black individuals, perpetuating harmful stereotypes and divisions even within the Black diaspora.

Teachers’ and counselors’ expectations of West African students and their academic abilities stemmed from their views on factors that they perceived to be associated with an idealized African culture. Their perceptions of African cultural values insinuated that there is a single African culture. “African” was then ethnicized or treated as an ethnicity with its own cultural values and practices, which is problematic because it overlooks the multitude of ethnic groups that exist on the continent. The ethnicizing of Africans provided adults with a way to differentiate between them and other Black students, particularly African Americans, in ways that positioned African Americans as inferior and thus justified their struggles (Pierre, 2004). This is the same method that was used at the onset of the model minority discourse in the 1960s, during which Asian immigrants and Asian Americans were grouped and assigned a single ethnic identity; they were promoted as a people with innate intelligence whose culture encourages hard work and values education (Kobayashi, 1999; S. J. Lee, 2009). This positioning of the well-mannered and obedient Asians was constructed to undercut and invalidate the loud and trouble-making African Americans during their quest for civil rights in the United States, thus making the model minority stereotype an anti-Black racial project.

As part of racial formation theory,

racial projects do both the ideological and the practical “work” of making [the links between structure and signification] and articulating the connection between them. A racial project is simultaneously an interpretation, representation, or explanation of racial identities and meanings, and an effort to organize and distribute resources (economic, political, cultural) along particular racial lines. (Omi & Winant, 2014, p. 125)

The model minority stereotype is an anti-Black racial project that advances the inferiority discourse and representation surrounding the African American community and culture. The racial ideologies about African Americans in our society are that they are racially inferior and have a culture that devalues education. Through multiple domains, including laws, policies, public debates, print media coverage, schools, and everyday interactions, these ideologies have been taken up as everyday “common sense” and have shaped societal interpretation and understanding of Black Americans and the economic, political, and cultural resources that they deserve. Because this racial project is embedded in our thinking that African Americans, resources afforded to them are in constant debate as to whether they deserve them or have earned them. Furthermore, this racial project has justified the underperformance and limited social mobility of African Americans while ignoring and sometimes omitting the impact of enslavement and racial segregation, unequal education, inadequate schools, and the many more factors that continue to shape African American lives (Agyepong, 2024).

Teachers’ and counselors’ use of culture to distinguish between African immigrants and African Americans, and to “other” the latter group in particular, speaks to the importance of cultural narratives in sustaining and perpetuating the model minority stereotype. Cultural narratives are stories that contribute to the formation of a collective consciousness—a set of shared values, beliefs, and ideas about a culture or society that are taken up as truth or facts. These shared beliefs are so heavily ingrained into our thoughts and ways of being that they often influence how we perceive ourselves, others, and the world. Thus, cultural narratives are used to explain everyday occurrences. The model minority stereotype is a cultural narrative predicated on the notion that those deemed model minorities have the “right” cultural values that result in successful outcomes for said groups (J. Lee & Zhou, 2015; S. Lee, 2009). These cultural values include being “more hardworking and more disciplined,” having “tight-knit families, respect[ing] their parents, delay[ing] gratification, mak[ing] sacrifices, and valu[ing] education more than other groups” (J. Lee & Zhou, 2015, p. 16).

Studies on the model minority stereotypes and Asian students have found that there is nothing particularly cultural about Asian students’ exceptionalism and that a multitude of factors contribute to the achievement of Asian students. Yet, the notion that Asians have an exceptional culture, and the model minority stereotype continue. Similarly, we see in this article that even though WAISs did not have the academic achievement to support the model minority claim, adults at Wilson still used cultural narratives about Africans and African immigrants to distinguish these students from other groups and position them as more academically successful and more desirable. Their use of culture to justify their perceived achievement of African students allowed for the hypervisibility of an exceedingly small number of WAISs who were academically successful. It ignored these hypervisible students’ hard work, the possibility of the impact of stereotype promise and symbolic capital to increase students’ achievement, and resources that students may have at their disposal at home or from their communities. More important, adults’ view of and reliance on “African cultural values” allowed them to harmfully overlook the low academic achievement of Wilson’s West African students and their academic needs, akin to the effect of the stereotype on low-achieving Asian students.

