Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 21:44, 1 February 2015

Somalis in the United Kingdom received a peer review by Misplaced Pages editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

This article was nominated for deletion on 8 September 2008. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Somalia High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Somalia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Somalia on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SomaliaWikipedia:WikiProject SomaliaTemplate:WikiProject SomaliaWikiProject Somalia High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. African diaspora High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. United Kingdom Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Ethnic groups Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ethnic groupsWikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groupsTemplate:WikiProject Ethnic groupsEthnic groups Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks: Here are some open WikiProject Ethnic groups tasks: Meta-tasks: Place the {{Ethnic groups}} template on the talk page of articles within the scope of this project. Resolve the disparity in importance rankings among different ethnic groups Articles about ethnic groups that currently have issues needing resolution: Category:Unassessed Ethnic groups articles Category:Ethnic groups articles needing merge action Category:Ethnic groups articles needing infoboxes Category:Ethnic groups articles needing reassessment Category:Ethnic groups articles needing attention Iyer Peruvian people Start an article: Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Ethnic groups/Article requests Feel free to edit this list or discuss these tasks.

Archives

Index Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

Somalis DO NOT reject Arabs

I have noticed some changes made on this entry again I will like to clarify some issue with editors who have been editing this, I have noticed that there is a subheading about Somalis' in UK rejecting our association with Arabs.

That Can not be the case

The evidence that Ackees has provided is just an opinion of young Somali writer, also even we take that as evident it doesn't change anything as Somalis are black in term of the colour of their skin tone, but as I said before, in term of race, we identify ourselves as Somalis. The other reason that also editor Ackees mentioned is pure political one, AND I WAS HOPING this to be impartial editing, racism in Arab league is just fabricated political slogans, Arabs have done more than enough to support Somalis and Somalia in general, evident of that is the Kuwaitis, Qataris and Saudis spending larger amount of their money on Somalia through UNICEF and OIC and this is widely documented, so this argument is not valid. of course, I am not suggesting that countries in Arab league do not have some problems with racism.

The last evidence editor Ackees provided is notes taken on the Britain's ONS,this actually has nothing to do with Somalis, its more on clarity of the form, so I am surprised this has been used as proof the Somalis reject Arabs and their association (5.2.4 Clarity, quality and acceptability).

Therefore I have restored the version to that of Middayexpress for this entry.

I hope this stays the same

Abdirisak (talk) 02:24, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

First of all, there is no such a thing as a "race". That Kuwaitis, Qataris and Saudis are spending a large amount of 'their' money on Somalia is not relevant to the case that British Somalis are 'rejecting' the Arab label. The poll gave a clear result, it was nearly unanimously(99%). The "rejection" is based on the poll, we can't deny that, but it is not obligated that the "rejection" section should stay. If it isn't contributing to the article, then it could be removed or replaced by an other section, discussing it on a different manner.

Instead of reverting, we should ask ourselves: are these sections really necessary? Is it contributing the article and helping the reader to understand more about the "Somalis in the United Kingdom"? What if we just remove the entire section about "relations with other communities". This article is only about the Somalis in the UK, and not about their affiliations with other ethnic groups within the United Kingdom Runehelmet (talk) 13:50, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Somalis did not "reject the Arab label in Census" as the section title claims, nor is the cited 99% figure even real. The document alluded to is a Census test from 2007, not the Census itself. On the other hand, the ONS' assertion that "there is some evidence that with an ‘Arab’ tick-box, some African Arabs might be unsure whether to tick ‘Arab’ or ‘African’ cognitive testing with Somalis in Wales showed that there was no standard way for them to answer this question with some ticking ‘African’, some writing in ‘Somali’ in the ‘Any other Black background’ write-in section and others ticking more than one box" refers to a separate Wales cognitive test. It does not refer to either the 2001 Census or the 2007 Census test. Please see my posts above from 16:45, 5 December 2012 (UTC) and 15:41, 6 December 2012 (UTC) for more details. Also, the contention is between this page version, versus this other one. In the latter version, the entire counterbalancing Arab section has been replaced with that misleading "Somalis reject the Arab label in Census" section. It also claims, among other questionable things, that one Isaaq leader in British Kenya "acknowledged he was identified as an 'East African Negro'". In reality, he was complaining somewhat hyperbolically to the Colonial Office that, despite long service to the Crown, the Somali community in the Great Lakes area was sometimes treated "on the same level as the Negroes of East Africa" in terms of privileges (i.e. he identified the locals as such, not himself; c.f. ). Middayexpress (talk) 14:28, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

