This article was downloaded by: [University Pendidikan Sultan Idris] On: 06 September 2011, At: 20:34 Publisher:

Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Intercultural Education
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ceji20

Minority schooling and intercultural education: a comparison of recent developments in the old and new EU member states
Mikael Luciak
a a

Department of Education, University of Vienna, Austria

Available online: 15 Aug 2006

To cite this article: Mikael Luciak (2006): Minority schooling and intercultural education: a comparison of recent developments in the old and new EU member states, Intercultural Education, 17:1, 73-80 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14675980500502370

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-andconditions This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Intercultural Education, Vol. 17, No. 1, March 2006, pp. 7380

Downloaded by [University Pendidikan Sultan Idris] at 20:34 06 September 2011

Minority schooling and intercultural education: a comparison of recent developments in the old and new EU member states
Mikael Luciak*
Department of Education, University of Vienna, Austria
MikaelLuciak 0 1 17 mikael.luciak@univie.ac.at 000002006 Intercultural 10.1080/14675980500502370 CEJI_A_150220.sgm 1467-5986 Original Taylor 2006 and & Article Francis (print)/1469-8439 Francis Education Ltd (online)

Comparative reports conducted by the author show different educational approaches concerning the schooling of ethnic minorities in the EU Member States as well as differences in the handling of issues of cultural diversity. Minority schooling in the new EU Member States primarily focuses on the education of national or autochthonous minority groups, in contrast to the old EU Member States, where language and compensatory programs for migrant minority students have been of main concern. In addition, there are also different conceptions of intercultural education in the respective countries. Differences in school achievement of various ethnic groups can be identified despite limited differential data on educational attainment in many countries. This paper addresses two main questions: first, in which ways can different educational approaches be effective in raising the educational attainment of ethnic minorities? Second, in which ways could they be most suitable for preparing all students for living in a culturally diverse society and to encourage tolerance towards cultural differences?

Introduction Two recent studies (Luciak, 2004; Luciak and Binder, 2005) show a highly diversified picture regarding the schooling of ethnic minority students in the old and new EU Member States. Many different types of minority groups exist, as well as a broad spectrum of educational approaches, which target cultural and language diversity. There are indigenous, autochthonous or national minorities (at times referred to as nationalities) who have lived in the respective countries for centuries. Minority
* Institut fr Bildungswissenschaft, Universittsstrae 7, 6. Stock, 1010 Wien, Austria. Email: mikael.luciak@univie.ac.at ISSN 1467-5986 (print)/ISSN 1469-8439 (online)/06/01007308 2006 Taylor & Francis DOI: 10.1080/14675980500502370

74 M. Luciak education programs or minority schools that offer native language or bilingual instruction and teach content related to the minority cultures can be found in several old and new EU Members States. However, school legislation and practices concerning minority rights and their implementation in education frequently differ. For example, while Roma, whose status as a minority group is recognized in several old and new Member States, at times have the declared right to minority education, this right is frequently not implemented in educational practice. In contrast, minority groups such as the Hungarians benefit from minority schooling in Slovakia or in Romania, an EU accession country. The reasons for these differences are manifold and influenced by the relationship between the minority and majority cultures, the status of minority groups, but also, as in the case of Hungarians, by the support minority members receive from their mother country. Indigenous groups in the old Member States also encounter different educational opportunities. While the Smi in Finland and Sweden or the Muslim minority in Greece have access to minority education programs in designated regions, the Travellers in Ireland are offered far less opportunities. Furthermore, the wide spectrum of minority education also includes the schooling of territorial language minorities such as the Italian and Hungarian minorities in Slovenia, the Swedish-speaking minority in Finland or the Finnish-speaking minority in Sweden. At times, the recognition of minority status and associated minority rights are denied or quite restrictive. For example, in France, the republican imperatives of promoting national unity and secularity work against special group rights that might benefit national minorities in the form of subsidized initiatives and laws to protect cultural identity. In the new Member States, citizenship status is in most countries a precondition for acknowledgement of minority status. In Estonia, for instance, this has the consequence that more than half of all minorities do not fall under the legal definition of national minorities and therefore have no special minority rights. This is a problem particularly for many Russians who are not Estonian citizens. In addition, the Baltic States, after gaining independence, are undergoing a difficult transition period as the State languages are sought to become the main languages of instruction in schools. The education system under Soviet rule impeded integration and many Russians did not learn todays State languages. Currently, Russian schools and teachers are often not prepared to implement the new regulations. Estonia appears to have chosen the most controversial approach by outlawing bilingual preschool programs and by aiming for an increasingly monolingual and monocultural education system. The most apparent difference between the old and new Member States is the fact that owing to migration (labor migration, family members that followed, migration from former colonies, and refugees) the ethnic composition of many old Member States has changed in the second half of the 20th century to a great degree, while the ethnic composition in the new Member States has remained more stable. For a long time, several of the old EU Member States had great difficulties acknowledging that they have become countries of immigration. Today, educational programs for migrants primarily aim at fostering the integration process of migrants and descendants by

