Letter of the Day | Jamaica College stance on hair grooming sets important precedent

THE EDITOR Madam:

I applaud the recent decision by Jamaica College to revise its hair grooming policy, a meaningful step toward dismantling discriminatory practices still present in our education system and rooted in Jamaica’s colonial past. For decades, hair rules have served as subtle but powerful mechanisms of discrimination in schools, disproportionately affecting African-Jamaican students whose natural hair textures do not conform to Eurocentric standards.

At Fi We Children Foundation (FWCF), we believe that no child should be denied access to education because their natural hair does not fit outdated definitions of what is considered “groomed.” Although often framed as neutral, grooming rules have historically targeted Black children, imposing penalties for simply wearing the hair they were born with. Such policies communicate a harmful message: that Black hair is somehow unprofessional or unacceptable, reinforcing discriminatory ideals that have no place in a modern, inclusive school environment.

In recent discussions with FWCF, Jamaica College principal Wayne Robinson posed a crucial and long-overlooked question: “What is it that stops an African-Jamaican student from growing his hair, while his Caucasian or Asian classmate can? I simply cannot understand that justification. To me, this is a colonial vestige that is prejudice and discriminatory.” His position is both courageous and necessary, acknowledging a reality many institutions have long avoided confronting.

Students themselves welcome the revision. OS, a Lower Sixth student, shared that the updated policy feels more inclusive and meaningfully reduces discrimination against students with Afro-textured hair. This shift signals to young people that they need not suppress their identity to receive an education or be respected within their school community.

FWCF has consistently raised concerns about grooming-based exclusions. In September, we condemned the practice of locking children out of school for such reasons, noting that it violates a child’s right to education and freedom from discrimination – rights protected under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, ratified by Jamaica in 1991.

As Frantz Fanon argued in Black Skin, White Masks, societies must liberate themselves from the constraints of the “white gaze” and reclaim their cultural identity on their own terms. Confronting discriminatory grooming rules is one meaningful and practical step in that broader process of decolonisation and self-affirmation.

This position is not a rejection of discipline, which remains essential. Rather, it is a call for rules that uplift students instead of reinforcing prejudice or disproportionately disadvantaging Black children. Jamaica College’s stance sets an important precedent, showing that school regulations can respect both cultural identity and the need for order.

AFRICKA STEPHENS

Executive Founder

astephens@fiwechildren.org