I agree with your assertion that the article is ultimately about Somalis in the UK, not about their affiliations with other populatins. This kind of material is also not common on other UK immigrant community pages. Middayexpress (talk) 15:14, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

I dont see how that census shows that somalis reject arab label it just shows they identify as blacks then arab even the sudanis declare themselves to be black once in a while..based on my observation there's two types of somali self-identity, one that declares themselves to be arab by blood or religious affiliation (common brotherhood) and the other that totally rejects arabs as outsiders..some somalis will reject those who are light skin (probably a specific clan), declaring them arabs that speak the somali language and are to be excluded from being "pure somali"..overall somalis as well as those in the horn have a considerable amount of arab blood in them and its not something that can be "rejected". Baboon43 (talk) 15:44, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. Note that that "Somalis reject the Arab label in Census" material was actually added in place of a section on the relationship with the British Arab community (viz. ). If the material on the relationship with the Black British community is to be retained at all, this British Arab section should be re-included for balance. The Black British section also needs work, as many of the statements in it are either false, original research, out of context, or poorly sourced opinions (specifics are provided in the discussion above). I already tidied it up (c.f. ), and included a general statement on how many Somalis in the UK self-identify . However, that too was reverted. Middayexpress (talk) 16:47, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Well if the poll is false, then I don't see any reason why we should keep it. And I'm doubting if the "poll" is representing the British Somali community, even if it truly occured. The entire section is actually dispensable, it will benefit the article if it's scrapped from the page. Runehelmet (talk) 17:41, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

what about removing both relationship with black and arab communities because i dont see why its important in this article. Baboon43 (talk) 19:33, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

I think the Relationship with the Black British community part in this entry should be removed, because the evidence provided is just opinion and does not reflect the fact that if Somalis in UK have relationship with other black community in UK or not. One has to define what type of relationship we are talking about? if we talking about the colour of thier skin, of course Somalis identify themselves as black and then Somalis and because of that we can not say because Somalis are black they also have relationship with other black community in United Kingdom!

Another point is that, I don't know how many of the editors in this entry are based UK or so, but frankly there is no clear relationship between Somalis and other Black community, specially with that of West Indies who contribute the largest members of black community in the UK, Somalis for example do not participate the famous London carnival and any other important black event that take place in UK and that is the fact and to be frank again it seems people are mixing the colour of our skin tone to the race which is not fair.

Cheers Abdirisak (talk) 21:51, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

We are in agreement. The section is undue, misleading and unimportant. Middayexpress (talk) 14:04, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Black British cats, etc.

Besides the now removed section discussed above, the editor has also attempted to add category "Black British people" to the article, arguing on various pages that Somalis, Ethiopians and Eritreans in the UK are and self-identify as "Black British".

According to Movinghere , the term "Black British" arose in the 1980s to emphasize the political relationship between all ethnic minorities in Britain ("During the 1980s this term was used to stress the political unity between ethnic minorities in Britain, particularly African, Caribbean, South Asian and Chinese"). Nowadays, "Black British refers to British descendants of first generation Caribbean migrants." It only then adds the politically-based qualifier that "where necessary Black British refers broadly to all people of African or Caribbean descent living in Britain, for instance, 'the relationship between Black British people and the police'"". "Black British" thus refers first and foremost to a subset of Afro-Caribbeans, though the term is sometimes also extended on a secondary basis to all African or Caribbean immigrants.

