Talk:African immigration to the United States

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject African diaspora. This WikiProject aims to improve the quality of articles related to topics concerning persons of African descent and their cultures. If you would like to participate in the project, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the Wikipedia:WikiProject African diaspora for more information. (See: Category:WikiProject African diaspora for more pages in this project.)
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-Importance within African diaspora.

	United States Portal This article is within the scope of the United States WikiProject. This project provides a central approach to United States-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

This article was nominated for deletion on 30 May 2008. The result of the discussion was keep.

The article's sources all check out. Can anyone else confirm this? --Yellowfiver 02:36, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Kofi Annan is not a citizen of the U.S.24.185.49.151 22:21, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Contents 1 Whats the point of this page 2 watch 3 Barack Obama 4 Intro 5 Title 6 Misleading university data 7 "related groups" info removed from infobox 8 African Immigrants 9 Health 10 Fair use rationale for Image:John Ogbu.jpg

[edit] Whats the point of this page

Can someone please tell me the point of this page. I dont see a European immigration to the United States page. And why is Baracks picture up there when he dosent even consider himself African? His father left him at two. He didnt even know him for christ sakes! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.240.140.235 (talk) 23:43, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] watch

I guess I should watch this page. African Immigrants specifically refers to people from the African continent who come to the United States and their children. Not black Mexicans, Not black carribbeans, not black people from France, not anyone who is of African i.e. black descent! If you want, you can make your own article about Carribbean Immigrants, but that is not what I'm writing about. Carribbean Immigrants have similar stats, but should be categorized differently.--Blambloom 00:33, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

echoing Blambloom's sentiments, African Immigrants should retain its separate category for numerous reasons. They are a small but distinct and growing group. If rates continue, by the next Census, this article will seem like a no-brainer. The main reason it should be distinct from African Americans is because they are not a sub-group of African Americans but a distinct entity. Different culture, different languages, different history, and (most importantly for me) different statistics.

However because there is still the commonality of "blackness" I'd suggest a brief summary of the group be put in African Americans with a link to the full article as is seen in many other articles. --Yellowfiver (talk) 22:35, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I am professor of history, and today's lecture was on immigration to the United States. One of my students brought up slavery, and that set us to discussing the numbers of non-coerced African immigrants to the United States. That's why I came to this page. Unfortunately, it only deals with very recent immigration--I'm going to see if i can find some actual year by year numbers for African immigration. If I do, I will incorporate them into the article. I think this article should stay. Grumpy otter (talk) 18:08, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Barack Obama

Should Barak Obama's photo be a part of this category? While his father was an African Immigrant, he is a native US citizen. For this reason - I think that the picture should be removedSketer1 02:20, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I love, Obama, but he's a straight-up American, otherwise he could not run for office anyway...he's also half-white.. it's too complex to use him as the example ... futurebird 03:55, 14 February 2007 (UTC

welllll, the stats I use for Harvard and Berkeley are comprised of both African Immigrants and their children. That's what makes the group so interesting. The 2nd generation, American born, American citizen, American assimilated children do just as well as their parents (albeit, highly educated parents) do. There really only aren't any stats for 3rd generation African Immigrants.

I think Barack Obama qualifies, his mother is almost a non-entity and his father is a Harvard graduate. i.e., he follows the exact same trend as regular African Immigrants and their children, the only difference is, his mother is not African. Emeka Okafor, Joseph Addai, Hakeem Olajuwon (and his children) are all citizens, the 2 former were born in the states. PLUS there are black people in the U.S. claiming Obama does not deserve to be called black or African-American because he is not the descendent of slaves. He does not fit the historical definition of "African American" but he does of 2nd generation of African Immigrant. -acutally if you guys could find a better description of these African Nisei that would be helpful. I do understand what you're saying though. maybe Barack fits in multiple categories: Black, Mixed Race, African-American, American-African, Keny...man, his mom being white really throws a wrench in an otherwise perfect categorization--Blambloom 18:46, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

