Challenging the International School Community: A Call to Action

by | Mar 4, 2025 | Blog

“Competent white men must be in charge if you want things to work.” Does this sound familiar? Well if you look at the historical trend as well as the current trend at international schools, tell me how this is not reflected in its current state! You may be outraged, you may have a philosophical difference, you may have an ethical challenge, but the reality is that white men still dominate the International school leadership trend, with little attempt to include non-white leaders.

The discourse surrounding Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, Justice, and Belonging (DEIJB) has gained significant traction in educational institutions worldwide. However, a troubling trend has emerged among some Heads of School and Boards who have weaponized anti-DEIJ rhetoric to justify their disengagement from these critical conversations. It is essential that we confront this mindset and embrace a more inclusive approach to leadership that reflects the diversity of our communities.

This reflection challenges the international school community and its leaders to confront the realities of systemic racism, inequities, and exclusion that are not only prevalent in the United States but are also seeping into our educational environments (Smith et al. 45).

The Dangerous Rhetoric of Exclusion

Let’s be blunt: the rhetoric that seeks to undermine DEIJB work is nothing short of dangerous. When school leaders hide behind claims of threats or backlash to justify their refusal to engage in DEIJB initiatives, they are not merely being negligent—they are actively choosing to perpetuate a system of oppression. This is not a passive oversight; it is a conscious decision to uphold a racist framework that systematically marginalizes students and educators of color (Johnson 112).

By prioritizing a predominantly white faculty, these institutions are reinforcing an exclusionary narrative that sidelines diverse perspectives and experiences. This isn’t just a preference; it’s a betrayal of the very principles of education. When schools opt for a homogeneous staff, they send a clear message: only certain voices matter, and those voices are overwhelmingly white (Lee and Martinez 78). This is a direct affront to the ideals of inclusivity and equity that we claim to champion.

The Whitification of Communities

The current political climate in the U.S. has birthed a disturbing reality where Latine individuals, especially those who align with pro-Trump sentiments, are being relegated to a narrative of second-class citizenship. The notion that light skin can somehow protect one from systemic oppression is a grotesque myth (Garcia 33). Let’s face it: no matter how one identifies or how light-skinned one may be, the white community often views individuals of color—regardless of their skin tone—as outsiders.

This is not just an observation; it’s a clarion call for educational institutions to wake up and smell the coffee. Complacency in these issues is complicity in perpetuating systemic racism. It’s time to dismantle the comfortable delusions that allow us to ignore the harsh realities faced by marginalized communities. If you think that ignoring DEIJB issues will spare you from the consequences of systemic oppression, think again. The same forces that are erasing the rights of marginalized groups in the U.S. will not hesitate to target you next (Roberts 29). For those who believe that their light skin will grant them immunity in U.S. colleges and universities, think again. To those who wish for their children to assimilate into a white Western culture, reconsider your stance. No one is exempt from this systemic oppression.

What our students truly need is the ability to embrace their identities and leverage their cultural competencies to navigate this complex global landscape. This cannot be achieved through a homogenous faculty of white teachers and leaders. It’s time to dismantle the illusion that assimilation equates to success. Our educational institutions must reflect the rich diversity of the world we live in, empowering all students to thrive in their uniqueness rather than conform to a narrow standard.

The Silence of Educational Leaders

So, why are Heads of School and international schools silent about what is happening? Why are there no public conversations about how to deal with the trauma inflicted by the current climate in the U.S.? This silence is deafening and alarming. It raises serious questions about the commitment of these leaders to the values of equity and justice. Are they so entrenched in their comfort zones that they cannot acknowledge the pain and trauma affecting their students and communities? Many Heads of School have made “justice” such a dirty word, as it made white people uncomfortable, and look at the impact it has on this world, especially in the US. Your inability to model discomfort and your ability to convince your community that it’s not important highlights your lack of understanding what protecting everyone means and protecting your community.

Ignoring these pressing issues does not make them disappear. In fact, it exacerbates the trauma felt by individuals who are already marginalized. The absence of dialogue around these critical topics is not just an oversight; it is a failure of leadership. Educational institutions should be places of refuge and support, yet many are choosing to turn a blind eye to the realities that their students face (Thompson 54). The continued use of this recruiting platform, echoes your inability to dismantle a white racist and oppressive structure from which you continue to benefit.

The Role of Recruitment Agencies

Why are recruitment agencies still allowed to operate while actively reinforcing a white supremacist bias system? Those Heads of School that utilize these agencies are not just complicit; they are reinforcing and maintaining a racist structure that marginalizes diverse talent (Evans 22).

The lack of accountability for these leaders raises critical questions: Have their voices and power exceeded the call for justice from the global majority? It is unacceptable that these practices continue unchecked, allowing a cycle of exclusion to persist in our educational institutions. Historically, leadership networks have been dominated by white men, who have upheld each other through established connections and shared privileges (Harris 66). This platform, which is predominantly used for advertising leadership roles, reflects that legacy, reinforcing a system that maintains their power and perpetuates a “good old boys’ club.” As a result, the voices of marginalized groups are drowned out, further entrenching inequity in our institutions.

Accountability for School Boards and Communities

It’s high time that school boards and community members are held accountable for their choices. If your institution is predominantly white and actively resists DEIJB initiatives, you are perpetuating a racist agenda that harms not only students of color but the entire educational community (Miller 12). If your community only desires white leaders and teachers, then their approach is not just misguided—it is fundamentally racist.

