Somalis in the United Kingdom received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
This article was nominated for deletion on 8 September 2008. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Index
|
|||||
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Middayexpress, can I ask why you keep removing the sourced claim that the Somali Youth Development Resource Centre is credited with helping significantly improve Somalis' GCSE performance in Camden? That seems an important thing to note in the context of a discussion of GSCE results to me. Cordless Larry ( talk) 18:11, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
Agree. The Economist also provides an explanation for why the centre was established, which Middayexpress has also removed. BrumEduResearch ( talk) 19:26, 23 May 2015 (UTC) Cordless, it's his foundation, so he's certainly very reliable on its functions. The crediting part is perhaps a bit weird, though, so I've attributed instead to the GCSE recognition ceremony [2]. Middayexpress ( talk) 20:06, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
I've had a longstanding wish to get this article to Good Article status. As far as I know, there are currently only two articles on ethnic groups in the UK that have this status: British Cypriots and British Bangladeshi. I think this article has clear potential to be the third. There has clearly been a lot of discussion and disagreement on this talk page in the past. Middayexpress has added much that is of value to the article, but it's no secret that I think they have also demonstrated an unwillingness to observe WP:NPOV. It now seems that Midday has quit Wikipedia. I don't want to use this as an excuse to bulldoze through my own preferred version of the article (particularly since Midday and me are overwhelmingly the most active editors of the article), but I do see it as an opportunity to consider the article's content afresh and to push on towards GA status. I will be bold and make some fairly major additions, but anyone should feel to revert me, and/or raise issues here (and also make your own edits, of course). One thing that we clearly need to tackle before nominating for GA status is the WP:UNDUE template in the education section, so I will draft some replacement text for this section for discussion. In the meantime, I am going to add coverage of the gender distribution of the community to the demographics section of the article, which should hopefully be uncontroversial. Cordless Larry ( talk) 06:43, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
Commentators and policymakers have expressed concern about the poor educational performance of Somali pupils in British schools. [1] [2] [3] No nationwide statistics are available on the number and educational attainment of Somali pupils in the UK. This is because "Somali" is not a tick-box option in official ethnicity classifications, [4] and Somali pupils are therefore subsumed within the broad "Black African" category. [5] Nonetheless, some local education authorities in Engand make use of so-called "extended ethnicity codes" in order to capture data on more specific groups of pupils, including Somalis. Collating data from local authorities that collect this data, the Institute for Public Policy Research has published statistics on GCSE performance by extended ethnicity code. According to these statistics, in the school year 2010-11, the proportion of Somali pupils being awarded five or more GCSEs at grades A* to C, including in mathematics and English, was 23.7 percentage points below the average for all groups of 56.9 per cent. [6] Feyisa Demie of the London Borough of Lambeth's Research and Statistics Unit has used language spoken at home as a proxy for ethnicity, using language data on pupils whose first language is not English, which has been collected in England since 2007. His analysis shows that of the 2,748 pupils classified as Black African and speaking Somali at home taking GCSEs in 2012, 47 per cent gained five or more A*-C grades, compared to 58 per cent of all Black African students and a national average for all pupils of 59 per cent. [7]
Demie and colleagues have also analysed data from London local authorities that use extended ethnicity codes. They note that "evidence in London shows a pattern of continuous underachievement of Somali children compared to the national average of White British, African, Caribbean, Indian and other ethnic minority groups", and that Somalis pupils are the lowest attaining group at Key Stage 2, Key Stage 3 and GCSE level in a number of local authorities. They present an average figure for 10 London local authorities, showing that only 34 per cent of Somali pupils gained five or more A*-C GCSEs in 2006. [8] The average for Somalis in schools in 28 London local authorities was 43 per cent. [9] There was marked variation in these pupils' performance across London. In one local authority, no Somali pupils were awarded five GCSEs at grades A*-C, but in five other local authorities, the proportion achieving this benchmark was between 52 per cent and 69 per cent. [10]
A number of explanations have been offered for the relatively poor performance of Somali pupils in British schools. These include the fact that many Somalis enter the British education system late due to their arrival as refugees and have had their education interrupted, stereotyping and a lack of cultural awareness on the part of school staff, an inability of parents to offer sufficient support due to lack of knowledge of the system and lack of maternal literacy, poverty and overcrowding in Somali homes, and a lack of role models. [8] [11] [12] [13] Lack of English language ability is a key factor. In the London Borough of Lambeth, around 87 per cent of Somali pupils are not fluent in English. [14]
Significant improvements in the performance of Somali pupils have been observed in some London boroughs. In September 2000, Somali community groups in conjunction with Camden Council, police and the voluntary sector established the Somali Youth Development Resource Centre in order to provide advice, information and activities for Somali youngsters, with the aim of promoting educational achievement, after only one Somali pupil gained five good GCSEs in the borough that year. [2] [15] The centre is credited with helping significantly improve Somalis' GCSE performance. [2] The Camden and Tower Hamlets local authorities reported that the performance of their Somali pupils was comparable with the overall student population in those boroughs in the school year 2011-12. [16]
