African Immigrants, the “New Model Minority”: Examining the Reality in U.S. k-12 Schools

Abstract

African immigrants in the U.S. have been headlined as America’s “new model minority.” The purpose of this paper is to examine if evidence exists to support the claim of African immigrant students’ (AIS) educational achievement and excellence (a core indicator of the “model minority” theory) in U.S. k-12 schools. Using a multiple methodological research approach and analysis, the study examines whether aggregated and disaggregated data exist to verify AIS’ superior academic achievement in U.S. k-12 schools. The study reveals a lack of data to substantiate the claim. Instead, the study reveals a paucity of research on AIS’ academic performance and achievement in k-12 schools, as well as academic underperformance and underachievement, and the challenges that exist. The notion of a “model minority” attributed to African immigrants is disingenuous and a disservice to AIS in U.S. k-12 schools. The paper discusses significant implications and recommendations for policy and practice that include overhauling the data collection and reporting system, data disaggregation for AIS, debunking the African immigrant “model minority” ascription, preparing culturally responsive and globally competent teachers, and increasing research on AIS in k-12 schools.

Introduction

A recent phenomenon in academic and social discourse is the portrayal of African immigrants in the U.S. as America’s new “model minority.” This representation arises from reports and data that show that African immigrants are educationally accomplished and that, overall, are the most highly educated immigrant group in the U.S. In 2000, 43.2% of African immigrants had a college degree, compared to 42.5% of Asian Americans, 28.9% of immigrants from Europe, and 23.1% of the general U.S. population. In 2010, data showed 48.9% of African immigrants had a university degree, compared to 42.5% of Asian-Americans, 28.9% of European Americans, and 23.1% of the general U.S. population (McCabe 2011; Zong and Batalova 2017). In 2014 data showed that African immigrants have the highest percentage of advanced degrees at 8.2%, compared to 6.8% of Asians and 2.6% of all U.S-born citizens (Anderson 2015; Gambino et al. 2014). Headlines have drawn attention to the phenomenon of African immigrants as America’s “new model minority.” Headlines such as “African immigrants, an invisible model minority,” “A success story: Immigrant Blacks in colleges” (Allen 2009), “African immigrants are the most educated”, “Black immigrants collect most degrees” (Page 2007), and “African immigrants now America’s new “model minority” (Kperogi 2009) tell the story. If this claim is true at the college level, how valid is it for African immigrant students (AIS) in U.S. k-12 schools? Is this simply an overstated generalization that obscures the lived academic realities of African immigrant students in U.S. k-12 schools? What do we really know about the academic performances and achievements of African immigrant students enrolled in U.S. k-2 schools? Do their academic performances and achievements match the standards of excellence, accomplishment, and success that are the hallmark of the “model minority”?

Asian Americans were the first U.S. ethnic group to be designated America’s “model minority.” For Asian Americans, both aggregated and disaggregated data have been used to demonstrate their high-level scholastic performance and academic achievement in U.S. k-12 schools and to debunk the “model minority” myth. The purpose of this paper is to determine whether both aggregated and disaggregated data exist to verify African immigrant students’ (AIS) academic performance and excellence in U.S. k-12 schools. The paper aims to deconstruct the implications of the “model minority” label ascribed to African immigrants, and to offer recommendations for educational policy and practice for equitably serving AIS in U.S. k-12 schools. The ultimate goal of the study is to increase the visibility of AIS as a distinct minority subgroup and to place in true perspective their achievement realities in U.S. k-12 schools. The study will raise educators, researchers, and policymakers’ awareness about AIS’ true academic performance, their lived educational and schooling realities, and to better understand how best to serve them and maximize their academic achievement, educational success, and citizenship development.

Theoretical Perspectives and Literature Review

Because this study focuses on African immigrant students and the reality of their academic performance and achievement in U.S. k-12 schools, the literature review first examines their demographics and immigration trends and realities. Second, because the study seeks to determine the reality and exemplification of the “model minority” ascribed to African immigrants, the review attends to the “model minority” myth discourse. Third, because African immigrant students are a part of a marginalized student group of color in U.S. k-12 schools, it is relevant to draw on critical race theory as a lens to understand and interrogate issues of schooling, achievement accountability, and knowledge construction and legitimacy (Delgado and Stefancic 2001).

African Immigrant Students and Demographic Trends and Realities

African immigrant students (AIS) are part of an immigrant student population influx that is revolutionizing the U.S. k-12 schools. For the purpose of this paper, AIS refers to any child under age 18, regardless of immigration or refugee status, who resides in an African immigrant family, was born in any African country or is U.S-born with at least one African immigrant parent, and is attending a U.S. k-12 school. This definition will include those born outside of the U.S. (1.0 first-generation), those born in Africa who immigrated prior to their adolescent years (1.5 first-generation) and those U.S.-born with at least one African parent (2.0 second-generation) (Awokoya 2012; Waters 1994). It is important to recognize that a majority of AIS in U.S. k-12 schools are U.S.-born citizens or are naturalized citizens (Gambino et al. 2014). Although African immigrants are found in many U.S. communities, most reside in minoritized urban communities, and so their children attend urban schools plagued by conditions of “savage inequalities” that negatively affect their academic learning, performance, and achievement.

In 2009, 714,000 children resided with at least one African-born parent (McCabe 2011). In 2011, that number rose to 816,000, and to 861,000 in 2012 (McCabe 2011; Kids Count Data Book Center 2014). These children are entering U.S. schools in increasing numbers. However, despite their increasing number in U.S. k-12 schools, they are invisible and marginalized (Arthur 2000; Allen et al. 2012).

AIS are a diverse group in U.S. k-12 schools. Although there are commonalities within the group due to their own or parents’ origination from Africa and a common cultural ancestry, there are also stark differences that affect their schooling and educational experiences and outcomes. They are diverse geo-politically, linguistically, religiously, socioeconomically, and in immigration statuses and family configurations. Like their immigrant families, AIS have roots in different geopolitical regions in Africa. Data indicates that about 75% of African immigrants come from 12 of the 55 African countries, namely Nigeria, Egypt, Ghana, Ethiopia, South Africa, Kenya, Liberia, Cameroun, Somalia, Morocco, Cape Verde, and Sierra Leone with a sizeable number also coming from the Sudan, Eritrea, and Burundi (McCabe 2011). Most of them come from countries plagued by considerable economic, political, religious, and social conflicts that propel them to immigrate (American Community Survey (ACS) 2009; Capps et al. 2011). Some are “voluntary” or “involuntary” immigrants (Ogbu 1978). Voluntary AIS often arrive with or join their families who immigrate to seek better lives and opportunities and often are beneficiaries of the U.S. Diversity Visa Lottery (DVL) program. In most cases, the families come from relatively stable countries and so are better educated, have professional skills, language proficiency, and are likely to hold professional jobs (Dodoo 1997; McCabe 2011).

