The Disappearance of Equity in Schools
What is systemic racism, and how does it impact our students? 
This is a question many of us ask and wonder about. This summer, I had a conversation with my niece from Australia about systemic racism. I could explain it, but I struggled to come up with a concrete example because it’s so deeply embedded in our policies. Unless you’re actively looking for its impact on marginalized communities, you won’t always notice it. I don’t study these policies in my work, but I know systemic racism exists—I see it. Yet, I don’t always have the words to explain how the decisions made within a system impact students.
However, this year, I am seeing concrete examples that make me uncomfortable. One thing I’ve come to understand is the prevalence of confirmation bias. We can all find research to support our beliefs, no matter what they are, but looking at all perspectives is much harder—especially when urgency makes people reluctant to dig deeper. Maybe writing about this won’t make me friends or help my career, but I need space to process it. And what else is this blog for if not to voice my thoughts and unpack why I feel uneasy and anxious for the students I teach? I always try to be collaborative and respectful when addressing systemic racism and don’t call it what it is but maybe it’s time. This is my space, and I will write what I see—the recent decisions I hear about in education that are being made are steeped in systemic racism.
I’m hearing the same concerns from colleagues in school boards across the province, and likely across the country and the world. Many boards are eliminating equity coach roles under the assumption that if we focus on literacy for all, we no longer need dedicated equity and anti-racism departments. This decision is deeply problematic. Literacy and equity go hand in hand.
Read the research by Zaretta Hammond and Gloria Ladson-Billings, and you’ll see why they advocate for Culturally Responsive Pedagogy and the importance of representation and rigor in the classroom. When we remove an anti-racist lens from literacy, we move backward. If a system eliminates these voices, who is sitting at the table to consider the impact on marginalized students? No one—because that table is filled with one dominant identity. And when there’s only one perspective in the room, how are decisions truly being made for all students?
Instead of dismantling equity departments, why aren’t we integrating their work into literacy and math? Rather than treating anti-racism and equity as isolated initiatives, why not embed them into all departments so literacy and math experts can develop a deeper understanding of what it means to apply an anti-racist lens? Just by saying your are anti-racist – doesn’t make you so. Especially if your advocacy and decisions reflect hard to marginalized communities.
What I see happening is a misrepresentation of Culturally Responsive Pedagogy—one where so-called “experts” in literacy and math reduce it to simply acknowledging the culture of students—what they wear, eat, or celebrate. But that is not what CRP is. Being culturally responsive means recognizing that students learn in different ways, building on their strengths, creating a supportive environment, and adapting instruction accordingly. It does not mean don’t bring in gummy bears for a math activity because there are children who can’t eat gelatin. It is being aware of this and having a math activity with gelatin free candy (and yes, every gummy bears can be) but really thinking though the lesson and why it involves food. What are students in your class interested in that will engage them in the activity? You might think that not deeply understanding CRRP is not a form of racism but it is. When a system only allows teachers to scratch the surface, it is not supporting our most vulnerable students.
What many educators are being taught about CRP is just a rebranded version of multiculturalism. And this is systemic racism in action—because systems are not giving teachers the time, resources, or depth needed to truly understand and implement it.
The Marginalization of Multilingual Learners
Another clear example of systemic racism is the lack of support for our multilingual learners. As a teacher who works with many new immigrants, I see firsthand how little the system does to support them. It often feels like decisions that impact their learning are made to satisfy ministry requirements rather than meet student needs. Advocacy can feel like a risk, with the fear of punishment for speaking out. The system justifies its choices using language rooted in colonial structures. Again, confirmation bias plays a role—we can all find research that supports our views. But how willing is the system to look at all the research to make truly informed decisions that uplift marginalized students? Are they considering the families impacted by their decisions right now, or only focusing on what they believe will benefit future students? Are they checking their own biases and doing the really hard work of understanding them?
Why aren’t they thinking about the grade 8 student who struggles to read in English but is fluent in Mandarin? Why aren’t they making decisions that help an award-winning student from India reach new heights rather than plateau? Why aren’t families who don’t speak English given the opportunity to be deeply involved in the school community?
I could rant about this forever, but I’ll stop here and leave you with this: take a moment to reflect on the decisions being made around you. How do they impact racialized students in your community? And what are we willing to do about it?