References
OK. Understood. BrumEduResearch ( talk) 19:16, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
Levels of education amongst Somali-born adults in the UK are low relative to many other foreign-born groups and to the British-born population. [1] [2] [3] Analysis of Labour Force Survey data by the Institute for Public Policy Research, published in 2008, shows that in 2006/07, 48 per cent of the working-age Somali-born population of the UK had no qualifications. 6 per cent had GCSEs at grades A*-C or equivalent foreign qualifications, and 19 per cent had A-levels or their equivalent. The remaining 27 per cent were classified as having "other qualifications". The IPPR note that it is often difficult to classify foreign qualifications, and hence a higher proportion of foreign-born populations are classified in this category than the UK-born population. When immigrants' qualifications are classified as "other", they note, they are often of a high level. [4]
According to the 2011 Census, out of a total of 89,022 Somali-born residents aged 16 and over in the UK, 55 per cent had completed up to a lower secondary education ( ISCED Level 2), 25 per cent had completed up to an upper secondary education (ISCED Level 3), 20 per cent had completed up to the first stage of tertiary education (ISCED Level 5), and 0.3 per cent had completed up to the second stage of tertiary education (ISCED Level 6). By comparison, 29 per cent of all foreign-born residents aged 16 and over had completed up to a lower secondary education, 24 per cent had completed up to an upper secondary education, 46 per cent had completed up to the first stage of tertiary education, and 0.9 per cent had completed up to the second stage of tertiary education. [5]
According to the IPPR, the relatively low level of education amongst Somali migrants in the UK can be attributed to their migratory history and the situation in their country of origin. They note that, like many other refugee and migrant communities, early Somali migrants tend to be relatively well educated, but later arrivals, including family members of early migrants, are less well qualified. Labour migrants arriving prior to 1988 were generally literate in either English or Arabic, although few had completed secondary education. Many of the initial wave of refugees from the Somali Civil War who started to arrive from 1988 onwards were well educated, with many possessing secondary education and some holding degrees. According to the IPPR, the educational profile of Somali migrants subsequently changed again, because of the impact of the civil war on education in Somalia. In the north, including Somaliland, the majority of schools in urban areas were destroyed, along with higher education institutions. In the south, "education has been completely destroyed by the fighting". While some schools have been rebuilt and have reopened, the IPPR reports that "younger Somalis who have come directly from Somalia will not have attended university and are likely to have had a very interrupted education or none at all". [4]
References
Muir2012
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).economist.com
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Great work Larry. It balances now too. I think I will move on to other communities now. It only took 4 months. :-~ BrumEduResearch ( talk) 06:49, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
Soupforone, regarding these additions, I think some detail on how Somalis have been classified in censuses is welcome, but I wonder if this is too much detail for this article. That section is becoming very long, and not all of the material you added concerns Somalis in the United Kingdom. For example, is this article the best place to discuss the classification of Somalis in the 1962 British Kenya census, or would that material be better covered in the main Somalis article or at Somalis in Kenya? Cordless Larry ( talk) 12:07, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
The "sometimes" denoted that BME is a different designation - it is an umbrella term for non-European populations. The government and Scottish Council of Jewish Communities note this. Anyway, the more recent separate ethnic designation for Somalis is explained on page 9 [10]. Soupforone ( talk) 04:47, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
The government links mean "African" specifically, and they indicate as much too. This designation is based on the UK census, where there is no "Black African" tick-box. There is instead an "African" designation under "Black/African/Caribbean/Black British", which some individuals as disparate as Sri Lankans and Italians also selected since they too may have emigrated directly from the continent [13]. The government makes this "African" designation clearer here, on page 24-> [14]. As regards the separate "Somali" category, it is not the same thing as the extended codes. The government link indicates that the London borough authorities aggregated the data via the LERN -- "Thanks are also due to The London Educational Research Network (LERN) which represents the 32 London boroughs. LERN played a key role in bringing together Somali pupil data which was collected separately by the different local authorities in Greater London." [15] Therefore, the text should actually indicate: "Consequently, Somali student performance data has often been aggregated under a broader "African" category. However, in order to more effectively monitor pupil attainment, London local authorities through the aegis of the London Educational Research Network have in recent years started processing achievement data for Somali students under a separate "Somali" ethnic category." Soupforone ( talk) 03:53, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