African immigrants and AIS carry different immigration statuses such as permanent residency, naturalized citizenship, and non-immigrant visa statuses (F-1 student visa and H-B and JV temporary working visas). Some are also undocumented. These legal and non-legal statuses have different, unequal and consequential impact on each individual or family as they navigate and negotiate their transmigrant spaces in U.S. society. For example, naturalized citizens and permanent residents will have better opportunities, benefits, resources, and relative security than those with legal, non-immigrant visas and the undocumented, who will have limited or no access to resources and other necessities needed for living a quality and dignified human life. For instance, an undocumented African immigrant family or student will experience a life of invisibility and fear (fear of being caught and deported), which may prevent them from taking advantage of services, such as enrolling their children in schools or effectively advocating for them if enrolled in school when they experience educational inequities and injustice. An Undocumented AIS will keep a low profile and avoid expressing concerns when subjected to inequitable and dehumanizing conditions.

Voluntary African immigrant families who originate from countries with relative stability (for example, Nigeria, Kenya, and Ghana) are likely to be educated and to have the tools to navigate their new society and the education system. AIS from such families enter the U.S. k-12 schools with strong support for their educational aspirations (Awokoya 2009; Waters 1994; Zong and Batalova 2017). Some may have attended strong public/private or parochial elementary and middle schools prior to immigrating to the U.S., and so have the literacy skills, self-discipline, and the academic readiness to engage in U.S. schools. Involuntary African immigrants families and students, on the other hand, who often are refugees and asylees, come from disproportionately war-torn and conflict-ridden countries such as Sudan, Somalia, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Burundi, and Rwanda, and are less likely to be educated and to have the skills to navigate their new society and the education system. Most often, involuntary AIS come from families with limited resources to support their personal and educational development, and have had limited or no educational opportunities and linguistic proficiency needed for success in U.S. schools. Some may not have attended schools or good schools prior to their immigration to the U.S. Some lack literacy and proficiency in their native language, which limits their readiness to engage effectively in academic activities. As research indicates, students with low literacy skills, disrupted schooling and traumatic experiences take about 10 or more years to catch up to average levels of cognitive and academic language proficiency and success (Thomas and Collier 1997). Some AIS are unaccompanied minors who lack adequate resources to support their personal development and academic pursuits (Rana et al. 2011). Most refugee AIS enter U.S. k-12 schools with deep physical and psychological traumas and academic challenges caused by the horrors of war (genocide, massacre, rapes, nightmares of watching their family members killed or tortured, and dislocation and separation of families, and disrupted schooling) that other African immigrant students may not have. This is not to suggest that involuntary AIS do not thrive and succeed academically. There are success stories of the Sudanese “lost boys” such as John Dau and Gai Nyok: the latter is now a U.S. diplomat (Simon 2013). AIS with longer residency in the country are more likely to be well established and acculturated, while new arrivals will struggle and experience stresses of acculturation and cultural displacement (Suárez-Orozco and Suárez-Orozco 2001; Portes and Rumbaut 2001).

Religious diversity also exists among AIS and impacts differently on their schooling experiences and academic outcomes. AIS who are Muslims are more likely to experience tremendous challenges in navigating and negotiating the U.S. school system and culture that are plagued by xenophobia or Islamophobia than non-Muslim AIS. While AIS in general experience microaggressions from peers and educators, this is intensified for Muslim AIS who are targets for harassment, bullying, physical assault, and name-calling (Abu-Ras and Abu-Bader 2008; Aroian 2012; Council on American Islamic Relations 2012). These dehumanizing and oppressive conditions contribute to their school dropout and the depression of Somali Muslim students, for example (Ellis et al. 2008).

The “Model Minority” Myth

Asian Americans were the first U.S. ethnic group to be labeled America’s “model minority.” In the 1980s, they were celebrated and headlined as America’s “Model Minority.” Takaki (2003) has summarized how the various media networks such as NBC Nightly News and The MacNeil/Lehrer Report aired special news reports on Asian Americans and their success in America. CBS 60 min featured Asian American 10-year-olds in college who were chaperoned by their parents on college campuses. Mike Wallace prefaced the segment with the question: “Why are Asian Americans doing so exceptionally well in school?” He then quickly added, “They must be doing something right. Let’s bottle it!” Other news magazines featured such stories as “Asian-American Advances” (U.S. News & World Report) and “Asian-Americans: The Drive to Excel” and “A Model Minority” (Newsweek) and “The Triumph of Asian-Americans” and “America’s Greatest Success Story” (New Republic). Even President Ronald Reagan reportedly hailed their “American success and preserving the Dream by living up to the bedrock value of America,” which in essence, linked Asian American value and hard work to that expressed in America’s political system (pp. 474–476).

Peterson (1966), who published an article in the New York Times about Japanese Americans and the “whiz kids” (Chew 1994), is credited with conceptualizing the “model minority” concept. The concept posits that Asians/Asian Americans have “successfully assimilated into the mainstream society” (Pang et al. 2011). The connotation is that their success is due to their cultural values of work ethic, strong family values, and/or stronger belief in the American ideology of meritocracy (Chang and Au 2007; Wu 2002). The concept thus validates the American dream (Goodwin 2012; Pang et al. 2011). Although researchers have analyzed, criticized, and even debunked the “model minority” as a myth (Chow 2011; Li and Beckett 2006; Pang et al. 2011), it remains pervasive in social and academic discourse. Both aggregated and disaggregated data have been used to examine and debunk the Asian “model minority” stereotype or sociotype. Studies find that while many Asian American Pacific Islander (AAPIs) such as the Chinese, Koreans, Indians, and Japanese excel, others do not. Disaggregated data shows that some AAPIs, particularly the Hmong and Laotians, struggle and underperform (Pang et al. 2011). Researchers who have debunked the “model minority” as a myth argue that the label engenders internalized racism within the AAPIs communities against other communities of color and invalidates the American dream (Goodwin 2012; Pang et al. 2011), promotes a color-blind society and harms the education of AAPIs (Pang et al. 2011). This discourse relates well to this study, as it seeks to examine the achievement reality of AIS—America’s new “model minority.”

U. S. Schools, Student Achievement, and Accountability

The persistent “achievement gap” between different student groups in U.S. k-12 schools is of great concern for educators, leaders, researchers, and communities of color. Although the concern often focuses on ethnically/racially diverse student groups, much of the discourse has excluded immigrant students (Covington-Clark 2008; Pang et al. 2011). Traditionally, student achievement data have been reported by aggregation in U.S. schools. The passage of the “No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act” in 2001 changed all that and has brought a much needed attention to the achievement disparities between different student groups. It put forward a rigorous accountability measure that holds schools accountable for the academic achievement of all students. The law requires that student achievement data be disaggregated and reported by subgroups—race, ethnicity, gender, class, language, and disability (U.S. Department of Education 2001). Six federally-mandated categories—American Indian/Alaska Native, African American, Asian, Hispanic/Latino, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, and White (National Forum on Student Statistics 2016)—are to be used for reporting student performance data. In 2011, National Center for Education Statistics (2011) expanded the categories to include two or more races (multiracial), economically disadvantaged students (free or reduced-price lunch), limited English proficient students/English language learners (ELL), and students with disabilities.