The positioning of African immigrant students as model minorities has impactful consequences for their socioemotional well-being. The stereotype ultimately renders them invisible, regardless of their achievement level, which could lead to feelings of neglect by adults and isolation from their peers. African students’ constant comparison to African Americans and the preferential treatment they receive could cause them to internalize the negative stereotypes of their African American counterparts, further exacerbating intraracial tensions between the two groups. Furthermore, African students might internalize the stereotype in ways that credit their achievement to external expectations rather than their own abilities and hard work, which could undermine their self-esteem. Finally, the stereotype could instill a deep fear of failure; African immigrant students may worry that any academic shortcoming would reflect poorly on their family, community, or just themselves. As we’ve seen in the case of Asian students, this fear could lead to perfectionism, anxiety, and reluctance to take risks or seek help when needed. To reiterate, although the model minority stereotype might seem positive all around, its socioemotional effects on African immigrant students could be complex and detrimental, particularly as it relates to unrealistic expectations, self-esteem struggles, and lack of support for individual and group needs.

Implications for Theory

The findings presented in this article have theoretical implications for examining the racialization of West African immigrants in the United States. Race is the most used descriptor for identifying oneself and others in the United States and has been used to sort human beings into categories, with meaning ascribed to said categories (Bonilla-Silva, 1997; Feagin, 2013; Leonardo, 2013; Winant, 2007). Racialization, then, is “the extension of racial meaning to a previously racially unclassified relationship, social practice, or group” (Omi & Winant, 2014, p. 111). Scholars have argued that the Black population in the United States is perceived by non-Blacks, especially whites, as a homogenous group (Awokoya, 2012; Humphries, 2009; Waters, 1994). Therefore, the placement of Black immigrants under the Black racial category renders them invisible (Arthur, 2000; Bryce-Laporte, 1972; Kiramba et al., 2020; Waters, 1994). This idea is based on the argument that being the largest representation of Blackness in the United States, African Americans are often mistakenly considered a racial group (Black) instead of an ethnic group (African American). This then assumes that people who are phenotypically Black (racial category) are also African American (ethnic identity).

This study revealed that examination and analysis of the racialization of African immigrants should, in addition to their Black racial identity, take into consideration their positioning as a Black model minority group. Yes, sub-Saharan Africans are racialized as Black, but as this article shows, the perceptions and treatment of this group were heavily influenced by their identity as Africans. Thus, the racialization of Africans in America should be explored through Claire Jean Kim’s (1999) racial triangulation theory. Kim’s (1999) racial triangulation theorizes not only that racial stratification in the United States is based on who is inferior and superior, but also that there are multiple dimensions to how racial groups are positioned in relation to each other and the dominant group (i.e., whites). Speaking specifically of Asian Americans, Kim (1999) posited that they are triangulated vis-à-vis Blacks and whites on a field of racial positions with two dimensions: the superior/inferior and foreigner/insider axes. On the horizontal superior/inferior axis, Asian Americans are valorized and lauded as superior to Black people on cultural-racial grounds to dominate both Asians and Blacks, but especially Blacks. However, on the vertical foreigner/insider axis, whites have constructed Asian Americans as “immutably foreign and unassimilable with whites on cultural and/or racial grounds in order to ostracize them from the body politic and civic membership” (Kim, 1999, p. 107). Thus, racial triangulation posits that in the field of racial positioning, “a racial group can be rated high on one dimension and low on another” (Xu & Lee, 2013, p. 1366). Ultimately, the racial positioning of Asians and Blacks pits both groups against each other, all while maintaining and reinforcing white dominance and privilege.

African immigrants, like Asians, are triangulated vis-à-vis whites and African Americans in the field of racial positions. Africans are not only racialized as Black but also viewed as different from and more favorable than African Americans, therefore placing Africans as “superior” to African Americans on cultural and ethnic grounds—as we see with teachers at Wilson High School. The overemphasis on culture as the main source of academic ability by teachers could force African students to feel that they must not only maintain but also highlight a foreign (i.e., African) identity regardless of their generational status, while minimizing their other identities, particularly a Black American identity, for those who are American born or American raised. Although being foreign and not “Americanized” might be beneficial in schools such as Wilson, being Black and an immigrant does have long-term sociopolitical consequences for African immigrants as a group. In a society that demeans Blackness and disfavors foreignness when attached to non-white bodies, to occupy both identities could be used to hinder social progress for the group.