I also made some changes to the paragraph on write-in responses to the census ethnicity question. The 103,000 figure is a 2013 estimate, not from the 2011 census, and refers to the total number of UK residents born in Somalia, not the total number of people with Somali ethnicity. We don't know the latter because we don't know how many Somalis ticked the Arab, Black African, or other options, rather than writing in Somali. I also removed the line "The remaining Somali respondents selected the "Arab" tick-box under "Other ethnic group"", as we don't know what box they would have ticked. Cordless Larry ( talk) 09:10, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
What you appear to be referring to are the extended codes. These are optional, utilized by only some institutions in England, and not the same thing as the primary classification. As the government link explains, the primary classification is based on the actual UK census, which only has an "African" designation. There is no "Black African" heading or subheading. Also, the 2011 UK Census recorded 99,484 Somalia-born residents in England, 1,886 in Wales, 1,591 in Scotland, and 88 in Northern Ireland. That is 103,049 residents i.e., it's where the 103,000 rounded government figure actually originates. The total Somalia-born resident population gives an idea of the proportional representation of the various census entries. As regards the "Arab" tick-box, while we can't be sure of the individual identities of the tickers, it is clear from the comparative figures that a majority of Somalia-born individuals indeed selected it. Only 42,934 individuals wrote in "Somali" and "Somalilander" under the African heading, which is over 60,000 persons less than the 103,000 total Somalia-born residents. The write-in responses of the Somali and other potential Arab respondents total 126,224 according to the National Association of British Arabs. When this figure is subtracted from the 404,207 total of Arab state-born individuals, it gives 277,983, which is quite close to the 240,545 figure for persons that actually ticked the "Arab" box. Therefore, most of the Somali and other potential Arab respondents who did not use the write-in responses indeed appear to have selected the "Arab" box per the NABA [16]. Soupforone ( talk) 04:18, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
I understand, but I'm aware of the difference between nationality and ethnicity. The calculations are actually the NABA's (404,207 - 126,224 = 277983; 277983 - 240,545 = 37,438). It explains why it used the countries of origin:
If only 51,724 individuals indicated "Somali" and "Somalilander" in the various write-in entries, that still leaves at least several tens of thousands of residents that did not use the write-in entries but instead ticked a box(es). Given the NABA's calculations, the most likely box is indeed clearly the "Arab" tick box. The number of "Arab" tickers could not reach anywhere near the indicated 240,545 total without a substantial number of Somali tickers since they constitute the largest Arab-born population per the NABA [18]. That is why, after taking into consideration the write-in entries, it puts a ceiling of ~37,439 for those who do not identify themselves as Arabs but were born within Arab countries. Soupforone ( talk) 03:39, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
I realize that's the purpose of the optional extended codes. However, the government link doesn't indicate that the separate categorization it is referring to is an extended code. It instead alludes to aggregation by the London borough authorities and via the LERN specifically. Anyway, with regard to the main designation, alternate phrasing is necessary to make it clear that while the "African" or "Black African" category is apparently the same, certain government authorities refer to it in accordance with the "African" census box whereas some other institutions utilize the latter designation [19]. So something like -- "Consequently, Somali students are often aggregated into a broader "African" or "Black African" category in pupil performance data." Soupforone ( talk) 03:56, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, but it's an official government document ("First Published March 2008 by Lambeth Research and Statistics Unit"). That aside, asserting that the institutional designation is "Black African" is already focusing on the precise mechanics, and mistakenly at that. The designation is actually "African" or "Black African". This does seem relevant since the government link explains that this lack of appropriate classification for this population at the national level is part of the problem -- "To date it has been difficult to draw generalised conclusions from research on Somali educational achievement as the lack of appropriate categorisation at a national level has made it difficult to accurately establish the relative achievement of Somali pupils compared to English/Scottish/Welsh and other ethnic groups." [20] With that noted, more accurate wording would be -- "This is because there is a lack of appropriate categorisation of Somalis at a national level, and "Somali" is not a tick-box option in official ethnicity classifications. Consequently, Somali students have often been aggregated into a broader "African" or "Black African" category in pupil performance data." Soupforone ( talk) 04:06, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
I work with school ethnicity stats every day and Larry is right, the category is black African.-- BrumEduResearch ( talk) 00:13, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
Cordless Larry, the designations in that link are just ethnicity monitoring advice (also note that it is "Black – African" not "Black African" since their is no such option on the national census). What designations the institutions and boroughs themselves ultimately use are at their discretion and are recorded in their respective management information systems. The link itself indicates this:
With that said, the Bradford schools use the "African" designation per their official management information system [21]. There are many other institutions that similarly use their own variations on the census categories, such as the Catholic Education Service which represents 2300 Catholic schools and universities in England and Wales and uses a "Black – African or African" designation per its official management information system (p.24 - [22]). A more accurate wording would therefore be: "Consequently, Somali students have often been aggregated into a broader "African" or "Black – African" category in pupil performance data."