Student data disaggregation provides and highlights meaningful variation within groups and subgroups. Unfortunately, even with the NCLB legislation, information about some student groups is excluded. This is often the case with immigrant students (Pang et al. 2011). Increasingly, there are calls for state, district, and schools to disaggregate data beyond the federally mandated categories to ensure educational equity for all students and to close the achievement gap. The National Forum on Education Statistics (2016) has argued that data disaggregation beyond the federally-mandated categories has value because it: (1) reveals complexities and nuances that would otherwise be lost given student diversity (2) highlights trends and disparities that may otherwise go unnoticed, and (3) helps educators allocate resources and target efforts to close educational achievement gaps and improve educational outcomes for all students (p. 6). Currently, there are no mandates that states, districts, and schools disaggregate student achievement data beyond the federally mandated categories. As a result, some groups or subgroups are marginalized and denied the instructional and support services they need (National Forum on Education Statistics 2016), and this is inequitable and unjust.

Critical Race Theory

Critical race theory (CRT) is a vital lens for understanding and illuminating the discourse on AIS’ educational and academic achievement in a racialized educational system. In order to ensure educational equity and social justice, CRT is relevant for analyzing and critiquing policies and practices that marginalize others such as immigrants (Delgado and Stefancic 2001; Ladson-Billing and Tate 1995). The five tenets of CRT are that: race is fundamental, endemic and is linked to other forms of oppression—gender, class, immigration; people of color experience racism and other forms of oppression; dominant ideologies mask racism and other forms of oppression; there is value in using multiple approaches for examining the manifestations of racism and other forms of oppression; and that educators and researchers must commit to working for social justice (Delgado 1995; Sleeter 2012). CRT is used to understand the educational and achievement realities of other marginalized groups such as African Americans, Asian Americans, Latino Americans, and others. AIS are a minority and an invisible group in U.S. k-12 schools (Allen et al. 2012; Obeng 2008). As a minoritized group, CRT is a relevant construct for examining the lived realities and experiences of AIS in U.S. educational institution.

Methodology

This study examined whether AIS in U.S. k-12 schools perform and achieve at a level implied in the “model minority” theory. The overarching research question was, how well do the academic performance and achievement data of AIS in U.S. k-12 schools reflect the standard of excellence indicator of the “model minority”? The sub-questions examined include, what aggregated and disaggregated academic achievement data exist to support AIS’ educational excellence in U.S. k-12 schools? What disaggregated data exist for subgroups within the AIS population in U.S. k-12 schools? The study employed a multiple research methodology for data collection. First, I employed a literature research methodology to access the achievement data on AIS in U.S. k-12 schools. I searched several databases, using Google Scholar, Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC), Clearinghouse for Immigrant Education (CHIME), and Journal Storage (JSTOR). Key terms searched were: “African immigrant students model minority,” “Black immigrants and the model minority,” “America’s new “model minority,” “African immigrants and educational success,” “African immigrants in U.S. k-12 schools,” “African immigrant students achievement data,” “African immigrant students’ data disaggregation,” “Data disaggregation by home language,” and “Data disaggregation by country of origin.” Second, I searched and examined the websites of the Census Bureau, the National Center for Education Statistics and the National Longitudinal Survey of Freshmen (NLSF) for national, state and school districts’ assessment report cards. Specifically, I searched numerous websites of school districts in four U.S. regions and twenty states where the largest number of African immigrants mostly reside (Gambino et al. 2014; Anderson 2015). I examined cities where the largest number of African immigrant students are most likely to be enrolled (Kids Count Data Center 2014) and their assessment report cards. Ten cities identified in Kids Count with 3000 and above AIS population were selected and examined. These included New York City (NY), District of Columbia (MD), Boston (MA), Philadelphia (PA), Omaha (NE), Houston (TX), Charlotte (NC), San Diego (CA), Phoenix (AZ) and Portland (OR)—see Table 1. Of these ten cities, thirty-seven school districts were identified and their profiles reviewed for most diverse settlement areas of African immigrants. They included twenty-five New York City counties of Bronx (6), Brooklyn (12), and Queens (7); three Baltimore county public schools (Baltimore, Montgomery, and Prince George); Boston Public Schools; The School District of Philadelphia; Omaha Public Schools; Houston Independent School District; Charlotte School District, San Diego Unified School District, Phoenix Union School District, and Portland Public Schools (see Table 1). City School districts with less than 3000 AIS (as listed in the Kids Count Data Book) were excluded. Third, I conducted inquiries with one large local urban school district where I work. I targeted two schools with high populations of AIS. One school is a k-8 charter school, with predominantly newcomer and refugee students. The other school is a 9–12 comprehensive public high school populated by immigrant students, mostly African immigrant students.

Table 1 African immigrants’ residential settlements in the U.S. & City School Districts.

Further, qualitative data was collected through a review of publications (articles, books, dissertations and theses). Although the data search yielded 300 references to African immigrants and students, in addition to the data from 37 school districts’ websites, 15 articles, 4 books, 3 book chapters, and 25 online reports were relevant to the study and examined. Using a content analysis approach (Krippendorff 2013), all data were compiled and imported into one large file and carefully reviewed to identify relevant information and themes. The study revealed four key findings: (1) no data to substantiate the “model minority” claim for AIS in U.S. k-12 schools; (2) paucity of research on AIS; (3) academic underperformance and underachievement of AIS; and (4) struggles and challenges of AIS. These are discussed below.

No Data to Substantiate “Model Minority” Claim

This study sought to examine whether AIS in U.S. k-12 schools perform and achieve at a level implied in the “model minority” theory, particularly whether aggregated and disaggregated data exist to substantiate AIS’ superior academic performance and achievement. Academic excellence is a key indicator of the “model minority” theory. As discussed earlier, the NCLB legislation requires that state and districts use the federally mandated racial/ethnic categories to report student assessment performance and academic achievement and other proficiency tests such as ACT/SAT (Covington Clarkson 2008; National Center for Education Statistics 2012; National Center for Fair & Open Testing 2012). This study found that the states, school districts, and schools examined reported students’ assessment and achievement by the federally mandated racial/ethnic categories of American Indian/Alaska Native, African American/Black, Asian, Hispanic/Latino, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, White, and Two or More Races (Multiethnic/Multicultural). Other reporting categories were for students who are Migrant, have Limited English Proficiency (LEP/ELL), receive Free/Reduced Lunch (Economically Disadvantaged), Student with Disabilities (SPED/504), and Homeless (see Table 2). The study found no data reported for AIS. Instead, their academic performance and achievement data are reported under the racial/ethnic category of African American/Black. That is, their performance and achievement data are included with those of native-born African American students and other Black students including those from the Caribbean. This homogenizes and masks AIS’ demographics and their academic performance and achievement data. Across the data, state, school district, and schools’ assessment report cards were aggregated for all students identified as Black or African American (see Table 2).