Downloaded by [University Pendidikan Sultan Idris] at 20:34 06 September 2011

Minority schooling and intercultural education 75 providing native language and second language instruction. At times, these programs also include the teaching of minority culture and religion. In recent years, intercultural education, which targets minority as well as majority students, has been regarded primarily in the old Member States as a relevant and essential educational approach. Intercultural education aims to deepen students knowledge and appreciation of different cultures, to reduce prejudices, to pinpoint the interdependence of the world community, andif it encompasses an anti-racist approachto facilitate a critical awareness of institutional discrimination and the origins of societal inequalities. Thus, comparing the developments in minority education and intercultural education in the old and new Member States, the following conclusions can be drawn:

Downloaded by [University Pendidikan Sultan Idris] at 20:34 06 September 2011

Distinctions can be made between:

minority schooling for established minorities, i.e. minority schools or school programs, which offer education in the minority language and culture language (and cultural) programs for migrants and descendants intercultural education approaches, which target minority and majority students.

Minority schooling for established minorities, in particular minority language development, is a relevant issue in several of the old Member States, but it is the central aspect in minority education in the new Member States Some new Member States lack legislation for minority education. Others do not clearly define the concept of ethnic minority or national minority. The categories nationality and ethnicity are at times intermingled, despite the fact that most minorities permanently live in these countries and are not migrants. This is similar to the old Member States, where uniform standards pertaining to the constitutive elements of minority status do not exist. Educational approaches, which foster the integration process of migrants (native language and second language instruction) are much more predominant in the old Member States. The quality of these programs and the quality of training of language teachers vary considerably. There appears to be less emphasis in the new Member States on the fact that native language teaching fosters the learning of the second language. Intercultural education, which targets all students, is a more central issue in the old Member States. However, these concepts often are not adequately implemented. Reasons for this are insufficient training for teachers to acquire intercultural competencies and a lack of adequate teaching materials.

School achievement and inequalities in education Owing to the countries different ethnic compositions, to heterogeneous classification systems and to different school systems, it is difficult to compare the educational situation of minority groups in the European Union. Furthermore, great differences exist regarding the availability of data on school enrolment and on

76 M. Luciak achievement of situated and migrant ethnic minorities. These differences not only exist between the old and new EU Member States but across many countries. All countries in the old and new Member States collect some kind of differentiated data on school enrolment of ethnic minority groups at different educational levels. However, only few countries also collect data on school completion rates. Overall, it can be determined that in the old Member States students with a migrant background have a tendency to attend schools that are less academically challenging and of shorter duration. Frequently, they have higher dropout and expulsion rates than native students. They are overrepresented in vocational schools, in special education and in schools situated in underprivileged neighborhoods. In general, they show lower school achievement than the native population, a difference that increases as students advance through the years. Aggregate statistical data, however, do not allow for an accurate assessment of the situation. In particular, existing differences in educational performance within and between minority groups are often difficult to trace. Differentiated data of school completion rates in England show that certain minority groups perform less well in education, while others outperform the majority students. On the one hand, the groups most at risk of underachieving are African Caribbeans, Roma and Travellers, and pupils of Bangladeshi and Pakistani origin. On the other hand, students with Chinese and Indian backgrounds achieve significantly above-average results. In many old EU Member States, there is insufficient data regarding the educational performance of indigenous or national minorities. Still, it can be shown that certain groups such as the Muslim minority in Greece, Travellers in Ireland or Roma in several countries do not achieve well in education. There is also a lack of data on school achievement of ethnic minorities in the new Member States. Despite this circumstance, it is known that Roma are the most disadvantaged group in education. They are overrepresented in schools of special education, have high dropout rates, frequently do not continue beyond compulsory schooling and suffer from segregation. Thus, in order to gain a better understanding of the educational situation of ethnic minorities in the EU Member States, we need differentiated data and research. When examining school enrolment and school achievement of the various groups, the focus should not primarily be on citizenship status, time of stay in the country, language competence, ethnic affiliation, gender and socioeconomic status, but also on the reasons why a minority group came into contact with the majority population, or on the relationship between the minority and majority populations. Among the predominant issues concerning the education of migrants and ethnic minorities in both the new and the old Member States are segregation and overrepresentation in special education. Different types of segregation can be discerned: 1. intra-class segregation, caused by organizing different level-groups in a school-class 2. intra-school segregation, caused by organizing special minority classes or remedial classes in the same school