As regards the NABA, when it indicates that "as can be seen, many people responded to the question in terms of a refined categorisation, and specifically those Arabs from North Africa and Somalia... we cannot be sure how many of the individual identities have also responded in the general ‘Arab’ box so there may well be some overlap in these figures", it is referring to national identities. This is established in the first phrase, from the fact that only one box can be ticked per individual, and through its calculations involving the total number of British Arabs per country of origin (404,207). What the NABA is saying is that while some wrote in ethnicities whereas others ticked the Arab box, there is overlap in that it classifies all Arab state-born individuals as Arabs. Anyway, this is perhaps a subtle point so your phrasing seems adequate. Soupforone ( talk) 04:35, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
Cordless Larry, I do concur that the Bradford link shouldn't be used as a source for the "African" designation. I linked to it here to show that some other institutions utilize that designation. I think the other government link that is already cited in the same sentence should be used there instead. Also, are you okay with the National Association's official population estimate for Somalia-born Arabs? Because you only mentioned the 'overlap' phrase above, and I agreed with your rewording to correct for ambiguity. The population figure is from the census. I'm also confused as to why the other NABA phrase was removed since it basically indicates what you did above that we don't know how many Somalis ticked the Arab box. Do you know of a specific number of tickers, or do you still agree that we don't know? The phrasing goes "the National Association of British Arabs (NABA) indicates that "many people responded to the question in terms of a refined categorisation, and specifically those Arabs from North Africa and Somalia", but notes that "we cannot be sure how many of the individual identities have also responded in the general 'Arab' box"." I agree that the "also" makes the phrase somewhat equivocal, but this ambiguity can be corrected with an ellipsis or paraphrase -- "the National Association of British Arabs (NABA) indicates that "many people responded to the question in terms of a refined categorisation, and specifically those Arabs from North Africa and Somalia", but notes that it is uncertain how many of these individuals responded in the general 'Arab' box". Soupforone ( talk) 05:14, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Cordless Larry, you're right that the census is apparently statutory. The government does though appear to provide some leeway in that regard to the boroughs and institutions. It uses "African" in some of its guidance handbooks, like on the p.31 [23]. In that guide the government enumerates various African countries, such as Somalia, Sudan and Algeria. It therefore seems that you were correct about the government's loose use of the "African" designation. How's about this wording then? -- "Consequently, Somali students have often been aggregated into a more general "African" or "Black – African" category in pupil performance data." Soupforone ( talk) 03:46, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
The government doesn't appear to classify populations in any specific way. Individuals can therefore select any ethnicity on the national census. The government explains this by pointing out that "ethnicity is subjective: a person should self-assign his or her own ethnic group... while other people may view an individual as having a distinct ethnic identity, the individual's view of their own identity takes priority." As such, how the population self-identifies is prioritized. The government also takes into consideration key criteria as to what actually constitutes an ethnic group. These "features that help to define ethnic group are as follows : a shared history; a common cultural tradition; a common geographical origin; descent from common ancestors; a common language; a common religion; and forming a distinct group within a larger community". [24]
With that established, some boroughs do seem to use the "African" designation for the category whereas others use the "Black – African" designation. However, this is apparently per the government's own guidance handbooks, which suggest either designation. The governmental guide above uses "African" for most African populations, including some Arab world groups from Somalia, Algeria and Sudan - p.32 [25]. Here is another governmental guide that also suggests the "African" designation for the category - p.18 [26]. With that said, how's about -- "Consequently, Somali students have often been aggregated into a broader "African" or "Black – African" category in pupil performance data"? This wording seems to indicate well the designations. Soupforone ( talk) 03:29, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
Cordless Larry, please toggle to the pages 31-32. It indicates there that the coding designation is "African", and the bit on self-classification by children and their parents is specified there as well. On the adjacent page, it has Somalia, Sudan, Algeria and various other African populations under that [30]. Soupforone ( talk) 03:19, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
I understand, but it seems more intricate. As regards that codeset, one of the England government department's guides suggests the "African" category designation for most African populations, including some Arab world groups from Somalia, Sudan and Algeria -- pages 31-32 [32]. The Wales department as well apparently. This is why I suggest the wording above to reflect this actuality. Soupforone ( talk) 03:27, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Somalis in the United Kingdom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 12:09, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 11 external links on Somalis in the United Kingdom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:46, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
Somalis in the United Kingdom received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
This article was nominated for deletion on 8 September 2008. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Index
