Mayan Education in Guatemala: A Pedagogical Model and Its Political Context

Author(s): Meike Heckt

Source: International Review of Education / Internationale Zeitschrift für
Erziehungswissenschaft / Revue Internationale de l'Education, Vol. 45, No. 3/4, Learning,
Knowledge and Cultural Context (1999), pp. 321-337
Published by: Springer
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3445230
Accessed: 05/10/2008 01:35

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=springer.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the
scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that
promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Springer is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to International Review of
Education / Internationale Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft / Revue Internationale de l'Education.

http://www.jstor.org
MAYAN EDUCATION IN GUATEMALA: A PEDAGOGICAL
MODEL AND ITS POLITICAL CONTEXT

MEIKE HECKT

Abstract - In order to give an idea of the present situation of education in Mayan

communities, the article starts with a survey of published anthropologocal and edu-
cational information on the content, values and methods of education in indigenous
communities in Guatemala. The second part deals with the formation of a new col-
lective identity in Guatemala, exploring the relationship between the recent debate
on Mayan identity, and Mayan education. Finally, attention is given to the relation-
ship between education in indigenous communities and official, formal education,
which is itself being called into question. Mayan education in Guatemala is not only
a historical tradition which has survived centuries of alien domination, but is also a
forceful voice of criticism in the debate about general educational reform.

Zusammenfassung - Um einen Einblick in die gegenwiirtige Situation der Erziehung

in Dorfgemeinschaften der Maya zu gewahren, beginnt der Artikel mit einer Ubersicht
iiber die anthropologischen und bildungsbezogenen Informationen, die bisher iiber
Inhalte, Werte und Methoden der Erziehung in indigenen Gemeinden Guatmalas
veroffentlicht wurden. Der zweite Teil des Textes behandelt einige grundlegende
Aspekte einer neuen kollektiven Identitat in Guatemala, die Ethnogenese der Maya,
wobei die Beziehung zwischen den Diskussionen beziiglich der Identitat der Maya
und deren Erziehung im jiingsten geschichtlichen EntwicklungsprozeB dargelegt
wird. AbschlieBend wird auf die Beziehung zwischen der Erziehung innerhalb ein-
heimischer Gemeinden, wie im ersten Teil beschrieben, und der offiziellen formalen
Ausbildung, die in den gegenwartigen Diskussionen iiber eine Bildungsreform in
Frage gestellt wird, hingewiesen. Eine hauptsachliche SchluBfolgerung liegt in der
Erkenntnis, daB die Erziehung der Maya in Guatemala nicht nur eine historische
Tradition ist, die Jahrunderte hegemonialer Politik iiberlebt hat, sondern auch ein
Hauptelement des Widerstandes und der Kritik, die eine zentrale Rolle in den Debatten
iiber eine Bildungsreform spielen.

Resume - Pour donner une idee de la situation actuelle de l'education dans les com-
munautes mayas, l'article debute par un apercu de l'information anthropologique et
educative qui a 6et publiee jusqu'ici sur les contenus, les valeurs et les methodes d'edu-
cation dans les communautes autochtones du Guatemala. La seconde partie du texte
traite les aspects essentiels de l'apparition d'une nouvelle identite collective au
Guatemala, l'ethnogenese des Mayas, en expliquant la relation entre d'une part les
d6bats sur l'identite maya et d'autre part l'education maya au cours de l'histoire
recente. Enfin, il focalise l'attention sur la relation entre l'education dans les com-
munautes autochtones decrites en premiere partie et 1'education officielle et formelle,
qui est remise en question par le debat actuel sur la reforme educative. Une conclu-
sion principale reside dans l'observation que 1' ducation maya au Guatemala n'est pas
seulement une tradition historique qui a survecu a des siecles de domination de l'Etat,
mais aussi un element essentiel d'opposition et de critique, qui joue un role de premier
plan dans les debats sur la reforme educative.

l International Review of Education - Internationale Zeitschrift fiir Erziehungswissenschaft

I - Revue Internationale de l'Education 45(3/4): 321-337, 1999.
? 1999 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.
322