Table 2 School district achievement data report card categories.

Overall, the study confirms previous studies that concluded the lack of disaggregated achievement data for immigrant students (Covington Clarkson 2008). Subsuming AIS’ achievement data under the African American/Black racial category creates a lack of clarity on their true performance and achievement. Because there are no aggregated and disaggregated data reported for AIS, it is not possible to determine if they perform and achieve at a level implied in the “model minority” theory.

However, the study found two reports that showed disaggregated academic data for students, including AIS, by home language and country of origin. The first data disaggregation for AIS was found in a news report on how district officials of the Seattle Southeast schools in Seattle, Washington, broke down students’ test scores by home language and country of origin in 2011 for the first time (Rosenthal 2011). This involved four AIS’ language-speaking groups of Amharic, Oromo, Somali, and Tigrinya. The second data disaggregation for AIS was found from a collaborative research report for the Multnomah County Public Schools in Portland, Oregon (Curry-Stevens and Coalition of Communities of Color 2013). Concerned about racial/ethnic disparities in the Multnomah County, researchers at the Portland State University and the Coalition of Communities of Color collaborated to document the experiences of people of color in Multnomah County, Portland, Oregon. One of their studies focused on African immigrants and refugees. Their report showed student test score disaggregation by home language and country of origin. Data disaggregation were provided for eleven AIS’ language-speaking groups of Amharic (Ethiopia), Igbo (Nigeria, Equatorial Guinea, Cameroun), Kinyaranda (Rwanda, Uganda), Kirundi (Burundi, Uganda, Rwanda), Krahn (Ivory Coast, Liberia), Lingala (Democratic Republic of Congo, Republic of the Congo), Maay-Maay (Somalia, Ethiopia, Kenya), Oromo (Ethiopia, Kenya, Somali), Somali (Somalia), KiSwahili (Burundi, Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda, Democratic Republic of Congo, Malawi), and Tigrinya (Eritrea, Ethiopia). A review of these two data showed that AIS did not evidence superior academic performance and achievement to reflect the standard of academic excellence implied in the “model minority” theory (see Tables 3, 4).

Table 3 Seattle Public School data disaggregation for AIS by home language.

Table 4 Multnomah County academic achievement by home language 2011 (as measured by % of students who meet or exceed benchmarks).

Paucity of Research on AIS’ Academic Achievement

Although the population of African immigrants in the U.S. is growing (Arthur 2010; Anderson 2015; Kent 2007) and their children are increasingly attending schools across the nation (Kids Count Data Book 2015; Terrazas 2009; Wilson 2010), little is known about their true academic performance and achievement in U.S. k-12 schools. This study confirms findings of previous studies about the paucity of research on AIS’ academic achievement and educational experiences (Covington Clarkson 2008; Curry-Stevens and Coalition of Communities of Color 2013). The study yielded minimal data. Only a few, small-scale isolated studies have examined AIS’ academic performance and achievement in U.S. k-12, notably studies by Njue and Retish (2010) and Schwartz and Stefiel (2006), discussed in the literature review. These small-scale studies were motivated by the nativity-gap discourse (achievement between native-born African Americans and African immigrants). Njue and Retish (2010) examined and disaggregated the academic performance of a small group of East African high school students and compared their performance to native-born African American peers. Their study found that the AIS in the study performed better than their native-born African Americans, although they performed below other student groups. A few qualitative studies have examined the cultural, educational, social experiences, and challenges of AIS in U.S. k-12 schools (Awokoya 2009; Kanu 2008; Kumi-Yeboah and Smith 2016; Traore 2006). While there has been a few studies on African or Black immigrant students’ scholastic achievement at the post-secondary or collegiate level (Bennett and Lutz 2009), this study found minimal empirical studies on AIS’ academic performance and achievement in U.S. k-12 to support the “model minority” claim.

Academic Underperformance and Underachievement

The small qualitative research on AIS in U.S. k-12 schools shows that many students struggle and underachieve because of the challenges they face in schools (Allen et al. 2012; Kumi-Yeboah and Smith 2016; Traore and Lukens 2006). This study found that disaggregated student data outcome showed that many AIS underperform. As discussed above, the only two school districts where data disaggregation were available for AIS showed that they did not perform at a superior level (see Table 3). Although both the Seattle Public Schools’ and the Multnomah County Public Schools’ disaggregated data showed that AIS performed better than their native-born African American peers they neither performed at the district standard of proficiency nor performed as well as their Asian and Caucasian peers or better. Except for two subgroups in the Multnomah data, AIS’ performances did not measure up to the school district’s average test pass rate in reading and math. For example, in the Seattle Public Schools data, in reading, the district’s average test score pass rate was 78%. All the AIS subgroups’ test score pass rates were below this standard—Amharic-speaking (74%), Oromo-speaking (68%), Somali-speaking (67%) and Tigrinya-speaking (65%). In math, all the AIS subgroups were below the district’s average test pass rate of 70%: Amharic-speaking (62%), Oromo-speaking (53%), Somali-speaking (47%) and Tigrinya-speaking (58%) (see Table 3). Although all the AIS subgroups outperformed their native-born African American subgroup whose scores were 56% in reading and 36% in math, they did not perform as well as their Caucasian subgroup who scored 88% in reading and 80% in math or the Asian subgroup with scores of 77% in reading and 80% in math (Rosenthal 2011).

Similar achievement results and gaps were found in the Multnomah County Public Schools’ disaggregated data. The Multnomah County Public Schools’ reading average test score pass rate was 84%. Of the eleven AIS subgroups, with the exception of two subgroups—Nigeria, 86% and Rwanda, 100%, all other nine subgroups scored lower. In math, all the AIS subgroups scored below the district’s average pass rate of 69% (see Table 4). These two cases, the only disaggregated data found in the study, suggest that AIS are not performing as well as implied by the model minority claim. In fact, in the African immigrant community in the Multnomah, Oregon, report, the researchers noted that at least one-in-three students failed to meet the minimum benchmarks (Curry-Stevens and Coalition of Communities of Color 2013).

Bashir et al. (2016), in their analysis of the Portland Public Schools progress report, found that only 58% of AIS from Somali graduate from high school. They also note, “They are underrepresented in advanced classes such as AP, IB and dual credit classes and severely under-represented in the “talented and gifted” (TAG) program” (n.p.).