Accordingly, Movinghere describes the genesis of the distinctive "Black British" identity as follows:

• "Young Caribbean migrants took advantage of the fact that sport was the one arena where it was possible to compete on equal terms and, from the 1950s onwards, many played a prominent part in Britain's sporting life. Music, on the other hand, presented different opportunities but also problems. In the days before reggae gained general acceptance, young migrants forged their music into a tool of self-expression and used it as a career opportunity. They created their own market for the music which, in turn, gave them a platform from which they influenced British youth culture. In the process, the music created its own market: clubs, small recording companies and, notably, DJs. It was this music culture which helped to create a new, cohesive identity among young migrants, and one which everyone began to recognise as 'Black British'. Jazzy B, for instance, one of the most prominent of recent Black British musicians, went to school in Islington, and spent his spare time learning to be a DJ and creating his own music to give voice to an emerging Black British culture."
• "In the aftermath of the Second World War, nationalism and the effort of nation building began changing attitudes in the Caribbean. The migrants who arrived in Britain in the post-war years were making their journey at the beginning of a new cultural and political ferment, which was to redefine what it meant to be Caribbean. They brought with them the ideas which were sweeping the Caribbean region and Black communities generally - Black nationalism, a renewed interest in ethnic origins and a new assertiveness about racial justice and equality. These ideas were the basis of new forms of self-expression which new Caribbean migrants began developing in Britain. The result has been a culture which we now call Black British because it draws its identity both from the migrant background and the specific experiences of living in Britain and becoming part of the mix of cultures in the UK."

We seem to be in agreement that: a) the term "Black British" in its main usage does not apply to Somalis and other Horn Africans in the UK, b) many of the latter immigrants also do not identify in this way, and c) the few who do usually do so on account of dark skin tone as opposed to racial self-identification. Would this assessment be correct, especially given Movinghere's definition of the term and its genesis? If so, should we apply this across all other relevant wikipedia pages? Middayexpress (talk) 17:58, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Well it is clear that Black British doesn't refer to Horn Africans, so the added section is 'unlawfully' in the article. And it is violating the reached consensus/agreement. There must be one clear definition of "Black British", wich doesn't include the Afro-Asiatic speaking peoples in East Africa, so it should be removed from the article. Runehelmet (talk) 20:29, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

I strongly agree with this view, the term Black British is associated with black people from West Indies background, historically and commonly, an example for that is the Nagerians in UK are commonly known as Nagerian British, also same applies to the Ghanian.

I agree with Runehelmet and Middayexpress, people from the Horn of Africa should removed from the article. Abdirisak (talk) 12:50, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

usually east africans (including those from the horn) are lumped in as blacks in western countries but im not familiar with specifically "UK"..im assuming those who have several generations of ancestry in the nation would be referred to as "black british" and those who are african "black african" specifically malian,ethiopian,somali etc Baboon43 (talk) 13:57, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Classification of Horn Africans in Western countries varies. For example, in New Zealand, 'Ethiopian' is included within 'Other African'. However, specific Afro-Asiatic ethnic groups from Ethiopia, like the Amhara and Oromo, are categorized as 'Other Middle Eastern', as they have closer ethnic ties with the Middle East (c.f. ). In the UK, from about 1991 to 2001, the "African" tick box in the census was classified under something called "Black British". However, the British Office of National Statistics (ONS) has now moved away from that with its 2011 Census, and the "African" category is no longer under the "Black" heading, but is instead listed on par with the latter. In fact, in the Scottish version, "African" is listed first . The ONS now defines the 'African' tick-box on the basis of continental geography. It thus also includes North Africa in that designation, indicating that "the African population is one of the most diverse in terms of geographic origins there was no compelling case for adding a tick-box for any single sub-African group ahead of all others and space constraints meant that it would not be possible to sub-divide the ‘African’ category into smaller geographical areas, like North African or East African" (c.f. ). Middayexpress (talk) 15:12, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