although never explicitly stated, this article does show the incosistencies of Race and Intelligence. I don't want to get into it because I don't have the stomach for that kind of debate. African immigrants are just as black (actually genetically MORE black) than black Americans (due to mixing with whites and native americans) but do fine. Imagine if everyone knew these facts. Also shows the importance of culture and upbringing rather than 'race' and other societial constructs. --Blambloom 19:07, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I saw Barack Obama's picture up there so I removed it. He was born in Honolulu, HI which is a part of the United States, last time I checked. Also, common sense tells you that he isn't an immigrant if he can run for president. C'mon! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.159.64.4 (talk) 06:03, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I restored Obama, explaining why in the summary, but only now saw that you also left a message here. My reasoning is that given the current definition in the article, which includes both immigrants and their children, Obama should not be excluded. When the definition changes to only include natives, then I'd support removing him, too. SamEV (talk) 06:44, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Intro

The intro of the article can use some work. It seems to have original/unsourced statements. Also note that Africans that have U.S. citizenship are refered to as "African Americans". --Ted87 22:29, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

That is incorrect, Ted87. The AA term does not refer to indigenous Africans. They are Nigerian, Ethiopian, Ghanaian, etc. Africa is a continent, not a country. Nationalities refer to countries.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.185.49.151 (talk • contribs).

Ted87, this isn't a smear campaign against Obama. Eventually all the children of African Immigrants, even the immigrants themselves can be technically "African Americans" Obama's white mother doesn't take anything away from his heritage, and he is indicative of typcial African Immigrant's children. Most of Harvard's blacks are not the traditional definition of "African American"—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Yellowfiver (talk • contribs).

I don't know what you are talking about. I never even mentioned Obama's name. --Ted87 07:52, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I saw Barack Obama's picture up there so I removed it. He was born in Honolulu, HI which is a part of the United States, last time I checked. Also, common sense tells you that he isn't an immigrant if he can run for president. C'mon!

[edit] Title

"African Immigrants (U.S.)" is a highly idiosyncratic term. I suggest Africans in the United States.--Pharos 00:40, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree. —Nightstallion (?) 11:32, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

What are you talking about? The--Yellowfiver 23:36, 25 February 2007 (UTC) title of this article is fine the way it is. Leave it alone. Like that old saying goes, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."24.185.49.151 15:52, 24

"Calling this article "African Immigrants" is Americocentric and inaccurate because it's not just about African immigrants to the US, but their descendants as well. We do have Wikipedia:Naming conventions.--Pharos 19:04, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

no, no, no. The title of the article is fine as "African Immigrants" (U.S.) merely indicated the destination. What you did was make the title Afrocentric, actually you really just made the article obscure, and harder to find. The name really should simply be "African Immigrants" If one is looking on google and is looking for this group, what do you think they'll enter? --straight to the point--African Immigrants. or roundabout Africans in the United States. This has been a really good article so far, and your help is greatly appreciated, but I would prefer you not to ruin it.

You also redirected "African Immigrants" to "African Diaspora" I dunno if you're some black activist trying to draw attention to "African Diaspora" but African Immigrants are an interesting subject as well. And they are named "African Immigrants!"--Yellowfiver 20:54, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

And African immigrants to Europe are also "African immigrants". That's the problem.--Pharos 20:57, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Exactly! That's why the article was first named "African Immigrants" and then changed to "African Immigrants (U.S.)", This new change doesn't help or clarify, it just forces the article to fit your subjective view of the term. It's really a travesty. I foresaw something like this happening and meant to put write a complete section about the term before a foolish debate like this would begin. Americentric? doubtful, if anything it's biased towards African Immigrants (notice very few negatives in the article) why is that? I'm the son of West African parents at one of the colleges the article mentions. thought I was different, until I found out about African Immigrants. --Yellowfiver 21:11, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm not saying the article is anti-African. I'm saying the title "African Immigrants (U.S.)" is idiosyncratic and not in keeping with our naming conventions. We have no articles on "Russian immigrants" or "Chinese immigrants".--Pharos 21:18, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Chinese American, Russian American, Mexican American are all great terms, but we cannot use the term "African American" because it describes a specific group. Also the article combines the overall performance of African immigrants, combining Nigerians with Ethiopians with Ghanaians, because there aren't enough stats for the groups by themselves. There are articles called "Chinese Immigration to the U.S." The title's relative uniqueness lie in distinguishing the group from the now commonplace term "African Americans" Because of the history of Africans having already having lived in the U.S. due to slavery, different "African Immigrants" have to be described, and have been by numerous sources. Check all of the references, we are referred to as African Immigrants. NPR, NY Times, The 2000 U.S. Census. "African Immigrants (U.S.) certainly fits. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Yellowfiver (talk • contribs) 21:41, 25 February 2007 (UTC).--Yellowfiver 21:42, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