Njue and Retish’s (2010) small-scale study, which compared and disaggregated student data, revealed a similar result. Using the 2005 Minneapolis Public Schools Basic Skills Tests of high school students, Njue and Retish disaggregated data for two African immigrant student subgroups—Ethiopians and Somalis—whose achievement data had been categorized as African American. They disaggregated the data by English language proficiency—ELL and non-ELL—that is, ELL African American and non-ELL African American. Although their study showed that the ELL-African American students (AIS) outperformed the non-ELL African American students (native-born African American peers) they did not perform better than their Asian and Caucasian peers. For example, in math, the AIS’ pass rate was 52% compared to 57% ELL and 64% for non-ELL Asian American and 56% (ELL) and 56 (non-ELL) Caucasian American. In reading, AIS scored 59% compared to 61% for Asian American (ELL) and 64% for Caucasian American.

Academic Struggles and Challenges

Data from qualitative studies reveal that many AIS in U.S. k-12 schools are struggling academically, falling behind, experiencing academic disengagement and failure, dropping out, and predisposing them to engage in criminal activities and other at-risk behaviors (Deparle 2009; Harushimana et al. 2013; Medina 2009; Reyes and Curry-Stevens 2014; Suárez-Orozco 2001; Traore 2006). Reyes and Curry-Stevens (2014), in their study, noted that many AIS in the Multnomah County in Portland, Oregon, are predisposed to participate in gang activities. They noted that 62% of AIS do not meet academic expectations, making them at risk of leaving school and getting involved in gang activities. Reporting on her study in a U.S. high school, one of the few most comprehensive studies on African immigrants, Rosemary Traore found a similar finding:

There is a growing population of African [immigrant] adolescents who are dropping out of school. Teenage girls are becoming pregnant, both boys and girls are turning to drugs, both selling and using, and some who had started at the [high school] are now in jail, on drugs, prostituting themselves on the street, or falling into a host of negative street activities (Traore and Lukens 2006, p. 33).

In a study I conducted with African-born teachers in U.S. urban schools, several participants lamented the at-risk behaviors and lack of academic success of many AIS students in their schools. Although African immigrants are documented to be educationally accomplished, and indeed, some AIS do well in U.S. k-12 schools, some researchers have found that those that do well are mostly the first generation (Portes and Rumbaut 2001). Second and third generations experience less educational success than their first-generation immigrant parents, and newcomers experience significant academic challenges and failure, especially after their second year (Olneck 2004; Rong and Brown 2001; Portes and Rumbaut 2001). Studies show that AIS face multiple challenges due to their invisibility, racialization, colorization, linguistic and accent difference, stigmatization and stereotype (Kumi-Yeboah and Smith 2016; Reyes and Curry-Stevens 2014), hostility and bullying from native-born American peers, including African Americans/blacks.

Generally, research on immigrant students in U.S. schools reports that they experience various forms of marginalization (Hernandez 2004; Suárez-Orozco and Suárez-Orozco 2001, 2009). The few studies on AIS reveal that they are marginalized and seemingly invisible as they are homogenized, mis-identified, teased, ignored, neglected, bullied, stigmatized and discriminated against due to their cultural and linguistic difference. They experience inappropriate grade placement and poor academic counseling that jeopardize their academic success (Agyepong 2013; Covington Clarkson 2008; Deparle 2009; Gibson 2001; Goodwin 2002; Ghong et al. 2007; Harushimana 2007; Kumi-Yeboah and Smith 2016; Obeng 2008; Traore and Lukens 2006; Reyes and Curry-Stevens 2014). Reyes and Curry-Stevens highlighted inappropriate grade placement as a major concern expressed by the African immigrant community about the challenge AIS face in U.S. public schools:

The greatest challenge is that [schools] say, “You’re 15, so you must be in grade 11”… when you’ve missed education for the last 4 to 5 years. So the system has totally failed to create a bridge to where [students] should be. They come in and are expected to adapt. Just adapt. Now you are going to go to school and this is the way it is.” They are not able to ultimately be successful… they don’t go any further. They stop going to school or they don’t do well (Curry-Stevens et al. 2010, p. 49).

Ghong et al. (2007) found that invisibility is a major challenge for AIS, as they are overlooked, forgotten, and marginalized in U.S. public schools. Agyepong (2013) describes most vividly the marginalization she faced as a student in the New York public middle and high schools. She recounts the public humiliation she experienced in classes where she was told that her accent was “really thick and hard to understand […] and to go to the board and write what she had said” (p. 174). She also describes the constant harassment and teasing by peers who questioned her about her jungle life in Africa.

One harsh reality AIS face in U.S. k-12 schools is bullying. Although bullying is a common occurrence across many U.S. k-12 schools, it is more pronounced for AIS who are victims of violent, verbal, and physical abuse, perpetrated by native-born American peers, including African Americans. In 2005, in a southwest Philadelphia high school, native-born African American peers viciously beat a 13-year-old Liberian teenager (Moran et al. 2005). AIS also experience curriculum marginalization (Ghong et al. 2007; Goodwin 2012) and dehumanization (Ukpokodu 2013; Kumi-Yeboah and Smith 2016). AIS have recounted how Tarzan-like films and movies are shown in their classes that make them feel ashamed (Kumi-Yeboah and Smith 2016; Ukpokodu 2016).

Discussion and Implications

Academic excellence, as reflected in students’ assessment performance, is a core, distinguishing indicator of the “model minority” theory (Chang and Au 2007; Chew 1994; Chow 2011; Li and Beckett 2006; Pang et al. 2011). Disaggregated standardized test scores have been used to report subgroups’ academic and scholastic achievement. This is what has been used to substantiate AAPIs’ “model minority” status and used to debunk the myth. Unfortunately, although African immigrants are heralded as educationally successful in the U.S., this study found no evidence of significant data to verify the model minority claim for AIS in U.S. k-12 schools. The lack of aggregated/disaggregated data for AIS, as a distinct group/subgroup in U.S. k-12 schools, impedes the verification of the “model minority” claim. The homogenization of AIS’ achievement data under the racial category of Black/African Americans obscures and masks their academic performance and achievement outcomes. As revealed in the findings, school districts do not disaggregate student data beyond the seven federally mandated racial/ethnic categories. Rosenthal (2011), reporting on the Seattle Public Schools’ data disaggregation, commented that it is rare for school districts across the nation to disaggregate data beyond the federally mandated essential categories. The School District disaggregated data for its students that include AIS, for the first time in 2011. Curry-Stevens and Coalition of Communities of Color (2013), in their study of the African immigrant community in the Multnomah County, noted:

We do not have [achievement] data for African immigrant students. No information is collected on the status of our [African] students as a distinct group within the larger category of African American. The African community is typically incorporated within a larger group of “African American/Black” in the majority of datasets. While likely to be “counted,” the specifics of their experience render them a distinct community, which is unfortunately eclipsed when the community is embedded in the larger African American community. All institutions fail this community (p. 49).

