Is teaching racist? No more than Oxford University or 'Mastermind’

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/alasdair-palmer/8470027/Is-teaching-racist-No-more-than-Oxford-University-or-Mastermind.html

In this article Alasdair Palmer argues that we are too quick with throwing around accusations of racial discrimination. The Guardian called the profession of teacher an ‘institutionally racist’ one, because of the fact that black people make up 2 percent of the population while they only provide 0.7 percent of the head teachers. Palmer says it is only logical that “the proportion of a particular ethnic group in a particular position does not mirror that group's share of the population as a whole”. The failure of some ethnical groups is caused by different factors, in particular the sorts of things a child is exposed to, or not exposed to, before the age of seven. He argues it is wrong to benefit people because of ethnic or social class instead of qualities. Doing so destroys England’s top institutions.

In my opinion it is wrong indeed to benefit people because they belong to a specific ethnic group, social class or because of their gender. When a person is allowed entry into a top university it should be because he proved himself worthy. If a person is hired for a certain position, it should be because he’s the best candidate for the job. Like Palmer says in his article; no one is complaining about the fact that there are no white people in Britain’s Olympic sprinting team, simply because the fastest sprinters do not happen to be white. It’s too easy to explain data showing a particular group doesn’t mirror its overall population in a certain position as racial discrimination. It’s one of the possible explanations, but it shouldn’t be presented as a fact if the other options aren’t ruled out, yet.