Resumen - Paraproporcionaruna idea de cual es la situaci6nactualde la educaci6n

en las comunidadesmayas, el articulocomienza con un estudio de la informaci6n
antropologicay educacionalque se ha publicadohasta ahora sobre los contenidos,
valores y metodos de la educaci6n en comunidades indigenas de Guatemala.La
segundapartedel texto trataalgunos aspectos fundamentalesde una nueva identidad
colectiva que esta teniendolugar en Guatemala,la etnogenesis de los mayas, expli-
cando la relaci6n que existe entre los debates sobre la identidadmaya por una parte
y la educaci6nmayapor otraen el procesohistoricomas reciente.Finalmente,centra
la atenci6n en la relaci6n que existe entre la educacion dentro de las comunidades
indigenas,tal como se ha descritoen la primeraparte,y la educacionoficial y formal,
puesta en tela de juicio en los debates actuales sobre las reformasde la educaci6n.
Una de las conclusiones principalesreside en la observaci6nde que en Guatemala
la educaci6nmaya no es solamenteuna tradicionhist6ricaque ha sobrevividosiglos
de politicasde dominioestatal,sino que tambienes un elementoimportantede oposi-
ci6n y critica, que juega un papel central en los debates sobre reformasde la edu-
caci6n.

Pe3ioMe: AaHHaS CTaTbA HaHHHaeTCAIC o63opa aHTpoInojorHleIecKoi

H o6pa30BaTenbHOHi HH4OpMaLuHH, Ony6JIKKOBaHHOi 0
cogAep)KaHHH,UeHHOCTsIXH MeTOgax H 06pa30BaHHH B Ty3eMHbIX
o6IuecTBax B
FBaraTeMane RnIToro, ITo6bI AaTb npeAcTaBJIeHHIeo
ceroaHxmIIHeH
CHrTyaIHH B o6uiecTBeMaHsi.Bo
H o6pa30BaHHH
BTOpOH TIaCCTH HeKOTOpbIeOCHOBHbIe
TaTbH paCCMaTpHBaIOTCA
aCneKTbIC03HaHHI HOBOHKOJIJeKTHBHOHHaeHTHqHOCTH B
rBaTeMaJe, 3THOreHe3 B MaiiH, o6bSCHIS
HapOAHOCTH OTHOmeHHA
B HeaaBHeMHCTOpwHeCKOM
npoiecce Mecay ae6aTaMH06
HaeHTTHHOCTH HapoaHOCTHMafiA, c OAHOHCTOpOHbI,H
o6pa3osaHHHHapOaHOCTHMafiA,c apyroi. B 3aKJIioLHTeJjbHo0i
IaCTHICTaTbHIaBTop yaejmeT BHHMaHHe OTHOIIIeHHIO
MeIy
o6pa30BaHHeM BHyrpH Ty3eMHbIXo6iLeCTB, TO onHHaHO B nepBOi
qaCTH, IHO4HImHajIbHO-4OpMaJIbHbIM o6pa30BaHHeM, KOTOpOe
ocnapHBaeTcs B Ae6aTax 06 o6pa3oBaTeJIbHofi pecopMe ceroaHi.
B Ha6JInIoeHHHToro, rTO
rjiaBHbIi BbIBOA 3aiKIoiaeTCA
o6pa3oBaHHe HapoaHOCTHMaiiH B FBaTeMaJIeABjICeTC He TOIbKO
HCTOpHlIeCKOHTpa/HIAHeH,COXpaHHBmeHCcHa npOTDKceHHH
CTOJIeTHHBO BpeMeHa aOMHHHpyIOuleHrOCyAapCTBeHHOH
noJIHTHKH, a TaiKce OCHOBHbIM3JIeMeHTOM Onn03HIHH H KpHTHKH,
Hrpai0oIHM aeHTpanbHyb) pojb B aRHCKyCCHAX
06 o6pa3oBaTeAbHoHi
pe4opMe.
 323

What is Mayan education?