|
|||||
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Middayexpress, can I ask why you keep removing the sourced claim that the Somali Youth Development Resource Centre is credited with helping significantly improve Somalis' GCSE performance in Camden? That seems an important thing to note in the context of a discussion of GSCE results to me. Cordless Larry ( talk) 18:11, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
Agree. The Economist also provides an explanation for why the centre was established, which Middayexpress has also removed. BrumEduResearch ( talk) 19:26, 23 May 2015 (UTC) Cordless, it's his foundation, so he's certainly very reliable on its functions. The crediting part is perhaps a bit weird, though, so I've attributed instead to the GCSE recognition ceremony [2]. Middayexpress ( talk) 20:06, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
I've had a longstanding wish to get this article to Good Article status. As far as I know, there are currently only two articles on ethnic groups in the UK that have this status: British Cypriots and British Bangladeshi. I think this article has clear potential to be the third. There has clearly been a lot of discussion and disagreement on this talk page in the past. Middayexpress has added much that is of value to the article, but it's no secret that I think they have also demonstrated an unwillingness to observe WP:NPOV. It now seems that Midday has quit Wikipedia. I don't want to use this as an excuse to bulldoze through my own preferred version of the article (particularly since Midday and me are overwhelmingly the most active editors of the article), but I do see it as an opportunity to consider the article's content afresh and to push on towards GA status. I will be bold and make some fairly major additions, but anyone should feel to revert me, and/or raise issues here (and also make your own edits, of course). One thing that we clearly need to tackle before nominating for GA status is the WP:UNDUE template in the education section, so I will draft some replacement text for this section for discussion. In the meantime, I am going to add coverage of the gender distribution of the community to the demographics section of the article, which should hopefully be uncontroversial. Cordless Larry ( talk) 06:43, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
Commentators and policymakers have expressed concern about the poor educational performance of Somali pupils in British schools. [1] [2] [3] No nationwide statistics are available on the number and educational attainment of Somali pupils in the UK. This is because "Somali" is not a tick-box option in official ethnicity classifications, [4] and Somali pupils are therefore subsumed within the broad "Black African" category. [5] Nonetheless, some local education authorities in Engand make use of so-called "extended ethnicity codes" in order to capture data on more specific groups of pupils, including Somalis. Collating data from local authorities that collect this data, the Institute for Public Policy Research has published statistics on GCSE performance by extended ethnicity code. According to these statistics, in the school year 2010-11, the proportion of Somali pupils being awarded five or more GCSEs at grades A* to C, including in mathematics and English, was 23.7 percentage points below the average for all groups of 56.9 per cent. [6] Feyisa Demie of the London Borough of Lambeth's Research and Statistics Unit has used language spoken at home as a proxy for ethnicity, using language data on pupils whose first language is not English, which has been collected in England since 2007. His analysis shows that of the 2,748 pupils classified as Black African and speaking Somali at home taking GCSEs in 2012, 47 per cent gained five or more A*-C grades, compared to 58 per cent of all Black African students and a national average for all pupils of 59 per cent. [7]
Demie and colleagues have also analysed data from London local authorities that use extended ethnicity codes. They note that "evidence in London shows a pattern of continuous underachievement of Somali children compared to the national average of White British, African, Caribbean, Indian and other ethnic minority groups", and that Somalis pupils are the lowest attaining group at Key Stage 2, Key Stage 3 and GCSE level in a number of local authorities. They present an average figure for 10 London local authorities, showing that only 34 per cent of Somali pupils gained five or more A*-C GCSEs in 2006. [8] The average for Somalis in schools in 28 London local authorities was 43 per cent. [9] There was marked variation in these pupils' performance across London. In one local authority, no Somali pupils were awarded five GCSEs at grades A*-C, but in five other local authorities, the proportion achieving this benchmark was between 52 per cent and 69 per cent. [10]
A number of explanations have been offered for the relatively poor performance of Somali pupils in British schools. These include the fact that many Somalis enter the British education system late due to their arrival as refugees and have had their education interrupted, stereotyping and a lack of cultural awareness on the part of school staff, an inability of parents to offer sufficient support due to lack of knowledge of the system and lack of maternal literacy, poverty and overcrowding in Somali homes, and a lack of role models. [8] [11] [12] [13] Lack of English language ability is a key factor. In the London Borough of Lambeth, around 87 per cent of Somali pupils are not fluent in English. [14]
Significant improvements in the performance of Somali pupils have been observed in some London boroughs. In September 2000, Somali community groups in conjunction with Camden Council, police and the voluntary sector established the Somali Youth Development Resource Centre in order to provide advice, information and activities for Somali youngsters, with the aim of promoting educational achievement, after only one Somali pupil gained five good GCSEs in the borough that year. [2] [15] The centre is credited with helping significantly improve Somalis' GCSE performance. [2] The Camden and Tower Hamlets local authorities reported that the performance of their Somali pupils was comparable with the overall student population in those boroughs in the school year 2011-12. [16]
