A/HRC/14/18 46. Ms. Jenkins made the following recommendations: disaggregate data to monitor access to education; conduct mapping of programs and policies related to Afro-descendents to identify and analyse gaps; strengthen legal frameworks for teaching on Afrodescendents’ issues (South-South cooperation); increase coverage of early childhood education services; strengthen the capacity of teachers to include knowledge of peoples of African descent; stimulate participatory research to generate/systematize “new” knowledge (community-based pedagogic laboratories); and promote programmes that eradicate sexism and racism from curricula. 47. An observer pointed out that children of mixed families sometimes had problems with self-identification. 48. An observer expressed concern with regard to psychometric tests for school applications that purported to assess the intellectual capacity of prospective students. It was noted that such tests constituted barriers for children of African descent as the tests used variables which were extrapolated from culturally different contexts. 49. In concluding the discussion, Ms. Jenkins noted that the teaching of African history and culture should not be only for people of African descent. With regard to the construction of identity she stated that positive changes were observed in children from mixed marriages when they themselves chose their identity. Furthermore, she highlighted that it was not enough to have textbooks that were good; it should be ensured that they are accessible as well, as high prices constituted an obstacle. 3. Collection of disaggregated data as a tool in fighting structural discrimination 50. In her presentation at the 4th meeting, on 13 April, the Chair of the Working Group, Ms. Najcevska, gave an overview of racial disparities in infant and maternal mortality; incarceration; poverty and credit approval rates; and the dependency on social welfare, as an illustration of how disaggregated data could break down a global picture into a more specific one, necessary to devise and monitor adequate social and development policies. 51. Disaggregated data, she noted, was essential in combating racial discrimination effectively. Even though biologically there was only one race and racial discrimination was a social construct, its impact and consequences were real because society had given the term meaning. 52. Racial disparities, according to the Chair, were the cumulative result of past and current racism. Data collection and its disaggregation for people of African descent were essential in combating the erroneous perception that racism was something of the past or merely a challenge at the individual level. A decrease in overt racism had led many to believe that racism was no longer a problem. The disparities borne out by disaggregated data proved the contrary by providing a picture of collective marginalization. The Chair emphasized that the absence of an intention to discriminate was irrelevant as long as the disaggregated picture showed disparities. Not all disparities were a result of discrimination, but many were, and all needed to be examined. 53. The Chair then proceeded to examine the essential components of structural discrimination. Structural discrimination, she indicated, was deeply rooted in tradition, literature, arts and practice. Because of its social acceptance and absence of malicious intent, it did not at first sight appear to be wrong and did not yield negative consequences for the perpetrator. Secondly, she noted, the victim of structural racism was blamed for the situation, which was considered to be the result of his or her culture, indifference or passivity. Hence, no fault could be assigned to the perpetrator. 54. The racial motive in structural discrimination was hard to identify, stated the Chair, as it often resulted from deeply rooted value judgements dating back to slavery and 9