The "immigration to" articles are specifically about the process of immigration, not the immigrant communities themselves. I realize that the term "African American" is taken, and that an alternate is needed. Hence the form "Xes in Y", which is used in many articles, while no other articles use "Xian immigrants". "African immigrants", no matter how much you personally may identify with the term, is also plainly inaccurate as a reference to American-born people.-Pharos 22:24, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Good point about the American-born people whose are the children African Immigrants. I did not know how to reconcile that with the title. That being said, I don't know how "Africans in the United States" is better.--Yellowfiver 23:36, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

There's no inherent contradiction between being "African" and being American, as I said we have several articles like Hungarians in Vojvodina or Chinese in Japan. On the other hand, there is an inherent contradiction between being an "immigrant" and being American-born.--Pharos 17:05, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Whatever, I don't have the will to fight. "African Immigrants" is the term used by NPR and the U.S. Census, that's official enough for me. "Africans in the United States" doesn't make it any better. The inherent contradiction still exists. You just wanted to hijack the page "African Immigrants" because it now redirects to your "African Diaspora" article. Good job--Yellowfiver 22:10, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

I find it a very strange idea that African diaspora is "my" article, considering I haven't edited it once in 2 1/2 years at Wikipedia. Look, there's nothing wrong with saying "African immigrant" when writing in an American context (well, except that it excludes children of immigrants), but this is very much an international encyclopedia and surely you're aware that the considerable majority of Africans who immigrate go to countries other than the US.--Pharos 16:42, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Misleading university data

The great majority of non-traditional African Americans at elite universities are Caribbean, not African. While I don't doubt that Africans are well represented in such institutions relative to their numbers, one has to remember that Africans are a tiny minority of people in the US.--Pharos 23:07, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

References? --Yellowfiver 23:22, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree. Although I think the Harvard study concluded that the majority of blacks in elite American universities are either bi-racial, African, or the first or second generation children of African and particularly, Caribbean immigrants.

.............

72% percent of the people in that study were not from Africa, and many did not even self-identify as black (many identified as Hispanic, mixed, and other)! The study was very sloppy. I would not reference it in relation to African immigrants - It is more of a pro Affirmative Action/anti-immigrant manifesto.

The Study: Massey, D.S., Mooney, M. and Kimberly C. Torres, Charles C.Z (2007). Black Immigrants and Black Natives Attending Selective Colleges and universities in the United States. American Journal of Education 113 (Feb. 2007)

--70.68.179.142 10:12, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "related groups" info removed from infobox

For dedicated editors of this page: The "Related Groups" info was removed from all {{Infobox Ethnic group}} infoboxes. Comments may be left on the Ethnic groups talk page. Ling.Nut 16:58, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] African Immigrants

I put this paper together sometime ago. Although I have incorporated much of the information into this article in the past, I believe their is much good information that I have not. Please, if you have time see that some more of this information makes it into this article.

African Immigrants:

In an analysis of Census Bureau data by the Journal of Blacks in higher education (and several other sources using similar data), African immigrants to the United States were found more likely to be college educated than any other immigrant group. African immigrants to the U.S. are also more highly educated than any other native-born ethnic group including white Americans (Logan & Deane, 2003; Dixon, 2006; Journal of Blacks in higher education, 1999-2000; Onwudiwe, 2006; Otiso and Smith, 2005; The Economist, 1996: Shobo). Some 48.9 percent of all African immigrants hold a college diploma. This is slightly more than the percentage of Asian immigrants to the U.S., nearly double the rate of native-born white Americans, and nearly four times the rate of native-born African Americans (The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, No. 26 (Winter, 1999-2000), pp. 60-61).