References
OK. Understood. BrumEduResearch ( talk) 19:16, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
Levels of education amongst Somali-born adults in the UK are low relative to many other foreign-born groups and to the British-born population. [1] [2] [3] Analysis of Labour Force Survey data by the Institute for Public Policy Research, published in 2008, shows that in 2006/07, 48 per cent of the working-age Somali-born population of the UK had no qualifications. 6 per cent had GCSEs at grades A*-C or equivalent foreign qualifications, and 19 per cent had A-levels or their equivalent. The remaining 27 per cent were classified as having "other qualifications". The IPPR note that it is often difficult to classify foreign qualifications, and hence a higher proportion of foreign-born populations are classified in this category than the UK-born population. When immigrants' qualifications are classified as "other", they note, they are often of a high level. [4]
According to the 2011 Census, out of a total of 89,022 Somali-born residents aged 16 and over in the UK, 55 per cent had completed up to a lower secondary education ( ISCED Level 2), 25 per cent had completed up to an upper secondary education (ISCED Level 3), 20 per cent had completed up to the first stage of tertiary education (ISCED Level 5), and 0.3 per cent had completed up to the second stage of tertiary education (ISCED Level 6). By comparison, 29 per cent of all foreign-born residents aged 16 and over had completed up to a lower secondary education, 24 per cent had completed up to an upper secondary education, 46 per cent had completed up to the first stage of tertiary education, and 0.9 per cent had completed up to the second stage of tertiary education. [5]
According to the IPPR, the relatively low level of education amongst Somali migrants in the UK can be attributed to their migratory history and the situation in their country of origin. They note that, like many other refugee and migrant communities, early Somali migrants tend to be relatively well educated, but later arrivals, including family members of early migrants, are less well qualified. Labour migrants arriving prior to 1988 were generally literate in either English or Arabic, although few had completed secondary education. Many of the initial wave of refugees from the Somali Civil War who started to arrive from 1988 onwards were well educated, with many possessing secondary education and some holding degrees. According to the IPPR, the educational profile of Somali migrants subsequently changed again, because of the impact of the civil war on education in Somalia. In the north, including Somaliland, the majority of schools in urban areas were destroyed, along with higher education institutions. In the south, "education has been completely destroyed by the fighting". While some schools have been rebuilt and have reopened, the IPPR reports that "younger Somalis who have come directly from Somalia will not have attended university and are likely to have had a very interrupted education or none at all". [4]
References
Muir2012
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).economist.com
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Great work Larry. It balances now too. I think I will move on to other communities now. It only took 4 months. :-~ BrumEduResearch ( talk) 06:49, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
Soupforone, regarding these additions, I think some detail on how Somalis have been classified in censuses is welcome, but I wonder if this is too much detail for this article. That section is becoming very long, and not all of the material you added concerns Somalis in the United Kingdom. For example, is this article the best place to discuss the classification of Somalis in the 1962 British Kenya census, or would that material be better covered in the main Somalis article or at Somalis in Kenya? Cordless Larry ( talk) 12:07, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
The "sometimes" denoted that BME is a different designation - it is an umbrella term for non-European populations. The government and Scottish Council of Jewish Communities note this. Anyway, the more recent separate ethnic designation for Somalis is explained on page 9 [10]. Soupforone ( talk) 04:47, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
The government links mean "African" specifically, and they indicate as much too. This designation is based on the UK census, where there is no "Black African" tick-box. There is instead an "African" designation under "Black/African/Caribbean/Black British", which some individuals as disparate as Sri Lankans and Italians also selected since they too may have emigrated directly from the continent [13]. The government makes this "African" designation clearer here, on page 24-> [14]. As regards the separate "Somali" category, it is not the same thing as the extended codes. The government link indicates that the London borough authorities aggregated the data via the LERN -- "Thanks are also due to The London Educational Research Network (LERN) which represents the 32 London boroughs. LERN played a key role in bringing together Somali pupil data which was collected separately by the different local authorities in Greater London." [15] Therefore, the text should actually indicate: "Consequently, Somali student performance data has often been aggregated under a broader "African" category. However, in order to more effectively monitor pupil attainment, London local authorities through the aegis of the London Educational Research Network have in recent years started processing achievement data for Somali students under a separate "Somali" ethnic category." Soupforone ( talk) 03:53, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
I also made some changes to the paragraph on write-in responses to the census ethnicity question. The 103,000 figure is a 2013 estimate, not from the 2011 census, and refers to the total number of UK residents born in Somalia, not the total number of people with Somali ethnicity. We don't know the latter because we don't know how many Somalis ticked the Arab, Black African, or other options, rather than writing in Somali. I also removed the line "The remaining Somali respondents selected the "Arab" tick-box under "Other ethnic group"", as we don't know what box they would have ticked. Cordless Larry ( talk) 09:10, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