The findings show that U.S. k-12 school districts do not report aggregated and disaggregated assessment data for AIS. This means that it is not possible to determine if AIS perform and achieve at a level implied in the “model minority” theory, which not only has significant consequences for the students as well as implications for policy and practice but also is inequitable and unjust. When school districts fail to report data for a student group, they not only fail the students but also their community. U.S. k-12 schools are failing the African immigrant community in this regard.

This study’s findings have significant implications for the education, schooling, learning, and citizenship development of AIS. First, labeling African immigrants as America’s new “model minority” skews educators’ view, which has dire consequences for AIS. Harushimana et al. (2013) illuminates the danger of labeling African Immigrants as America’s model minority. In her quest to place her 15-year-old newcomer child in a school, she was alarmed to learn that her child had been assigned to one of the “toughest” New York City schools, and when she informed the coordinator of the program about her child’s newcomer, war refugee status, she was told, “Oh, he is from Africa! He will adapt fast; African children adapt easily” (p. 151). Harushimana noted that her concerns and her child’s needs were not even acknowledged, let alone addressed. She described her anguish and pain as she watched her children struggle with their academic learning. Labeling African immigrants as “model minority” carries the implication that AIS can easily negotiate the school system and achieve high-level academic success. This is erroneous, misleading, and a disservice. In fact, many AIS are falling into the cracks (Traore and Lukens 2006; Ghong et al. 2007).

Most of the available studies on AIS’ scholastic performance have focused on the postsecondary level. Such studies have been drawn from NLSF data that are entirely self-reported. In the self-reported data, there is the challenge of knowing where most of the African immigrants received their primary and post-primary education, bachelors, and other degrees. The generalization about African immigrants’ educational success is often based on the record of those who immigrated in the 60s through the early 80s (Arthur 2010; Curry-Stevens et al. 2010; Takougang 2003). Many of these immigrants came to the U.S. as a privileged group of professionals and students. Some of them were sponsored by governments and institutions and provided resources that allowed them to focus on their studies. This group of African immigrants was well-grounded in the African culture; most cultivated the African values of self-discipline, strong work ethic, high sense of responsibility, and a communal and collectivist spirit. They had a high-level drive for success, a self-regulated learning behavior, a high academic achievement identity and a strong educational and linguistic capital. They aimed to distinguish themselves and aspire to the upper echelon of society upon returning to their homeland. They desired to make their families and communities proud. They had no choice but to attain a proud legacy of academic and educational success. The late anthropologist John Ogbu’s seminal work (1978) on “voluntary” and “involuntary” immigrants was based on this group of African immigrants, himself an African immigrant who arrived in the 60s. Additionally, many affluent Africans and professional elites in the continent have always had a commitment to their children’s educational success and sending them abroad to receive foreign education. These children, including those that are U.S.-born while their parents were themselves students in the U.S., have immigrated to the U.S. upon completing high school education in their homeland. More often than not, these African immigrant students enroll in Ivy League colleges. It is the information of these students that are included in census data and other national longitudinal study data.

As discussed earlier, contemporary African immigrants are diverse in terms of their immigration statuses and circumstances. Although most African immigrant families place the same value on education for themselves and their children, the differences in their backgrounds and social capital affect them differently in their educational outcomes. While some AIS have the cultural and social capital to competently negotiate and navigate the U.S. k-12 school system, others with limited cultural, linguistic, educational, and social capital struggle. It is. Therefore, misleading to generalize that African immigrants are educationally and economically successful. While a few studies with disaggregated data (Rosenthal 2011; Njue and Retish 2010) show that AIS outperform their native-born African American peers, it is no consolation given that they perform behind their Asian and Caucasian peers.

Additionally, Black immigrants and AIS are not a monolithic group. Just as there is lack of data disaggregation within the African American/Black racial/ethnic category, there is also a lack of data disaggregation within the Black and AIS groups. “Black immigrants” are a diverse group as they come from continental Africa, the Caribbean, and other parts of the world. Bennett and Lutz (2009) revealed that 75.1% of immigrant black high school graduates attend college compared to 72.5% of Whites and 60.2% of native-born African Americans, and that immigrant Blacks outperform native-born African Americans and Whites in selective college enrollment. In their study, 95 Black immigrant students were included in the sample but it is not clear who they were. Even if it is assumed that they were African immigrants, there is no way to know the specific subgroups included. More so, it is not clear if these AIS graduated from U.S. high schools or from their countries of origin. Are Black immigrant students from continental Africa, the Caribbean or other parts of the world the same?

This study revealed a lack of data to substantiate AIS’ scholastic achievement. The stereotype of African immigrants as America’s new “model minority,” creates a significant obstacle to understanding the needs of AIS who may be struggling in schools. Although some schools with a high concentration of African immigrant refugees may recognize the unique circumstances of a particular subgroup (refugees, Somali, Ethiopians), and so may provide some intervention programs, other schools often do not distinguish between AIS and native-born African American students, let alone within the AIS subgroups. However, the absence of data to verify AIS’ academic excellence and achievement does not suggest that some AIS are not academically successful or that they perform at a superior level. Some high-achieving AIS have been documented such as Kwasi Enin, a first generational Ghanaian (African) immigrant high school student, who was headlined to have received admissions to all eight Ivy League colleges (Steffen and Sanchez 2014). In 2015, Harold Ekeh and Victor Agbafe, both Nigerian-born teens also were accepted to all eight Ivy League colleges. Priscilla Samey, another African immigrant, with Togolese parents, was accepted to seven Ivy League institutions in 2017. Thus, there are isolated success stories of AIS in U.S. k-12 schools but they may be a statistical minority. The little research on AIS reveals that the focus is on those with the largest group and those who are most successful, such as Nigerians or Ghanaians. Massey et al. (2007) noted that the two African countries that contribute the most significant numbers to the pool of AIS are Nigeria (17%) and Ghana (6%). African immigrants from Nigeria are documented to be most highly educated, and researchers are most interested in researching their educational and motivational factors and parental/family influence. Yet many others struggle, underachieve, and at risk for failure and failed citizenship. In the following section, I discuss recommendations that are needed to effectively serve AIS in U.S. k-12 schools and ensure their academic success, educational equity, and social integration.

