Dear Editor,
Barring any COVID-19 restrictions, schools across Guyana will soon conduct their orientation exercises for their new intake of learners and open their doors for the new academic year.
An important item on the agenda for every orientation exercise is a presentation of the school’s rules. Parents are sure to find among the school rules those that advise on the presentation of the hair of the learners. Left to themselves, learners and their parents can test the limits of hairstyles for schools; granted that fashion and hairstyles change with every passing decade. In the past, to enforce conformity to the rules, some teachers went so far as cutting the hair of students themselves right in school. More often than not the boys thereafter visit the barber to complete their job.
When I was at Secondary School in the mid-1970s, the Head Prefect sported the biggest Afro in the school, with his hair covering even his ears. In the following decades there were styles such as Gyal-ah-rush-me, perm, Mohawk, and various designs made on the head. These days some parents even approach the school asking for exemption from the school rules for their children, giving reasons such as:
1. I have never cut my son’s hair, please allow him to attend with it neatly plaited.
2. My daughter’s hair is very short, please allow her to use an extension until her hair grows back.
3. We are Rastafarians, my child will wear dreadlocks.
4. Please allow my daughter to wear a hair piece because her hair is short.
5. My daughter’s hair is breaking, please allow her with braids.
Just a few weeks ago, Jamaica’s High Court ruled that a school was legally right in barring a child with dreadlocks. The court’s decision was that a school that said a student could not attend classes if she did not cut her dreadlocks did not infringe on the child’s constitutional rights.
The parents of the seven-year-old girl in this case had approached the courts for redress, since they refused to cut their daughter’s dreadlocks. This was after the school had informed the parents that the wearing of dreadlocks was against its policy due to fears of lice outbreak and ‘junjo’ at the school. (The Washington Post).
After the decision of the court, the chairman of the school board was quoted as saying that the student will be permitted to attend class in September after all. Predictably, the reaction of the Jamaican public has been very critical of the court’s ruling. What was even more startling for the population is the fact that Rastafarianism began in Jamaica and its followers are noted for their dreadlocks. However, the girl’s parents do not consider themselves Rastafarians but stated that they do see their hair as a form of expression. Even the Prime Minister of Jamaica, the Honourable Andrew Holness weighed in by saying that his government would update the relevant law noting that it is time to review and amend the Education Act (St. Lucia Times, August 4, 2020).
Importantly, it must not be lost in the discussions surrounding the court’s decision that the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child has listed (#28) that every child has the right to an education. So even as educators make rules for the maintenance of order and discipline and proper functioning of schools, they must be mindful not to trample on the rights of children. With the same breath I hereby advocate for parents and learners and other stakeholders to give maximum support to schools so that they can achieve their mission. Further, both parents and schools should strive to eliminate adversarial relations that are inimical to teaching and learning. Further, more parents need to up their game and expend the same vigour towards their academics as in their appearance.
Yours faithfully,
Bernel L.H. Wickham