In 1997, 19.4 percent of all adult African immigrants in the United States held a graduate degree, compared to 8.1 percent of adult whites and 3.8 percent of adult blacks in the United States, respectively (The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, No. 26 (Winter, 1999-2000), pp. 60-61). This information suggests that America has an equally large achievement gap between whites and African/Asian immigrants as they do between white and black Americans.

The Canadian sociological literature on immigrants also paints a similar picture, however, less stark. All visible-minority immigrant groups whether from the Caribbean or India do better academically than their native born (non-visible) cohorts, on average. Both foreign-born and Canadian-born blacks have graduation rates that exceed those of other Canadians. Similar patters of educational over-achievements are reached with years of schooling and with data from the 1994 Statistics Canada survey. (Guppy and Davies, 1998; Boyd, 2002).

In the UK, 1988, the Commission for Racial Equality conducted an investigation on the admissions practices of St. George's, and other medical colleges, who set aside a certain number of places for minority students. This informal quota system reflected the percentage of minorities in the general population. However, minority students with Chinese, Indian, or black African heritage had higher academic qualifications for university admission than did whites (Blacks in Britain from the West Indies had far lower academic credentials than did whites). In fact, blacks with African origins over the age of 30 had the highest educational qualifications of any ethnic group in the British Isles. Thus, the evidence pointed to the fact that minority quotas for University admissions were actually working against students from these ethnic groups who were on average more qualified for higher education than their white peers (Cross, 1994).

According to the report The State of Working Britain, published by the Centre for Economic Performance at the highly regarded London School of Economics, 21 % of adult blacks in Britain with African origins have a university degree. Only 14 percent of adult white Britons are college educated.

Of the African-born population in the United States age 25 and older 86.4% reported having a high school degree or higher, compared with 78. 9% of Asian born immigrants and 76.5% of European born immigrants, respectively. These figures contrast with 61.8% percent of the total foreign-born population. Immigrants groups in general tend to have higher high school graduation rates than the native-born general American population.

Those Africans born from Zimbabwe (96.7 percent), Botswana (95.5 percent), and Malawi (95 percent) were the most likely to report having a high school degree or higher. Those born in Cape Verde (44.8 percent), Mauritania (60.8 percent), and Somalia (63.3 percent) were the least likely to report having completed a high school education (Dixon, D., 2006)..

Of the European born those born in Bulgaria (92.6 percent), Switzerland (90.5 percent), and Ireland (90.4 percent) were the most likely to report having a high school degree or higher. Those born in Portugal (42.9 percent), Italy (53.7 percent), and Greece (59.9 percent) were the least likely to report having completed a high school education (Dixon, D., 2006).

Of the Asian born Mongolia (94.8 percent), Kuwait (94.7 percent), the United Arab Emirates (94.5 percent), and Qatar (94.3 percent) were most likely to report having a high school degree or higher. Those born in Laos (48.1 percent), Cambodia (48.4 percent), and Yemen (49.9 percent) were the least likely to report having completed a high school education (Dixon, D., 2006).. (Most people think the Asian group includes Orientals exclusively, this is not true)

Dodoo (1997) finds that while African immigrants are indeed the most educated of black groups in the U.S., he finds a negative return on African immigrants’ education attainment for diplomas obtained outside the United States. However, the same does not hold true for Caribbean immigrants. Although he finds that among blacks – native and immigrants – Africans earn the most, when earning-related endowments such as educational attainments are included in the analysis, this expected African advantage disappears (Dodoo, 1997).