Recommendations

Overhaul Data Collection and Reporting System

This study, along with previous studies, show that although AIS are increasing in U.S. schools, they remain invisible and marginalized (Arthur 2000; Ghong et al. 2007; Harushimana 2007). When they are not distinctly recognized, they are racialized and lumped together with native-born African Americans, so their demographic and achievement data are homogenized and their academic needs ignored. One major recommendation is to overhaul the data collection and reporting system. School districts and schools must be intentional, systematic, and equitable in their data collection, analysis, and categorization of information on AIS in U.S. k-12 schools. This will involve the following: (1) School districts should collect and track AIS demographics by students’ countries of origin and home language. This will allow AIS to be distinguishable from their native-born African Americans and therefore enable educators to recognize their unique challenges and academic needs for intervention. Such data collection will also allow AIS subgroups to be compared for accurate analysis; (2) track and disaggregate scholastic data—grade point average, subject-based reading, math, science, social sciences, and ACT/SAT test scores; and (3) disaggregate achievement data within the AIS subgroups by country of origin, gender, socioeconomic status, language and family status. Implementing these ideas would help provide a clear picture about AIS and their academic performances and educational experiences.

Specifically, school districts will need to put in place rigorous accountability programs that document AIS’ demographics, academic achievement, and other data such as attendance rate, dropout rate, discipline rate, course taking, participation in enrichment programs, advanced and honors’ classes, and completion and graduation rate, and high school attended. More importantly, achievement data must be broken down by AIS’ parent/guardian’s country of origin and home language. School districts should review, update, and compare this data across schools to inform policies and reform. Tracking and keeping accurate data will ensure that AIS receive appropriate services, including academic counseling, course taking, and required tests for college preparation and admission. However, this is not to ignore the inherent problem related to the data collection and reporting system. As Covington Clarkson (2008) observed, there may be only a handful of AIS enrolled at a particular school, so school districts or individual schools may find it less worthwhile to document them. However, I argue that if we truly believe in educational equity, each student deserves the right to be counted and documented (Kids Count Data Book 2015). Similar recommendations have been proposed (see Curry-Stevens and Coalition of Communities of Color 2013; Minnesota Minority Education Partnership 2006; NCES 2010). Some African immigrant communities in the U.S. have begun vocalizing their concerns about the academic challenges AIS face in U.S. k-12 schools and have called for data that will show how their children are doing:

Education reform is an urgent issue for our [African immigrant} families and children. While data shows we have high levels of university degrees, we also have high levels of those who have not graduated high school. We also believe, but do not have the “hard” data (yet) to back this up, that our children are [dropping out of] school in high numbers, departing from an unwelcoming environment which has been very difficult and holds little prospect for reform (Curry-Stevens and Coalition of Communities of Color 2013, p. 49).

Other school districts or individual schools should build partnerships with local organizations of communities of color to support research projects on AIS data collection, analysis, and reporting. The Coalition of Communities of Color suggests “African” as a racial identifier separate from African American, Caribbean, and Other Black. Curry-Stevens and Coalition of Communities of Color (2014) provide a research protocol that can guide school districts and communities as they embark upon such initiative on data disaggregation to close achievement disparities. To achieve this goal, school districts and collaborative universities will need resources and must seek federal funding such as Race to the Top or other state support.

Debunk and Interrogate the AIS’ Model Minority Ascription

Due to the insufficient evidence to support AIS’ academic achievement excellence in U.S. k-12 schools, it is important to debunk the “model minority” claim. The “model minority” claim disadvantages many AIS in U.S. schools who are struggling and are at-risk for failure. Much of the claim of African immigrant educational success is based on misleading and isolated statistical subgroup. Chow (2011) challenges educators to take an honest look at how the “model minority” myth plays out in schools and classrooms. He raises questions to guide educators in debunking and interrogating the myth: “Does the high achievement of an immigrant student group make us feel justified in our pedagogy for all students?” (n.p.). To what extent do we believe that, if the Nigerian or Ghanaian immigrant student can do it, then newcomer or refugee Somali, Sudanese, Liberian, Sierra Leonean, and or Ethiopian students can do it? Educators must recognize the diversity within the group. As discussed in the theoretical framework, while AIS may have some commonalities as Africans, there are also stark differences such as immigration status, geographic conditions, and economic, linguistic, and religious differences that impact differently on their schooling and academic outcomes. It is critical to disaggregate the achievement and performance data of each subgroup in order to accurately identify their unique abilities and address their needs and challenges. More importantly, educators must understand the differences between African Americans and AIS groups. African Americans and African immigrants may be racially related but are historically, culturally, and linguistically dissimilar.

It is particularly critical and responsible to deconstruct the African immigrant “model minority” label, given the divisiveness it instigates among other ethnic groups, especially with native-born African Americans. Headlining African immigrants as America’s new “model minority” contributes to and exacerbates the divisiveness and hostility between African immigrants and native-born African Americans. It pits AIS against their native-born African American peers. This exacerbates the cultural divide and intra-ethnic tensions and conflicts between the two groups (Arthur 2000; Traore and Lukens 2006). Kperogi (2009) notes that the news and discourse on African immigrant educational success have spurred some divisive commentaries and controversy among certain African American professional elites with specific reference to Harvard University professors, Lani Guinier and Henry Louis Gates, who have both made divisive comments about African immigrant students in U.S. colleges and universities. Guinier, a law professor, was noted to say, “I don’t think, in the name of affirmative action, we should be admitting people because they look like us, but then they don’t identify with us.” She also asked if “voluntary” immigrants should be the beneficiaries of affirmative action and called for reevaluation of the affirmative action and admission policies to ensure that native-born African Americans are the true beneficiaries of the race/diversity-based policy (Johnson 2005; Kperogi 2009; Page 2004; Rimer and Arenson 2004). I must note that not all African-American scholars or individuals hold this anti-African immigrant view.

Further, labeling African immigrants as America’s new “model minority” has created unfair comparisons between them and their native-born African American peers. Comparisons have appeared that tend to indict or shame African-American students whose primary language is English but perform significantly worse on standardized tests than AIS who are English language learners. For instance, The Seattle Times (Rosenthal 2011), reporting on the achievement gap between African immigrants and native-born African Americans in the Seattle Public Schools, quoted a staff member’s comment:

Our school has a large proportion of both populations [African immigrants and native-born African Americans], and most African immigrants are among the most motivated students in the school. Their parents push them hard and are supportive of everything we do in school […]. As we know all too well, African American families don’t exactly share that same trust of our educational system…It’s unfortunate, it’s sad, but it’s true (n. p.).

In their study, Njue and Retish (2010) referenced a similar comment:

The students [African immigrants] have made good use of what the school has offered them. References such as the students are “more respectful,” “more prepared to learn,” and “more teachable” that are heard from teachers are an indication that the teachers favorably compare them to other racial and ethnic groups within the school (p. 367).