have you looked at this page Demography of England it says "These groups are often combined into broader categories" refering to black british caribbean or black british african or is that page outdated? in 2011 census England and Northern Ireland lumps them together except scottland as seen here Classification of ethnicity in the United Kingdom. New Zealand's classification is somewhat odd..i can see why they classified ethiopians as "other african" but to say amhara and oromo have close ties with the middle east is pure ignorance..those two ethnic groups have gone a great length to reject any ties with the middle east. Baboon43 (talk) 18:01, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, the Demography of England page is outdated. It references the 2001 census data and uses its old classification scheme. So does the lede in the Black British article. Quite a few wikipedia pages are still using the old 2001 scheme, and they need updating. I've already seen to that on the the main Classification of ethnicity in the United Kingdom page. As I wrote, between 1991 (when the British government first introduced a question on ethnicity) and 2001, the "African" tick-box was aggregated under a "Black or Black British" heading. However, it no longer is in the current 2011 census. "African" is now part of the heading itself in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, and the "African" tick-box falls under that. In Scotland, "African" has an altogether separate heading. There is no "Black British" box in any of the censuses. It was included in the 2011 census as a possible write-in option to accommodate people whose "ties with their ancestral countries and culture had been lost over time and they and their children had been born or had lived for many years in the UK the term ‘Black British’ seemed to be a way of asserting their own identity in relation to their British roots while acknowledging their distant non-European heritage" (c.f. section 5.3 Black British ; the African category is discussed separately in section 5.1). Regarding New Zealand, that's what the Stats bureau indicates ("If ‘Ethiopian’ is reported it is included within the ‘Other African nec’ category. However, if the response is ‘Amhara’ or ‘Oromo’, the ethnic groups of most Ethiopians in New Zealand, then these responses are placed within the ‘Other Middle Eastern’ category. ‘Amhara’ and ‘Oromo’ ethnic groups have closer ethnic ties with the Middle East." ). Middayexpress (talk) 19:04, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

That is a lazy summary on part by the new zealand statistics bureau. They seem to think that only oromo and amhara may have a middle eastern connection as they refer to them being the two largest in ethiopia. Baboon43 (talk) 19:34, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

They mean the two largest immigrant groups in NZ from Ethiopia ("the ethnic groups of most Ethiopians in New Zealand"). So size is probably also a consideration here. Middayexpress (talk) 19:59, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Khabra

There's a rather incendiary opinion from one Piara Khabra in the social issues and solutions section. Given the fact that he made that statement essentially in passing and over a decade ago (he himself apparently died six years ago), it definitely seems to be undue weight. Your thoughts? Middayexpress (talk) 18:23, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Khabra's statement isn't a significant one, nor based on facts, so actually it shouldn't be there at all. Just one of the many populists statements, but this one is just odd. It is not only undue weight, but redundant and spurious too. It should be removed, for the sake of the article. Regards. Runehelmet (talk) 22:01, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Agreed. Middayexpress (talk) 14:22, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Welfare figures

I added the following text, which was cut out by Middayexpress as "undue":

"By 2013, 39 per cent of Somali households were claiming income support, and 40 per cent were claiming child benefit - both percentages higher than for any other ethnic minority within the UK.

The comment against the edit which removed this text also said "welfare already discussed in proper context". Sorry if I'm being obtuse, but I can't find such a section - or does Middayexpress mean "Employment"? In which case I can't see the figures I provided, or any equivalent to those figures. Please clarify a) should I be looking at another section of the article for this? b) if not, is there a good reason why I shouldn't include those figures with the citation?

