|
24 July, 2004: Minority Education in Latvia: From Segregation to Integration, Nils Muiznieks
Minority Education in Latvia: From Segregation to Integration
Nils Muiznieks, Latvia's Minister for Social Integration
No issue affecting minorities in Latvia has generated such controversy in recent years as the reform of minority education. The issue has topped the news as anti-reform activists, strongly echoed by Moscow, have mobilized in a series of demonstrations and appeals to the international community. Latvia is a democratic society and the government has always been ready for dialogue with peaceful demonstrators expressing their views. However, we are committed to creating an integrated society – one in which diversity is respected, but everyone has adequate Latvian language proficiency to participate fully in public life.
To understand current debates about the transition to an integrated education system, a brief excursion into history is necessary. Upon regaining its independence in 1991, Latvia inherited from the Soviet Union a segregated education system – ethnic Latvians went to Latvian language schools, while Russians and other minorities attended schools with Russian language instruction. In the early 1990s these "Russian" schools taught virtually no Latvian language and produced graduates whose poor Latvian skills hampered them from competing in the job market and for university admissions.
Soon after independence, Latvian authorities helped smaller minorities – Poles, Ukrainians, Belarussians, Lithuanians, Estonians, Jews and Roma - restore the educational and cultural infrastructure destroyed by the Soviet regime. These smaller minorities created their own schools or classes with the support of local municipal governments, the Ministry of Education, and often, the relevant foreign country. These new minority schools combined instruction of the native language and culture with instruction in Latvian. At the same time, many minority parents, dissatisfied with the quality of Latvian language teaching in the unreformed "Russian" schools, began to enroll their children in Latvian language schools. The need for reform in the remaining "Russian" schools remained urgent.
A major step towards improving Latvian language acquisition in "Russian" schools came in 1995. Then, the state determined that two subjects be taught in Latvian at the upper primary level (grades 5-9) and three subjects at the secondary level (grades 10-12). That same year, with the support of the United Nations Development Programme and other international partners, the government created a new support structure for minority schools – the National Programme for Latvian Language Training (NPLLT). The NPLLT devised a 10-year strategy to prepare teacher trainers, conduct in-service training, develop teaching materials and strengthen Latvian teaching methodology.
Teaching just some subjects in Latvian proved insufficient in guaranteeing the Latvian language proficiency of many minority youth. One symptom was the large number of minority army recruits (Latvian citizens of minority origin who had gone through the Latvian education system) speaking virtually no Latvian and requiring remedial language training. Given the unsatisfactory pace of change in Russian schools, Parliament continued the reform and in 1998 adopted a new education law. The new law envisaged the introduction of various models of bilingual education in primary schools as of 1999. After five years of implementing the bilingual models, the law foresaw increasing the percentage of instruction in Latvian/bilingually in state-funded secondary education (grades 10-12) to 60 percent starting in September 2004.
According to data from the Ministry of Education and Science, in early 2003 minority secondary schools already had a curriculum in which about 52 percent of all instruction took place in Latvian/bilingually, and 48 percent took place in minority languages. The increase in the Latvian/bilingual share by two classes per week will be phased in, with grade 10 shifting to 60 percent instruction in Latvian/bilingually and 40 percent in minority languages in 2004, grade 11 in 2005 and grade 12 in 2006.
As state support for education in minority languages in Latvia exceeds that in many other European countries, international human rights organizations have been supportive of the basic thrust of government policy. Indeed, the office of the OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities has affirmed that the 60/40 solution is in line with minority rights standards and asserted that the reform is "painful, but necessary." Moreover, commenting on a similar situation in Estonia, the Council of Europe's Advisory Committee on the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities concluded that the 60/40 model is basically in line with the convention.
Within Latvia the opinions of parents, teachers and students differ. According to sociological surveys, many support the reform, while many are uneasy about it, with parents being the most skeptical. There are three strands of opposition to the reform: 1) those who oppose any change in the education system, 2) those who have concerns about the readiness of schools and the ensuing quality of education, and 3) those who are uninformed or misinformed about the reform.
Those who are opposed to change in principle have sown fears about the assimilation of Russians and spread pseudo-scientific allegations about the psychological damage caused by bilingual education. The Russian language is robust in Latvia, as Russian-speakers are a majority or plurality in many cities, almost all Latvians speak Russian as well as Latvian and culture and media from Russia have a strong presence in Latvia. Indeed, the legacy of Soviet Russification policy was still evident in the results of the 2000 census in Latvia, which showed that knowledge of Russian is still more widespread than knowledge of Latvian in Latvia: 81% of all inhabitants know Russian, while only 79% know Latvian. The gradual shift of Russian from being a privileged language in Soviet-occupied Latvia towards being a minority language is inevitable. On the other hand, assimilation is not only impossible, it is not desirable. This is why the government offers support to minority NGOs active in preserving and developing minority identity, to minority language broadcasting and to minority language education.
The government addresses seriously concerns about the quality of education, as we all have a common interest in the competitiveness of minority youth. The primary problem is the Latvian language proficiency of teachers in minority schools, which is often inadequate. As noted above, the NPLLT has for years offered in-service training. On paper, all teachers are proficient in Latvian, though the reality is often different and old patterns of dissimulation towards central authorities die hard. The situation in schools is also diverse, with some exhibiting no problems and others struggling. Thus, the Ministry of Education and Science has taken a pragmatic, flexible approach, examining the preparedness of each school for the reform. Those schools that are encountering difficulties are offered assistance and individual time-tables for making the transition.
Previous governments were not sufficiently active in informing minority parents about the essence of the reform. This allowed segments of the opposition the opportunity to politically manipulate parents' fears and ignorance. The current government, led by the Ministers of Education and Social Integration, has actively sought to engage minorities in dialogue through systematic visits to schools, the creation of minority advisory bodies and regular meetings with NGOs.
Despite the government's flexibility and readiness for dialogue, some will continue to resist the reform. This resistance reflects a strong sense of entitlement felt by many Russians that government has the duty to provide state funding for instruction primarily in Russian, regardless of the consequences for Latvian language proficiency. Halting the reform would only prolong the Soviet legacy of segregation and undermine the competitiveness of minority children. The government is committed to creating an integrated society with rich cultural and linguistic diversity - one in which all can participate on an equal basis.
Secretariat of the Special Assignments Minister for Social Integration
|