Call for Culturally Responsive and Globally Competent Teachers

This study highlighted some dehumanizing treatment that AIS receive in U.S. k-12 schools, which affects their academic outcomes. Thus, this study calls for culturally responsive and globally competent educators who are caring and able to create respectful and humanizing learning spaces for AIS. Educators must recognize that making disparaging comments about AIS’ linguistic pattern affects their self-esteem and learning motivation. Educators must create and use balanced and stereotype-free instructional content and materials in their classrooms. Teachers should examine and evaluate instructional materials, especially films and videos, used in teaching about Africa to eliminate stereotypes or negative images that shame and dehumanize AIS. Teachers should also engage their classes in deconstructing negative and biased content and images found in instructional materials and curriculum. Images harbored by teachers and students that depict Africa as a backward and “dark” continent, a jungle and a place with starving and emaciated, skeleton-like people, as a disease-ridden place rife with “ebola” children, must be interrogated, discountenanced, and discontinued. The African immigrant community in Multnomah County Portland, Oregon, made this plea:

Our children need to enter schools where teachers understand their culture and the conditions of their arrival in the USA. All teachers who engage with our children need to understand the history, the challenges and the conditions in which our children encounter their world. Understanding will provide an important link to reducing the isolation and vulnerability of our children (Curry-Stevens and Coalition of Communities of Color 2013, p. 9).

Limitation and Future Research

While this study unpacks important information that is useful for understanding AIS and the issue of homogenized academic performance and achievement and other educational experiences in U.S. k-12 schools, it is important to recognize some limitations that may affect the generalization of the findings. The major limitation of the study is a lack of comprehensive data for analysis and interpretation. I used the only data available. The data examined included states and school districts that were identified in the Pew Research Center and Kids Count Data Book. This means that school districts with large numbers of African immigrants and students such as in Minnesota, where data was not provided, were excluded (see Table 1). School districts in other community contexts such as in suburban or rural areas that AIS attend were not examined. Another limitation relates to the two data disaggregation examined. As discussed in the findings, only two school districts’ disaggregated data was available and used to answer the research questions. Data disaggregation was by home language or country of origin, which excludes African students born in the U.S. and speak only English. However, this should not diminish the findings or the information provided in the paper. Based on the findings and implications of this research, this study recommends the following areas for further research. The paucity of research on African immigrants and the increasing presence of their children in U.S. k-12 schools calls for an urgent response and action. There is an urgent need for increased, comprehensive, and robust empirical studies on the academic performance and achievement, and the overall educational experience of AIS in U.S. k-12 schools. There is a need for research studies that make AIS visible in U.S. k-12 schools by disaggregating pertinent data such as academic achievement, graduation rates, participation in enrichment programs such as advanced placement and honors’ classes, college and career readiness, and dropout rates. I call on researchers, particularly university faculty to undertake collaborative research projects such as those undertaken by Portland State University and the Coalition of Communities of Color in Multnomah County, Portland, Oregon. Following this study, I am inspired to explore the work of the Coalition of Communities of Color and the possibility of undertaking a research project on data disaggregation for AIS in k-12 across the U.S. schools. Educators will be more successful in fostering AIS’ academic achievement, psychological wellbeing, and social integration if they have a better understanding of who they are, along with their unique schooling and educational experiences and scholastic performance.

Conclusion

The purpose of this paper is to bring a needed attention to the schooling and academic achievement realities of AIS in U.S. k-12 schools. The study examined whether data exist to verify the achievement and performance excellence of AIS in U.S. k-12 schools to justify the “model minority” claim ascribed to the group. Although reports show that African immigrants have high levels of educational accomplishment, data does not exist to support the educational excellence of AIS in k-12 schools. Instead, the study revealed that: (1) AIS’ academic achievement and performance data are homogenized and subsumed under the African American racial/ethnicity category in state and district databases; (2) a few disaggregated achievement data for AIS show that even though they outperform their native-born African American peers, they perform below their Asian and Caucasian peers. Curry-Stevens and Sinkey (2016), in their report, found that AIS performed below Asian and Caucasian peers. They noted that even low-income Asian and Caucasian peers outperformed AIS at all grade levels regardless of their income levels. The study also reveals that AIS experience marginalization and inequities that negatively affect their schooling, learning, and achievement. The paper concludes that the notion of a “model minority” attributed to African immigrants is disingenuous and a disservice to AIS in U.S. k-12 schools. The idea fails to account for and understand the stark differences among the group. As others have argued, it is a racialized ideology used to undermine and vilify other marginalized groups, particularly African American students or AIS subgroups.

Thus, I first argue that both aggregated and disaggregated data be available for AIS so that educators and families are informed and can have a better understanding of their true academic achievement and performance, as well as recognize the unique needs and challenges they may face in order to best serve them and ensure their success and social integration. One African immigrant community’s plea illuminates:

We need accurate and routine information on how our children and youth are doing in school […]. We ask all school boards […] to adopt the Coalition of Communities of Color’s Research Protocol that will allow for the progress of our children to be monitored as a composite group, rather than being rolled into the data for African Americans (Curry-Stevens et al. 2010, p. 49).

The study is significant and contributes to the limited research on AIS and their educational and academic realities in the context of U.S. k-12 schools. African immigrants and their children are one of the fastest growing immigrant groups in the United States (Anderson 2015). The African working-age population (15–64) is projected to double and add 700 million more potential workers and emigrants between 2005 and 2050 (American Community Survey (ACS) 2009; Capps et al. 2011; Ratha et al. 2011). This growth in African immigrant population is significant for the United States as it contributes to its diversity and, especially, to the Black/African American population (Konadu-Agyemang and Takyi 2006; Logan 2007). Unlike the 60s, 70s, and even the early 80s, when most African immigrants came to the U.S. to receive higher education and returned home, most of today’s African immigrants are “voluntary” professionals, Diversity Visa Lottery recipients and refugees who have every intention to not only make the U.S. their home but also to bring and resettle their immediate and extended relatives. The implication is that U.S. schools will experience an influx of African immigrant students that must be effectively prepared in order to foster their educational success and effective integration and citizenship development. Unfortunately, African immigrant students in U.S. k-12 schools are understudied and remain an invisible minority group (Knight 2011). I concur with other researchers who argue that the future of the American society depends on what happens to the young people growing up in immigrant families and the need to invest in their future (Hernandez et al. 2009). As African immigrant children increasingly become part of the U.S. society and future members of the workforce, they will constitute an integral part of the U.S. human capital. Overlooking and ignoring AIS’ schooling and educational experiences in U.S. k-12 schools, and obscuring their performance and achievement data, could spell doom for the nation. Homogenizing AIS obscures their true and accurate performance, and denies them access to quality and equitable education, which could lead to some devastating educational, political, psychological, and social outcomes. Disaggregating AIS’ performance and achievement data is critical as data often informs policymaking, intervention, and change. Serving AIS equitably and qualitatively in schools ensures their academic success and democratic citizenship which, in turn, benefits the U.S. society and humanity at large. The article is written in hopes that it will increase the visibility of African immigrant students in U.S. k-12 schools, raise awareness about their academic performance and achievement and school districts’ reporting system, and in particular, create for understanding of the educational issues they face. Another outcome is that other school districts will emulate the efforts of the Seattle Research Evaluation Department to improve data systems and data reporting.