Distortion and Group Differences:

In the United States researchers often muddle group difference data by aggregating divergent geographical, historical, cultural and ethic groups into crude and arbitrary categories with whom they then compare with the general population. This in practice misleads unwary readers into the false belief that those aggregated group mean scores objectively characterize the individual groups who have contributed to the overall figures. Take for example: Only 5.3 percent of Central American immigrants have earned a bachelor’s degree, and only 19.5% percent have graduated from high school (Davy, M. 2006). This difference is often coupled with data relating to South American immigrants who, according to the Migration Policy Institute (Dixon, D., and Gelatt J., 2006) 23.4 percent had a bachelor’s degree or higher and 74.3 percent reported having a high school degree. These skewed grouping methods; the Hispanic category in this case, creates the false impression in the minds of readers that South American immigrants are poor students based on the fact that they speak Spanish or Portuguese, alone.

The African born and Employment:

The African born are concentrated in management or professional and sales or office-related occupations. Of the employed population age 16 and older in the civilian labor force, the African born were much more likely than the foreign born in general to work in management and professional occupations as well as sales and office occupations. Additionally, the African born were less likely to work in service, production, transportation, material moving, construction, and maintenance occupations than the foreign born in general.

Ethiopians, Sudanese and Somalis, who mostly immigrate as refugees, do not do as well as their counterparts from English speaking African countries such as Nigeria, Egypt and Kenya. The reason was because most people from the three countries immigrate to the United States as refugees and asylum seekers, following crises in their home countries (Otiso and Smith, 2005).

Source Materials:

African Immigrants in the United States are the Nation's Most Highly Educated Group. The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, No. 26 (Winter, 1999-2000), pp. 60-61doi:10.2307/2999156

African-Born Blacks in the United Kingdom Are Far More Likely than Whites to Hold a College Degree. The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, No. 34 (Winter, 2001-2002), pp. 29-31 doi:10.2307/3134095

African-Born U.S. Residents are the Most Highly Educated Group in American Society The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, No. 13 (Autumn, 1996), pp. 33-34 doi:10.2307/2963153

Boyd, M. (2002). Educational Attainments of Immigrant Offspring: Success or Segmented Assimilation?

Cross, T. (1994). Black Africans Now the Most Educated Group in British Society. The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, No. 3 (spring, 1994), pp.92-93

Davy, M. (2006). The Central American Foreign Born in the United States. Migration Policy Institute. April 2006

Dixon, D. (2006). Characteristics of the European Born in the United States. Migration Policy Institute. February, 2005

Dixon, D. (2006). Characteristics of the African Born in the United States. Migration Policy Institute. January, 2006

Dixon, D. (2006). Characteristics of the Asian Born in the United States. Migration Policy Institute. April 2006 Dodoo, F. N-A (1997). Assimilation differences among Africans in America. Social Forces 76: 527-46

Gelatt, J. and Dixon, D. (2006). Detailed Characteristics of the Caribbean Born in the United States. Migration Policy Institute. July 2006.

Gelatt, J. and Dixon, D. (2006). Detailed Characteristics of the South American Born in the United States. Migration Policy Institute. May 2006.

Guppy, Neil and Scott Davies (1998). Education in Canada: Recent Trends and Future Challenges. Ottawa: Statistics Canada and the Minister of Industry.

Kefa M. Otiso and Bruce W. Smith, (2005). “Immigration and Economic Restructuring in Ohio’s Cities, 1940-2000”, Ohio Journal of Science, 105 (5): 133-137 December 2005

Logan, J.R, Deane, G (2003). “Black Diversity in Metropolitan America.” Lewis Mumford Center for Comparative Urban Regional Research University Albany

Onwudiwe, E. (2006). “Reflections on African Brain Gain Movement.”

The Economist (1996). 339 (7965): 27-28

In Educational Attainment, Black Immigrants to the United States Outperform Native-Born White and Black Americans. The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education © 2003 CH II Publishers —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.68.179.142 (talk)

[edit] Health

I have added a section on health. You may link to the references to get more information and maybe improve the section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.68.179.142 (talk) 11:44, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

There is no need for those sub-categories(Nigerian-Americans, etc.). Tell it on the Africans in the United States article. There are way too many articles. Cut it down. Erase those sub-categories and put it on the main page.Fclass 14:50, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:John Ogbu.jpg

Image:John Ogbu.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 22:30, 6 November 2007 (UTC)