Downloaded by [University Pendidikan Sultan Idris] at 20:34 06 September 2011

Minority schooling and intercultural education 77 3. inter-school segregation between regular schools, caused by regional and housing segregation of different ethnic groups 4. inter-school segregation, caused by a separate system with regular and special (remedial) schools 5. inter-school segregation, caused by organizing private, foundation or faith schools in addition to the State school system. Despite efforts to improve the schooling of minorities and to introduce intercultural education, there is also a trend towards segregation. Many parents send their children to schools where the ratio of minority students is low, hoping that they will receive a better quality of education in more culturally homogenous classes. Teachers and school administrators, who feel overstrained by teaching minority students or have low expectations of their educational achievements, frequently send minority students to special schools or remedial classes. Some parents of minority students send their children to faith schools in order to avoid the more liberal State school system. Finally, school policies, structural shortcomings and residential segregation contribute to an increasing educational stratification. Potentials and limits of minority schooling and intercultural education Minority education, educational programs for migrants, and intercultural education use different approaches with different aims and, in general, have different outcomes and benefits. Minority education programs for established national or language minorities frequently aim at providing an education that preserves and fosters the minority language and culture. At times, they also have a strong bicultural and bilingual orientation. Educational programs for migrants primarily aim at fostering the integration process of migrants and descendants by providing native language and second language instruction. Intercultural education, which targets all students, aims to deepen students knowledge and appreciation of different cultures, to reduce prejudices, to facilitate critical awareness of discrimination and inequalities and to foster the debate about diverse culturally based perspectives and practices. The consequences and outcomes of these different approaches vary. Two questions are of interest: 1. In which ways are these different approaches capable of raising the educational attainment of ethnic minorities? 2. In which ways are they suitable for preparing students for living in a culturally diverse society and for fostering tolerance towards cultural differences? Regarding minority education, an interesting example is the Hungarian minority education system in Romania. Although many theories stress the importance of an integrated school system, in the Romanian context, the Hungarian minority achieves high standards in education and the separation of Hungarian schools is often seen by the groups members as a necessity to avoid assimilation. On the one hand, it appears that the Hungarian minority benefits from this separate minority education

Downloaded by [University Pendidikan Sultan Idris] at 20:34 06 September 2011

78 M. Luciak system. Integration into the general educational system is not always a necessity for a minority groups educational success. In this case, adequate conditions exist that allow the minority members to do well in schools. However, it should be mentioned that frequently ethnic minorities do not have these kinds of beneficial circumstances. On the other hand, it must be questioned what implications this separate system within a State may have on intercultural dialogue and understanding. It is at least questionable whether this institutional separation of ethnic groups is the best approach to foster societal integration of all ethnic groups. However, forced integration, which currently takes place to some degree with the Russian minority in Estonia, is also a questionable approach. Despite protests, both within Estonia and by international bodies, it appears that few attempts are made to value the benefits of cultural and linguistic plurality. It remains to be seen whether the current approach to minority education will be modified. Otherwise, the educational attainment of large parts of the population may be impeded and the risk for further ethnic tensions might increase. In general, language programs for migrants are geared towards raising their educational attainment. However, the quality of these programs differs from country to country. Linguists and educational scientists have repeatedly stated that a combination of native language and second language instruction best suits minorities acquisition of a new language, which in turn is a prerequisite for academic achievement. Still, not all of the old EU Member States follow these recommendations. Denmark, for example, changed its earlier policy to provide native language instruction to all migrants in compulsory education. After 2002, local municipalities became only obliged to offer native language instruction to pupils from countries that are members of the European Union or the European Economic Area, as well as from the Faeroe Islands and from Greenland. Many so-called Third country nationals from outside the EU no longer have this right. In addition, the training of language teachers in several old EU Member States is of low quality. This concerns native language teachers as well as second language teachers, who are not qualified or licensed. For example, many schools in Italy have resorted to cultural and linguistic mediators as external language support providers for pupils who have been in the country for a short period of time. Frequently, the mediators do not possess the necessary competences. There appears to be no common standard for educating Italian as a Second Language teachers. In the new EU Member States, educational programs for migrants are frequently of lower quality, in part because migration is a more recent phenomenon. It can be concluded that appropriate school programs for migrants can foster their learning process and raise their educational levels. To what degree these kinds of programs also foster intercultural understanding is difficult to assess. It can be assumed that integrative measures, such as team-teaching approaches or instruction of all students by bilingual teachers in the same class are more suited to achieve these goals. Are intercultural education approaches suited to raising the educational levels of migrants and ethnic minorities? Members of minority groups that have in the past experienced subordination in their respective societies tend to have great difficulties