(btw quite understand about the removal of the detail provided by a single anecdote.) Alfietucker (talk) 19:31, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

The high intake of welfare is a function of the fact that most Somali immigrants in the UK are asylum seekers. It's not for the alarmist reasons that book insinuates. According to the Warwickshire Police Force and a report by ELWa, asylum seekers are not legally allowed to work for payment since the National Asylum Support Service (NASS) (now the UK Border Agency/UKBA) administers their monetary benefits while their claim is being processed. This is explained further down the page, in its proper context. Middayexpress (talk) 19:43, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

I've again removed that Goodhart book. It is not on the Somali community specifically. Its statistics are also unsupported. Worse, going by its cited figures for the number of economically active Somalis, they appear to be outright false. Per the Office of National Statistics which actually collects this data, in the three months to June 2008, 31.4 percent of Somali men and 84.2 percent of Somali women were economically inactive. That's almost 70% of Somali men that are economically active, not the 30% figure which that book misleadingly claims. Huge difference, and says a lot about the reliability of the work as a whole. Middayexpress (talk) 20:00, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

OK, but at least accept that the paraphrase I had to remove from "Employment" (and have removed again) of the BBC article was misleading. I can understand someone misread what the BBC wrote - "including a high proportion of skilled professionals who have not been able to find work in their field in the UK" and so paraphrased it as "This includes skilled professionals who, while constituting a high proportion of Somali immigrants, have not all been able to find work in their field". But that paraphrase is flatly contradicted by the 3 per cent figure given by the Institute for Public Policy Research, cited in the "Education" section above. Alfietucker (talk) 20:17, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

There's a contradiction because many of the qualifications that Somali professionals have obtained while in Somalia are not recognized in the UK. This leaves the not unusual situation of a doctor turned taxi driver, simply because his or her qualifications and experience are no longer recognized. Middayexpress (talk) 20:26, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Maybe, but this is not clear in the article as it stands, and if it's going to be said there it needs to be supported by a reliable citation to that effect. But I'm sure you know that already. :-) Alfietucker (talk) 20:33, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

It's already mentioned. Middayexpress (talk) 20:59, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Not meaning to be difficult, but the citation given did not substantiate the claim. I've removed the relevant sentence, but left the citation as it serves well for the previous sentence. Alfietucker (talk) 21:14, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

There's a tab toward the bottom labeled "Full text". Once that it is clicked, it is explained that "the refugees who arrived in London during 1980s and 90s were often wealthy and educated, but found it difficult to find work here comparable to the work they had left behind" . Middayexpress (talk) 21:22, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Yes I saw that and read that passage. But it doesn't say that they couldn't get work because their qualifications were not recognized (it could have been language problem, scarcity of suitable posts, lack of suitable experience compared to other candidates, etc.). What's needed is a citation that specifically says their qualifications were not recognized. Using the citation we had to claim this is WP:OR at best. Sorry. Alfietucker (talk) 21:28, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

It's in part due to language. But also to the authorities for whatever reason choosing not to recognize the qualifications of the many highly qualified asylum seekers . Middayexpress (talk) 21:38, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps you're right to infer this from the Guardian article, but even using this as a citation would be WP:OR since it nowhere mentions Somalis. As it is, AFAIK, the only reliable published citation in this article (relevant to this issue) that passes Misplaced Pages's policy of verifiability is the 3 per cent figure given by the Institute for Public Policy Research. Alfietucker (talk) 21:53, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

It's an old figure and obviously doesn't take into consideration the qualifications of many Somali professionals: "An estimated 1,500 refugee teachers live in England, but many are denied jobs either because their qualifications are not recognised or, in the case of asylum seekers, because they are banned from paid work. Sir Robert Dowling, headteacher of George Dixon International School in Birmingham, said his newest recruit, a science teacher, was a Somali refugee he had met at the school gates. His most recent job had been as a fork lift truck driver" . Middayexpress (talk) 22:33, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Yes, but then this is anecdotal. If we allow this, presumably an earlier edit you removed based on "a personal anecdote from one man" can equally be allowed since it is published in a reputable source. So either we allow both, or we need a more substantive citation based on some research to do with highly qualified Somalis in the UK. Alfietucker (talk) 22:43, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