What you appear to be referring to are the extended codes. These are optional, utilized by only some institutions in England, and not the same thing as the primary classification. As the government link explains, the primary classification is based on the actual UK census, which only has an "African" designation. There is no "Black African" heading or subheading. Also, the 2011 UK Census recorded 99,484 Somalia-born residents in England, 1,886 in Wales, 1,591 in Scotland, and 88 in Northern Ireland. That is 103,049 residents i.e., it's where the 103,000 rounded government figure actually originates. The total Somalia-born resident population gives an idea of the proportional representation of the various census entries. As regards the "Arab" tick-box, while we can't be sure of the individual identities of the tickers, it is clear from the comparative figures that a majority of Somalia-born individuals indeed selected it. Only 42,934 individuals wrote in "Somali" and "Somalilander" under the African heading, which is over 60,000 persons less than the 103,000 total Somalia-born residents. The write-in responses of the Somali and other potential Arab respondents total 126,224 according to the National Association of British Arabs. When this figure is subtracted from the 404,207 total of Arab state-born individuals, it gives 277,983, which is quite close to the 240,545 figure for persons that actually ticked the "Arab" box. Therefore, most of the Somali and other potential Arab respondents who did not use the write-in responses indeed appear to have selected the "Arab" box per the NABA [16]. Soupforone ( talk) 04:18, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
I understand, but I'm aware of the difference between nationality and ethnicity. The calculations are actually the NABA's (404,207 - 126,224 = 277983; 277983 - 240,545 = 37,438). It explains why it used the countries of origin:
If only 51,724 individuals indicated "Somali" and "Somalilander" in the various write-in entries, that still leaves at least several tens of thousands of residents that did not use the write-in entries but instead ticked a box(es). Given the NABA's calculations, the most likely box is indeed clearly the "Arab" tick box. The number of "Arab" tickers could not reach anywhere near the indicated 240,545 total without a substantial number of Somali tickers since they constitute the largest Arab-born population per the NABA [18]. That is why, after taking into consideration the write-in entries, it puts a ceiling of ~37,439 for those who do not identify themselves as Arabs but were born within Arab countries. Soupforone ( talk) 03:39, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
I realize that's the purpose of the optional extended codes. However, the government link doesn't indicate that the separate categorization it is referring to is an extended code. It instead alludes to aggregation by the London borough authorities and via the LERN specifically. Anyway, with regard to the main designation, alternate phrasing is necessary to make it clear that while the "African" or "Black African" category is apparently the same, certain government authorities refer to it in accordance with the "African" census box whereas some other institutions utilize the latter designation [19]. So something like -- "Consequently, Somali students are often aggregated into a broader "African" or "Black African" category in pupil performance data." Soupforone ( talk) 03:56, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, but it's an official government document ("First Published March 2008 by Lambeth Research and Statistics Unit"). That aside, asserting that the institutional designation is "Black African" is already focusing on the precise mechanics, and mistakenly at that. The designation is actually "African" or "Black African". This does seem relevant since the government link explains that this lack of appropriate classification for this population at the national level is part of the problem -- "To date it has been difficult to draw generalised conclusions from research on Somali educational achievement as the lack of appropriate categorisation at a national level has made it difficult to accurately establish the relative achievement of Somali pupils compared to English/Scottish/Welsh and other ethnic groups." [20] With that noted, more accurate wording would be -- "This is because there is a lack of appropriate categorisation of Somalis at a national level, and "Somali" is not a tick-box option in official ethnicity classifications. Consequently, Somali students have often been aggregated into a broader "African" or "Black African" category in pupil performance data." Soupforone ( talk) 04:06, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
I work with school ethnicity stats every day and Larry is right, the category is black African.-- BrumEduResearch ( talk) 00:13, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
Cordless Larry, the designations in that link are just ethnicity monitoring advice (also note that it is "Black – African" not "Black African" since their is no such option on the national census). What designations the institutions and boroughs themselves ultimately use are at their discretion and are recorded in their respective management information systems. The link itself indicates this:
With that said, the Bradford schools use the "African" designation per their official management information system [21]. There are many other institutions that similarly use their own variations on the census categories, such as the Catholic Education Service which represents 2300 Catholic schools and universities in England and Wales and uses a "Black – African or African" designation per its official management information system (p.24 - [22]). A more accurate wording would therefore be: "Consequently, Somali students have often been aggregated into a broader "African" or "Black – African" category in pupil performance data."