Downloaded by [University Pendidikan Sultan Idris] at 20:34 06 September 2011

Minority schooling and intercultural education 79 crossing cultural and language boundaries which are essential for fostering their school success. Members of migrant groups that have faced discriminatory treatment in society, inequities in the labor market and other structural barriers might develop a belief system that rejects schooling as a way to get ahead in society. We may ask, whether intercultural education can positively affect what John U. Ogbu calls community forces and thus help to improve the school performance of minorities. There are, of course, different conceptions and different implementations of intercultural education. And there is a big gap between the educational discourse and theory in this field, on the one hand, and the implementation of intercultural education in daily school practice, on the other. I would argue that intercultural education can help to improve the educational outcome of minority students, but only to a limited degree. There will be positive effects if teachers receive appropriate training in intercultural issues and in turn raise their expectations regarding the performance of minority students. It is furthermore essential that language differences are no longer seen as intellectual deficits and that teachers engage with parents of minority students to seek common solutions to certain problems. However, there is also a need for accompanying structural measures such as well-trained team teachers, bilingual teachers, assistants who are minority members, school classes with fewer students, as well as pre-school and after-school programs free of charge. Still, education cannot solve all problems. Unless there are equal opportunities in employment, housing and equal political rights, the positive effects of education will be limited. Finally, let us consider in which ways intercultural education can prepare students for living in a culturally diverse society and whether it may encourage their tolerance and respect for cultural diversity. Critical approaches to intercultural education ask us not to fall into the trap of treating cultures as uniform wholes, they ask us to abandon additive models of cultural pluralism and to avoid explaining all occurrences involving minority students along cultural lines. On the contrary, they ask us to acknowledge the heterogeneity and alteration of cultures, the importance of power structures in society, and to recognize the relevance of social inequalities. The difficult task is to translate these requirements into daily school practice, into teacher training as well as into the curriculum and textbooks. Intercultural education will foster diversity, if we

Downloaded by [University Pendidikan Sultan Idris] at 20:34 06 September 2011

integrate different perspectives into our teaching rather than always teaching the majority view; teach about minority cultures without using an us and them dichotomy; avoid nationalistic views that do not take account of cultural diversity; allow minority and majority members to take a critical view oft their own culture and to recognize its complexities; and pinpoint discrimination and societal inequalities.

Overall, it appears that there is a lack of research, knowledge, and debate on the commonalities and differences between the new and old Member States in the areas of minority education and intercultural education. All sides could benefit if more efforts were undertaken to strengthen research and exchange of ideas across

80 M. Luciak countries. Thus, researchers, practitioners and policy makers must become better informed about the current standard of knowledge regarding the educational situation of ethnic minorities in different countries, about successful measures to improve the situation of the groups most vulnerable to low school success, discrimination and segregation, as well as about new school programs, initiatives and policies that support diversity in the field of education. Notes on contributors
Downloaded by [University Pendidikan Sultan Idris] at 20:34 06 September 2011

Dr Luciak is an educational scientist and psychotherapist. He studied and conducted scientific activities at the University of Vienna and the University of Economics in Vienna, Austria, at the University of California, Berkeley, and at San Francisco State University. His research and teaching have an emphasis on intercultural education, the schooling of ethnic minorities in comparative perspective and inclusive education. References
Luciak, M. (2004) Migrants, minorities and education. Documenting discrimination and integration in 15 Member States of the European Union on behalf of the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC), Vienna. Available online at: http://eumc.eu.int/eumc/material/pub/ comparativestudy/CS-Education-en.pdf Luciak, M. and Binder, S. (2005) National strategies for minority schooling: a comparative analysis. Report submitted on behalf of the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC), Vienna. Available online at: http://eumc.eu.int/eumc/material/pub/RAXEN/4/edu/ CC/Educ.%20CS_EDU_CC.pdf