I've just found this, for instance, which suggests the problem for many Somalis is language (rather than HE qualifications). I'll keep looking and let you know if I find anything about failure to recognize qualifications, or anything else of interest. Alfietucker (talk) 22:52, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

OK, I've found a citation which seems to support that sentence (it may merit a more careful reading but a quick look over seems to suggest it does). I've reinstated that sentence and given it that citation. That's it, I'm calling it a day now. Alfietucker (talk) 23:06, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

The main statement that many teachers "are denied jobs either because their qualifications are not recognised or, in the case of asylum seekers, because they are banned from paid work" isn't an anecdote. At any rate, the assertion that only 3% of Somalis in 2005 had higher education qualifications is at odds with an earlier 2003 study by the Africa Education Trust and London Learning and Skills Council in which 12% of the total sampled refugees and asylum seekers had higher degrees, while around 20% of the sampled Somali refugees and asylum seekers had higher degrees. Despite this, "among the Somalis interviewed, only a quarter of those with a professional background had found similar jobs in London They were four times more likely to be working in semi-skilled or manual labour jobs than would be expected given their education and employment experience There were similar proportions of people working in semi-skilled jobs across all the communities interviewed." This is pretty old, but it supports CARE's aforementioned assertion that the authorities for whatever reason are choosing not to recognize the qualifications of the many refugee and asylum seeker professionals . Middayexpress (talk) 23:39, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

I'd be careful of assuming that because someone has a qualification and they fail to get a job suitable for that qualification that means it has "not been recognized". One only has to see the fate of many graduates in this country, who don't immediately find suitable work, to realize that often the issue is relevant job experience, and that is often measured by references. I may be wrong here, but I imagine (for instance) that it's rare that immigrant Somalis would be able to provide referees from their former employers back in Somalia. In other words, there are probably other issues which prevent apparently well-qualified Somalis from getting work, which are not to do with their original qualification. I'm only spelling this out to present the grounds on which a less sympathetic editor may claim it's WP:OR to draw the inference you did from the BBC article you last instated as a citation. That's why I've shunted this a bit, and given the relevant sentence the Harris document as a citation (the link of which, btw, was "dead" but I've now fixed). All best, Alfietucker (talk) 10:20, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

It's indicated as well in the link above: ""There is a barrier for many refugees in terms of their qualifications," Ms Jones told the London Assembly. "They may have qualifications which are not recognised in this country and then find themselves having to effectively start again. "On the one hand we have got skills shortages in London and on the other hand we have a group of people with skills. With a little support they could be in work"" . According to the AETLLSC, "not being able to get overseas qualifications recognised" is also one of the main barriers to employment . Middayexpress (talk) 15:50, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Somali Education

Middayexpress - sorry, but you appear to have overlooked a rather crucial point about the survey carried out by Africa Education Trust: that is, it was based on the interviews of a *total* of 356 interviews, "refugees and asylum seekers living in Barnet, Enfield, Haringey or Waltham Forest", of which just 23 per cent were Somalis. Therefore the figures you blithely quote as representing the entire Somali community in fact only represents some 83 or 84 individuals - hardly representative of a community which numbers tens of thousands. We must be clear in presenting this in the article: not to do so, but to present the figures as if representative of the entire Somali group in the UK is inescapably WP:OR. Alfietucker (talk) 17:37, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Most surveys include limited samples. That's how they work since obviously not every last immigrant can be sampled. On the other hand, the IIPR paper did not sample any Somalis for their educational background. It just gives two figures but doesn't indicate which surveys if any those numbers were drawn from in the first place. The Africa Education Trust and London Learning and Skills Council paper, by the way, applies to Somali UK immigrants in general:

Large numbers of the Somali community live in Tottenham, Colindale, Edmonton and Edgware. In general the Somali community are highly educated. Approximately half had completed secondary education and a further fifth of those interviewed had completed university. Most Somalis had attended education or training courses in the UK and over half had done a course at FE or HE level. Most Somali women had accessed education or training in the UK. The vast majority of Somalis have English skills of intermediate level or above. Over half of the Somali community have worked in the UK. 20% of Somalis had worked in professional employment in Somalia. Many of these people had worked as engineers or teachers. Only 4% had found professional employment in the UK. Half had worked in semi-skilled or manual jobs in the UK compared to 13% in Somalia.