As regards the NABA, when it indicates that "as can be seen, many people responded to the question in terms of a refined categorisation, and specifically those Arabs from North Africa and Somalia... we cannot be sure how many of the individual identities have also responded in the general ‘Arab’ box so there may well be some overlap in these figures", it is referring to national identities. This is established in the first phrase, from the fact that only one box can be ticked per individual, and through its calculations involving the total number of British Arabs per country of origin (404,207). What the NABA is saying is that while some wrote in ethnicities whereas others ticked the Arab box, there is overlap in that it classifies all Arab state-born individuals as Arabs. Anyway, this is perhaps a subtle point so your phrasing seems adequate. Soupforone ( talk) 04:35, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
Cordless Larry, I do concur that the Bradford link shouldn't be used as a source for the "African" designation. I linked to it here to show that some other institutions utilize that designation. I think the other government link that is already cited in the same sentence should be used there instead. Also, are you okay with the National Association's official population estimate for Somalia-born Arabs? Because you only mentioned the 'overlap' phrase above, and I agreed with your rewording to correct for ambiguity. The population figure is from the census. I'm also confused as to why the other NABA phrase was removed since it basically indicates what you did above that we don't know how many Somalis ticked the Arab box. Do you know of a specific number of tickers, or do you still agree that we don't know? The phrasing goes "the National Association of British Arabs (NABA) indicates that "many people responded to the question in terms of a refined categorisation, and specifically those Arabs from North Africa and Somalia", but notes that "we cannot be sure how many of the individual identities have also responded in the general 'Arab' box"." I agree that the "also" makes the phrase somewhat equivocal, but this ambiguity can be corrected with an ellipsis or paraphrase -- "the National Association of British Arabs (NABA) indicates that "many people responded to the question in terms of a refined categorisation, and specifically those Arabs from North Africa and Somalia", but notes that it is uncertain how many of these individuals responded in the general 'Arab' box". Soupforone ( talk) 05:14, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Cordless Larry, you're right that the census is apparently statutory. The government does though appear to provide some leeway in that regard to the boroughs and institutions. It uses "African" in some of its guidance handbooks, like on the p.31 [23]. In that guide the government enumerates various African countries, such as Somalia, Sudan and Algeria. It therefore seems that you were correct about the government's loose use of the "African" designation. How's about this wording then? -- "Consequently, Somali students have often been aggregated into a more general "African" or "Black – African" category in pupil performance data." Soupforone ( talk) 03:46, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
The government doesn't appear to classify populations in any specific way. Individuals can therefore select any ethnicity on the national census. The government explains this by pointing out that "ethnicity is subjective: a person should self-assign his or her own ethnic group... while other people may view an individual as having a distinct ethnic identity, the individual's view of their own identity takes priority." As such, how the population self-identifies is prioritized. The government also takes into consideration key criteria as to what actually constitutes an ethnic group. These "features that help to define ethnic group are as follows : a shared history; a common cultural tradition; a common geographical origin; descent from common ancestors; a common language; a common religion; and forming a distinct group within a larger community". [24]
With that established, some boroughs do seem to use the "African" designation for the category whereas others use the "Black – African" designation. However, this is apparently per the government's own guidance handbooks, which suggest either designation. The governmental guide above uses "African" for most African populations, including some Arab world groups from Somalia, Algeria and Sudan - p.32 [25]. Here is another governmental guide that also suggests the "African" designation for the category - p.18 [26]. With that said, how's about -- "Consequently, Somali students have often been aggregated into a broader "African" or "Black – African" category in pupil performance data"? This wording seems to indicate well the designations. Soupforone ( talk) 03:29, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
Cordless Larry, please toggle to the pages 31-32. It indicates there that the coding designation is "African", and the bit on self-classification by children and their parents is specified there as well. On the adjacent page, it has Somalia, Sudan, Algeria and various other African populations under that [30]. Soupforone ( talk) 03:19, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
I understand, but it seems more intricate. As regards that codeset, one of the England government department's guides suggests the "African" category designation for most African populations, including some Arab world groups from Somalia, Sudan and Algeria -- pages 31-32 [32]. The Wales department as well apparently. This is why I suggest the wording above to reflect this actuality. Soupforone ( talk) 03:27, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Somalis in the United Kingdom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 12:09, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 11 external links on Somalis in the United Kingdom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:46, 30 June 2017 (UTC)