Therereally is no system of Mayaneducationas such. Thereis no curriculum,the

very first seeds of it are Mayanschools. ... These are small seeds, small efforts
in this direction.... But if we speak of Mayan education itself in our current
situation,perhapsthe one thing that has contributedmost to the formationof our
identityandourcultureis whattherehas been in the way of an oraltraditionpassed
down from generationto generation,from grandparentsto grandchildren,from
parentsto childrenin family and communitylife. It is that which has shapedour
survivalandour lives throughagricultureandeducationwithinthe family, because
Mayaneducationcannotreallybe separatedfromlife, fromeconomicactivity,from
politics, from all aspects of life. (Interviewwith JuanaVasquez,July 1994)

Taking as our starting point this picture painted by the Mayan educator Juana
Vasquez of what many people understand by Mayan education in Guatemala,
we shall attempt in this article to pick out and describe some key features of
the recent debate on Mayan education and educational reform in Guatemala.
The first section of the article brings together anthropological and educational
information about the content, values and forms of instruction currently prac-
tised in many indigenous communities in Guatemala. The emphasis is placed
on non-formal education, elements of education within the family, and general
aspects of socialization.
In the second section, a number of basic key requirements are set out for
the creation of a new collective Mayan identity in Guatemala, as this has been
discussed in the debate on Mayan education.
In the final section of the paper, the focus shifts to the relationship between
family education and official, formal education, with the aim of analysing
the role that different groups assign to Mayan education in the debate on
educational reform in Guatemala.

Education in the various Mayan communities in Guatemala

By way of introduction to the topic, we shall begin with an overview of the

information to be found in the literature about family education in indige-
nous communities in Guatemala. One problem that arises is the generaliza-
tions used in terms describing Mayan culture. No distinction is usually made
in the literature other than between Mayas and Ladinos, although it is fun-
damentally necessary to differentiate within the two groups, given that these
are made up of different ethnic groups and cultural traditions. The "Agreement
on the Identity and Rights of Indigenous Peoples" signed by the Government
and the URNG guerrilla movement in 1995 recognises that four peoples live
side by side in Guatemala: the Mayas, the Ladinos, the Garifuna and the Xinca.
The Maya are subdivided into 21 linguistic groups, each of which has its
own language. Like the Xinca, the Mayas are regarded as indigenous peoples.
324

The Garifunas are descended from Caribbean immigrants and have their own
language. All the non-indigenous (and non-Garifunas) in Guatemala are called
Ladinos (Smith 1990: 74).
However, the available literature does not allow for subdivisions, distin-
guishing only between Mayan and Ladino education. In discussions of Mayan
education, most information relates the K'iche', Kaqchikel and Q'eqchi' tra-
ditions, which are the cultures that are best documented in terms of ethno-
graphy and education.
The following summary of the general basis of education in Mayan cultures
is based on recent educational and anthropological studies and on the author's
own interviews carried out in 1994. Where possible, it is specifically Mayan
culture which is referred to, with a note as to whether it is the Mayans them-
selves or others who provided the information. The aim is to describe the
different versions of what is understood by the ideal Mayan values that influ-
ence Mayan education, without seeking to lay down definitions of Mayan
values.

Ideal values

Many writers agree in their observation that work, as both a practical skill and
a worthwhile activity in its own right, is highly valued in Mayan families. A
positive attitude towards work in general can be deduced from this: produc-
tivity, discipline and determination are deemed qualities which parents wish
to pass on to their children. Working for the family and the community is
thought important, as is the ability to contribute to economic subsistence. This
attitude is also explained by the extremely difficult economic circumstances
in which most Mayan families find themselves (ASIES 1995: 33; FRMT and
UNESCO 1997: 60ff).1
A community spirit, reflected in values such as solidarity, co-operation and
mutual support within the family and community, is another fundamental
concept in Mayan cultures. Among other things, this is also due to the diffi-
cult economic situation in which most Mayan families live, which creates a
need for greater family and community solidarity. This feeling of community
cohesion is a factor that has contributed to the survival of the culture (ASIES
1995: 42; FRMT and UNESCO 1997: 77ff; Ramirez and Mazariegos 1993:
114).2 Dialogue and consensus as ways of resolving conflicts and taking deci-
sions are also considered part of solidarity, and are explicitly stated to be
values of Mayan culture, while being contrary to the principles of Ladino
values.3
Respect for a Supreme Being, for nature and people, especially older
people, is another essential value of Mayan cultures. Where human beings
live together, this respect must be maintained through obedience and courtesy
(appropriate greetings, for example) towards older people such as grand-
parents, parents, neighbours or siblings, and also by recognising authority
within the family and by carrying out allotted tasks (Ramirez and Mazariegos
 325