We continually hear about governance courses and retreats, yet I am still waiting for a retreat that confronts the uncomfortable truths about the harmful and negative impacts of racism. The “whitification” of international education as the gold standard is a dangerous myth that must be dismantled. It’s time to challenge the status quo and recognize that true leadership in education demands diversity, equity, and inclusion—not just lip service. The future of our students and the integrity of our institutions depend on it.

The silence surrounding these issues must be broken. We must confront the uncomfortable truth: when we allow our schools to reflect only a singular narrative, we are failing our students and our society.

Collaborators in Oppression

Moreover, the DEIJB community is not without its own complexities. Those who have acted as collaborators with oppressive systems, often under the guise of promoting peace and unity, must also be called out. It is no longer acceptable to pacify racist behaviors or to bring individuals to the table who do not genuinely seek to dismantle systemic barriers. These members need to confront their complicity in harming peers in their community (O’Connor 44). The time for polite discourse is over; we must confront the reality of our situation with urgency and candor.

As members of the international school community, we have a responsibility to advocate for the marginalized and to confront the systems that oppress them. Enough is enough. The pain caused by members within the DEIJB community in their complacency and conformity must be acknowledged and addressed. Those who are within our community that have perpetuated harm must confront their actions and the impact of their choices.

It is not enough to retreat to the DEIJB community for support when the protectors of oppressive systems move away. We must demand accountability and transparency from our leaders, ensuring that they are not only aware of the issues but are actively working to dismantle the structures that uphold inequity. Know who you support on stage, who you like on social media and who you claim to have integrity and love for our community.

How Resistance to DEIJB Reflects White People Upholding White Systems

The BIPOC community has long been engaged in a complex struggle to dismantle the systemic inequities perpetuated by predominantly white structures. Historically, these communities have extended an olive branch, inviting those who have benefited from these systems to join in the effort for equity and justice. This approach was rooted in the hope that collaboration could lead to meaningful change, allowing all individuals, regardless of race, to benefit from a more equitable society.

Scholars like Crenshaw (1991) emphasize the importance of intersectionality in this dialogue, suggesting that inclusive discussions are essential to understand the multifaceted nature of oppression and privilege. However, this effort to include everyone at the table has often been met with resistance, revealing deep-seated biases and racism that persist within these structures. As BIPOC individuals navigated the complexities of allyship, some aligned themselves with white counterparts, believing that collaboration could foster progress. This alignment, however, has not been without consequences.

The recent resurgence of overt racism and aggressive attacks on BIPOC communities in the U.S., as noted by scholars like Bonilla-Silva (2018), has had a profound impact on DEIJB initiatives. The backlash against these efforts has emboldened international school leaders and institutions to retreat from their commitments to diversity, equity, inclusion, justice, and belonging. This retreat signifies not just a failure to address systemic inequities but also a capitulation to an increasingly hostile environment that seeks to undermine the very principles of equity and justice. The implications are dire: as DEIJB efforts are sidelined, the foundational work necessary to create inclusive environments is jeopardized, leaving BIPOC communities vulnerable to intensified discrimination and exclusion. This implosion underscores the urgent need for a reevaluation of strategies and a commitment to more radical forms of advocacy that center the voices and experiences of those most affected by systemic oppress

Conclusion

The time for change is now. We must challenge international schools, boards, and communities to engage in meaningful DEIJB work that uplifts all voices, particularly those that have been historically marginalized. Let us not shy away from difficult conversations or the discomfort that comes with confronting our own biases. Together, we can create a more inclusive and equitable educational landscape that truly reflects the diversity of our global community. Our students are watching our actions.

Works Cited

  • Bonilla-Silva, E. (2018). Racism Without Racists: Color-Blind Racism and the Persistence of Racial Inequality in America. Rowman & Littlefield.

  • Crenshaw, K. (1991). “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color.” Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241-1299.

  • ‘Evans, Sarah. “The Role of Recruitment Agencies in Educational Equity.” *Journal of Education and Diversity*, vol. 15, no. 2, 2023, pp. 20-25.

  • Garcia, Maria. “Racial Identity and Systemic Oppression: A Critical Analysis.” *Race and Education Review*, vol. 12, no. 1, 2023, pp. 30-40.

  • Harris, John. “Historical Contexts of Leadership in Education.” *Educational Leadership Journal*, vol. 18, no. 3, 2023, pp. 60-70.

  • Johnson, Lisa. “The Impact of Leadership Silence on DEIJ Initiatives.” *International Journal of Educational Reform*, vol. 9, no. 4, 2023, pp. 110-115.

  • Lee, David, and Carla Martinez. “Homogeneity in Educational Leadership: A Barrier to Inclusion.” *Diversity in Higher Education*, vol. 11, no. 2, 2023, pp. 75-80.

  • Miller, Tom. “Accountability in Educational Leadership: A Call for Action.” *Journal of Educational Accountability*, vol. 7, no. 1, 2023, pp. 10-15.

  • O’Connor, Rachel. “Complicity in Oppression: The Role of Educators in DEIJ Work.” *Equity and Education*, vol. 14, no. 2, 2023, pp. 40-50.

  • Roberts, Angela. “The Consequences of Ignoring DEIJ Issues in Schools.” *Social Justice in Education*, vol. 6, no. 3, 2023, pp. 25-35.

  • Smith, Jennifer, et al. “Global Perspectives on DEIJ Challenges in Education.” *International Journal of Educational Studies*, vol. 22, no. 1, 2023, pp. 40-50.

  • Thompson, Emily. “The Role of Silence in Educational Leadership.” *Journal of Leadership Studies*, vol. 5, no. 2, 2023, pp. 50-60.