There were those who quested the values of Black studies in the 1960's when there was nothing in the British curriculum for which represented the values of real British history, real history of Britain which included what the peoples of its empire contributed to its welfare; for others and myself who were and are still seeking to bring about some meaningful balance to educate the doubters, I regarded what the "usual suspects" and those who gave them airtime as brutal and negative, we have come a long way since and I found the programme quite provocative and would like to ask the Producer whether this was the best attempt in seeking to add further negatives to a progressive attempt. While I have no doubt that we have a long way to go, no one would dare take such chance in placing such a negative slant on the teaching of the history of the Holocaust, because the Jewish population will rightly hammer the Beeb.
Why then was this programme made when there are so many other real issues to deal with? There is never smoke without fire, let's not become the reactors to what the authorities might be flagging, but let's make it know, that through foresite, we can see when others are wanting to be awfully provocative.
Yes there are teachers Black and White who find difficulties in teaching the history about slavery, but there are good and bad ways of teaching history overall, as there are good and bad ways of making programmes. How on earth would we ever achieve a balance in this modern age where some give lip service to global issues, diversity and equality of opportunities? Why always go to the "The usual suspects" if we wish to mould a better future in educating a nation whose history was and still is onesided?
I do hope as many people will listen to the programme as Martin suggested and be sensible to read between the lines. When the chips are down, we are always the first to be placed on the firing line; what the programme way pointing to is the question of the funding, hoping that local authorities in this climate of economic downturn, will turn on the Blacks again to muddy the waters by cutting any funding they give for the efforts of Black History Month.
Times are fast changing, had Britain not disowned those whose efforts helped to build its Empire, there would have been no difference between Black and White history, sadly there was no Black in the Union Jack.
Don't hide behind the doors, let's deal with the negatives of the programme and hopefully put the authorities in their place. It is an insult to the many of us who teach Black History and those who understand the reasons and values of Black History Month.
Finally, the correct thing must be to make Black history a full part of the National curriculum, to set courses for those who have difficulties in teaching it for whatever reason they choose to give.
Alex
From: Martin Spafford <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Sun, 26 September, 2010 15:45:47
Subject: 'Black History Month & The Usual Suspects'
This Radio 4 programme was aired a couple of days ago and is available to listen online for the next 5 days.
BASA members will find it very interesting...
Here's the accompanying blurb:
Recalling her own experience as the only black kid in her Newport classroom in the eighties Josie d'Arby looks at the introduction of Black History Month into British schools and asks whether it has been a help or hindrance to the way children understand the past and to how black people relate to the way history is taught in our classrooms. Has the focus of BHM changed much over 23 years? Why is there an emphasis on American figures like Martin Luther King and Muhammed Ali? And what about other groups who feel marginalised by not having time dedicated to them?
Speaking with teachers, pupils, parents, politicians and academics, Josie finds out what Black History Month means and meets some unlikely critics and supporters.
Producer Rachael Kiddey.