1993: 106; Alvarado in CECMA 1992: 37ff; ASIES 1995: 36). On a spiritual
level, human beings must accept their place in the universe. Starting from
the complexity of the universe, human beings have responsibility, in their
own interest, for maintaining a balance offorces. This holistic vision of the
relationships between humanity, nature and the universe, between science,
arts, medicine and mathematics, between philosophy, politics and religion,
etc., has also to be reflected in life and everyday practices (FRMT and
UNESCO 1997: 84ff; Alvarado in CECMA 1992: 38; interview 1994 No. 5
with K'iche' Mayan teacher).
Underlying these concepts is generally the idea that the members of a com-
munity must know and accept their place within it. To this end, the different
gender roles also to a degree play a positive part through the respectful recog-
nition of difference. Nonetheless, there are opinions on this matter which
allege discrimination against women and girls, in the observation that girls,
for example, have to start working at an earlier age than boys, or that they
are allowed to play less. This example of gender roles clearly teaches that
concepts such as "equality in difference" and mutual respect do represent
ideals. In practice, it is largely women who are critical of their heavier burden
of tasks and occupations, and of the meagre recognition accorded to their
work. Against this background, there is a noticeable recent trend for increasing
numbers of parents to demand that both their sons and their daughters should
receive school education (ASIES 1995: 104ff).

Skills

In the same way as the ideal values that teachers in Mayan education pursue
in family and community education, and those which they aim to transfer to
formal education, it is possible to identify certain skills that are key elements
of family education in Mayan communities. Working skills are obviously
the most important abilities that children have to learn in Mayan families.
Different types of work can be distinguished, according to age and gender.
The following are considered women's jobs: domestic tasks (cooking,
washing, cleaning, etc.), most upbringing of children, animal husbandry, help
with work on the land, income generation through trade, craftwork, textiles,
services, agricultural labour, etc. And the following are regarded as men's
work: work on the land, waged employment, and some upbringing of children.
Children's work is seen as: looking after younger siblings, looking after
animals, running errands and - in the case of older children - helping their
mothers or fathers. At the age of six to eight, the tasks assigned to boys and
girls start increasing; at that age, many already have their first paid job. At
the age of 15, young people generally have to carry out their tasks indepen-
dently (ASIES 1995: 33, 79; Cojti and CISMA 1990: 67ff).4
A sense of responsibility is another important quality which children have
to learn. This includes independence, self-confidence and the ability to make
decisions. Depending on their age, they have to be able to carry out the tasks
326

assigned to them so that they contribute to the community (Ramirez and

Mazariegos 1993: 105; Loukota Soler and Chacach 1992: 16).5

Ways of teaching values and skills

The most important principle in the transmission of knowledge and skills in

Mayan cultures is its practical approach. Children have to gain confidence
and experience by learning from practical example and by helping their
parents. Imitation of adults, observation and repetition of their actions by the
children are supplemented by explanations and demonstrations by adults.
Working in groups is seen as positive (Ramirez and Mazariegos 1993:
104-106; Cojti and CISMA 1990: 75ff; ASIES 1995: 64).
By assigning tasks to their children, parents provide children with new
challenges and learning opportunities. They allocate specific tasks according
to the ages of the children (e.g., responsibility for looking after an animal),
which gives the children recognition and a sense of security (Loukota Soler
and Chacach 1992: 10; Burgos 1984: 56).
A whole range of methods exists for correcting mistakes that have been
made, from admonitions, explanations, reprimands, threats and scares to pun-
ishments such as physical punishments, withholding of food, tasks given as
punishments or bans on watching television. The use of incentives such as
entertainment (for small children) and rewards (presents or free time for play
or buying things, etc.) is also mentioned (Cojti and CISMA 1990: 72ff). It is
often stated that some form of verbal action is taken first since parents are
anxious that children should understand why action is necessary (Ramirez and
Mazariegos 1993: 106). Most research studies report educational practices that
seldom use physical punishments. Two studies, however, are specifically
devoted to this topic, finding from interviews with parents and children that
physical punishments are frequently administered by mothers and fathers
(FRMT and UNESCO 1997: 96ff), and especially by drunken fathers (ASIES
1995: 126).
There are sharply differing attitudes to the role of play and its importance
in children's different learning processes. On the one hand, many parents
believe that their children should not play too much, but should devote
themselves more to work, especially when they are older (from about eight
years of age). On the other hand, it is said that small children learn many
things through play and imitation; they are given presents of miniature tools,
domestic implements and crockery (Ramirez and Mazariegos 1993: 108). The
argument that work is more important than play may once again reflect the
great economic pressure with which many Mayan families are burdened.