For example, research shows that Black immigrants, including Africans, are “charged with immigration-related crimes at a far higher rate than non-Black foreigners . . . [and] experience significant anti-Black racism in the criminal justice system, the labor force, and beyond” (Lindsay, 2015, p. 25). Furthermore, the valorization of African immigrants through the Black model minority label makes it difficult to combat the very struggles imposed on them because of their Black and African identities. Because the label is designed and implemented as a divisive tool between Black immigrants and African Americans, it stifles Black progress, and thus Black liberation, all while maintaining the racial order with Blacks at the bottom. Overall, theories on the racialization of African immigrants should consider the multiple dimensions that shape this group's incorporation into American society.

Implications for Policy and Practice

Research has shown that teachers' perceptions of students’ behavior and academic abilities are shaped by their perceptions of students’ racial, ethnic, and class identities (Alexander et al., 1987; Downey & Pribesh, 2004; McGrady & Reynolds, 2013; Rist, 2007). Teachers, particularly white teachers, have less favorable and more negative perceptions of Black students’ behavior and academic ability, which has contributed to the achievement differences between Blacks and other students, particularly white and Asian students (Ferguson, 2000; Lewis, 2003; Lewis & Diamond, 2015; McGrady & Reynolds, 2013; Tenenbaum & Ruck, 2007). In recent years, there has been a push for ethnoracial matching between students and teachers because it is likely to have a favorable impact on the school experience of Black and other minority students (Banerjee, 2019; Cherng & Halpin, 2016; McGrady & Reynolds, 2013; Milner, 2006; Redding, 2019). Although studies have been mixed on the effectiveness of ethnoracial matching and minority students’ academic achievement (Banerjee, 2018; Redding, 2019), the favorable impact of ethnoracial matching for Black and minority students has been attributed to Black and minority teachers’ having cultural and multicultural awareness and sensitivity, being more relatable, and being a role model to students (Cherng & Halpin, 2016; Milner, 2006; Redding, 2019).

Currently, scholarship on the impact of ethnoracial student–teacher matching has ignored the diversities that exist within racial and ethnic groups in the United States and how stereotypes such as the model minority discourse shape teachers’ understanding of students and their academic performance. There are cultural aspects and differences, real or perceived, that studies on ethnoracial matchings have not considered. For example, being Latinx does not mean that a first-generation Mexican student can or will relate to a third-generation Cuban American teacher. In the case of this article, being a Black American student with ancestry rooted in the transatlantic slave trade does not mean that they can or will relate to a first-generation Black immigrant teacher, and vice versa.

Findings at Wilson show the damaging perceptions that teachers have of African American students and, in contrast, their positive perceptions and favorable treatment of African students, especially given that most of the teachers in this study were racially Black. This indicates that students’ immigrant and American identities also play a role in the ways that students are perceived by teachers. This implies that although an increase in diverse teaching staff is very much needed, matching teachers and students based on race or ethnicity alone will not achieve the intended goal of providing minority students with positively effective teachers. Perhaps ethnoracial matching would be more advantageous if combined with culturally relevant teacher training programs that emphasize culturally relevant pedagogy in K–12 schools (see Ladson-Billings, 1995; Prater & Devereaux, 2012). If we seek to combat anti-Blackness within the education system and among our teachers, we must examine the anti-Black teacher education systems that train them.

Conclusion

The perception of African immigrants as a model minority group has permeated the public sphere in recent years. This study highlights whether teachers and counselors at Wilson High School perceived and treated WAISs through this lens. Throughout this article, I have illustrated that teachers and counselors perceived WAISs as a well-behaved group that does not fail. Adults at Wilson emphasized the importance of maintaining one’s cultural identity; they agreed that upholding one’s “African culture” and rejecting African Americanization seemed to be more of a factor in WAISs’ achievement and behavior. The data, however, showed that adults’ perceptions of WAISs as high achievers did not match students’ GPAs and that the academic performance of WAISs as a group was grossly overlooked by teachers. Findings also revealed that while teachers at Wilson held positive views of Africans and their “culture,” they held troubling views of African American students and what they perceived as African American culture. Implications from the findings indicate the need for further exploration of the racialization of African immigrants that includes an emphasis on their growing positioning as model minorities. The findings also complicate ethnoracial student–teacher matching and ask policymakers and researchers to take into consideration students’ and teachers’ immigrant identities as well.