The foregoing is on page 23, in the section aptly titled Summary of each community Middayexpress (talk) 18:46, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

"On the other hand, the IIPR paper did not sample any Somalis for their educational background. It just gives two figures but doesn't indicate which surveys if any those numbers were drawn from in the first place". Presuming you mean IPPR, that's not true. The IPPR report in question is their Beyond Black and White. It uses Labour Force Survey data for the period 2000-04. However, the figures that were previously cited do not refer to all Somalis in the UK, rather than just those who had arrived in the previous ten years. The relevant quote is: "Education levels among the new Somali-born immigrants are the lowest of the countries compared, with the highest proportion of people having no qualifications (50.1 per cent) and the lowest proportion of those having a higher qualification (2.8 per cent)". Cordless Larry (talk) 08:50, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

The educational levels of Somalis over a decade ago are outdated and do not reflect the current situation. The 2013 IPPR paper on the educational attainment of Somali students gives a 33% GCSE figure, but it concedes that its data is not robust. I've therefore replaced it with a 2014 La Sainte Union School study, which notes the actual latest GCSE figures for 2010-2012. Additionally, the Lambeth Research and Statistics Unit's detailed 2009 study on Somali students indicates that their attainment is rising and is directly related to relative command of English ("the evidence is that once Somali children reach a competent level of English, they forge ahead in their learning and can reach the highest standards" ). Middayexpress (talk) 18:35, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Which 2013 IPPR report is this? The one discussed above is from 2005. Anyway, there's no reason to remove mention of it. If there is more data now available, that can be added to the article - it doesn't have to replace what is already there. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:14, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

I've now added the IPPR and other material you deleted back in, while keeping your additions. I have to say though, the La Sainte Union School is just one school. Isn't it WP: UNDUE to be even reporting what this source says, when the topic is Somalis in the UK as a whole? Cordless Larry (talk) 20:25, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, the data refer to one borough, not just that one school. Still, I think we need to be careful - what applies in Camden might be different elsewhere (or might not, but it would be better to rely on national sources where possible). Cordless Larry (talk) 20:30, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

That editorial is not a reliable source . Neither is the data from over a decade ago; that does not reflect the current situation. Also, the IPPR itself concedes in its paper that its data is not robust. The actual scholastic performance of Somali pupils is covered in detail in the Lambeth Research and Statistics Unit's 2009 study on Somali students in the UK. Additionally, the La Sainte Union School paper isn't for that one school but rather for Camden as a whole. It notes specific GCSE results in keeping with what the Lambeth Research and Statistics Unit indicates. At any rate, per WP:BRD, changes of that magnitude first require discussion then consensus. WikiProject Africa regular AcidSnow already thanked me for my edit, so that's a start. If additional input is needed, I'll ask if it would be alright for me to alert the Somalinet forum members of this discussion. There are several thousand of them, so their expertise in this area should be welcome. Middayexpress (talk) 21:44, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

• Old requests for peer review
• All unassessed articles
• B-Class WikiProject Somalia articles
• High-importance WikiProject Somalia articles
• WikiProject Somalia articles
• B-Class African diaspora articles
• High-importance African diaspora articles
• WikiProject African diaspora articles
• Start-Class United Kingdom articles
• Mid-importance United Kingdom articles
• WikiProject United Kingdom articles
• Start-Class Ethnic groups articles
• Mid-importance Ethnic groups articles
• WikiProject Ethnic groups articles