Languages in Mayan education

According to the literature, most parents nowadays think it very useful for
their sons and daughters to be able to speak, read and write Spanish, since
 327

with this knowledgeit is hoped thatthey will have a betterchance of earning

money, and it is seen as a prerequisitefor success at school. Many parents
thereforeset out to teach some basic notions of the languageto theirchildren
within the family, so that Spanishis eroding the place of Mayan languages
even in the family environment(ASIES 1995: 43, 124ff; Cojti and CISMA
1990: 58).
This apparentpreferencefor Spanishas the languageof instructionhas also
to be seen againsta historyof rejectionof theirown languagesby the indige-
nous peoples. Accordingto most researchstudies, parentsdo not explicitly
mentionspeaking,or readingand writingMayanlanguages amongthe skills
to be taughtat school. This gives rise to variousinterpretations:on the one
hand, it may be that this is taken for granted, so that there is no need to
mention it. At best, learning Spanish at school means a plea for bilingual
education, althoughthis is not stated outright.On the other hand, it is also
possible that parentsdo not mention Mayan languagesbecause they do not
considerthem important.On the question of the role of Mayanlanguagesin
education,thereis a clear discrepancybetweenthe views of parentsandthose
of Mayan educators.While the majorityof parentsdo not have much expe-
riencethemselvesof formalschooling,a largenumberof Mayanteachershave
wide and generally negative experience of being educated in a foreign
language.A differentapproachto this issue can be foundin two recentstudies
which supportthe argumentfor Mayan schools and take a clear stance in
favourof teachingindigenouschildrenthroughtheir mothertongues (FRMT
and UNESCO 1997: 120ff; Chaclanand Solis 1995: 87).

The importance of school for children's education

Parentswho are askedaboutwhatthey expect fromschool seldommakeheavy

demands.The main advantageof school educationis thoughtto be that their
childrenwill learn to speak, read and write Spanish,and perhapsalso to do
arithmetic.Anotheraspect, which not all parentsregardas positive however,
is thattheirchildrenwill meet otherchildrenat school and will play together.
Many parentsdo not agree with this, thinkingthat their childrenwill waste
too much time at school and will to a certainextent be exposed to harmful
influences.Theybelieve thatone aspectof thesebadinfluencesis thatchildren
pick up bad mannersat school, learn disobedience,and start smoking ciga-
rettes and swearing(Cojti and CISMA 1990: 59; ASIES 1995: 104ff). All of
this reflects the problemthat school activitiesbear little relationto daily life,
and especially to the work of the family. In many communities,school life
and the way of life of the people in the village have little in common.
However,there may be some parentswho have no desire to see these worlds
converge.
328

The foundations of education in Mayan cultures

The family and the community are the starting point for studying the features
of education in indigenous cultures. The traditions and foundations of indige-
nous cultures are passed down from generation to generation, including
spirituality, moral norms and values, their own systems of justice, medical
knowledge, agricultural and economic practices, and general techniques and
practical skills. So far, Mayan languages have been a key factor in the survival
of these cultural systems.
It may be recalled that in indigenous cultures, education is also the result
of more than 500 years of confrontation with the dominant cultures of the
invaders. Even before the arrival of the Spanish conquistadors in Guatemala,
there had been foreign conquests and influences, the Toltec invaders from
central Mexico who reached the Guatemalan highlands in the 12th century,
for example, but it can be assumed that the most profound changes in Mayan
cultures were brought about by the Spanish invasion that began in 1524.
Following this, adaptations and changes have gradually become an integral
part of indigenous cultures. It does not seem sensible, however, to attempt to
construct an artificially "pure" form of Mayan education, bearing in mind
the dynamics and capacity for change of cultures in general, and of the indige-
nous cultures in this particular case.
One conclusion to be drawn from this overview of the core features of edu-
cation in Mayan communities is that most of the values, skills and methods
of transmission which form the basis of Mayan education are generally shared
by many rural communities and are not specific or unique to Mayan cultures.
It can be assumed that elements such as the value of work, solidarity and
responsibility, the teaching methods and the emphasis on practicality, and
the assignment of tasks and imitation of adults, are of equal importance in
the Ladino rural communities in Guatemala. In the light of this finding, we
have to ask ourselves what exactly is meant by "Maya".

"The Mayas": a new collective identity

As we look for an interpretation that goes beyond a mere description of what

is understood by Mayan education, it is important to consider the social envi-
ronment that has made the upsurge in Mayan education possible. To this end,
we must first outline the origins of the concept of "Maya".

Where did "the Mayas" come from?

The term "Maya" was originally introduced by Central American researchers

- archaeologists, linguists and anthropologists - who began at the end of the
last century to describe the "linguistic family relationships" within the
"Quiche-Mayan" group. The only language group that had, and still retains,
 329

a traditionof calling itself "Maya"is the YucatanMayas who occupy the

Mexican peninsulaof that name, and particularlythose in the Mexican state
of QuintanaRoo, who are also called Cruzoob.
Until about 15 to 20 years ago, it was uncommonin Guatemalato use the
term"Maya"to designatethe contemporary"Mayas".In Guatemala,the only
groupsreferredto as "Mayas"were the historicalpeoples who had occupied
the territoryof Guatemalabefore the Spanish conquest. The "Mayas"were
regardedas an extinct people even before the arrival of the Spanish con-
quistadors.Their descendantswere given generalizednames such as indige-
nous people, Indiansor natives. They called themselves rahal ch'och (sons
of the earth), hach winik (true men), etc., or Sacapultecos, San Pedranos,
Ixtahuatecos,etc. (takingthe names of the localities where they lived).
From aroundthe 1980s, a change and a new dynamismhave come over
the scene. The academicterm "Maya",which had been an alien designation,
has been appropriatedby various indigenous groups and organizationsand
appliedto themselves. In reactionto foreign labels, which had for centuries
underlainthe social, politicalandeconomicmarginalizationof the indigenous
peoples in Guatemala,the variousindigenousorganizationsare beginningto
create a new commonbasis of positive "Mayan"identity.This expressionof
a new collective ethnic identity- Mayanethnicity- has arisen out of social
processes and the strugglefor political participation.

Ethnicity: a product of creative processes

Forthe theoreticalstudyof ethnicity,the Guatemalancase is a very interesting

example of the process of the formationof ethnicity.(This process is known
in the literatureon sociology as "ethnogenesis".)Ethnicityis understoodin
this context as a principle of social organizationthat describes the internal
cohesion of ethnic groups. Accordingto the concept of "ethnicboundaries"
developed by Barth (1969: 11), ethnicity does not derive from primordial
characteristics,from biological and culturaltraitsallotted"by nature",but is
a social act of delimitationbetween groups.One element of this delimitation
is what groups call themselves, and what others call them: an ethnic group
defines and/oridentifiesitself by settingitself apartfromothergroups.In con-
sequence,the bases for this cohesion are not to be foundin supposedcommon
characteristicsthat exist "objectively"and are socioculturallyor genetically
fixed, but in conscious, subjectiveself-definitionsappliedby the social forces
in an ethnic group.
The self-identificationof an ethnicgroupcan be basedon a real or supposed
set of common sociocultural characteristics and/or on real or supposed
common (historical)experiences(Weber1972: 237). Alien labels originally
appliedby outsidersare also recycled in this process.
Ethnicgroupsarealso frequentlyinterestgroups,which develop set formal
principlesof organizationsuch as delimitation,communication,structuresof
authority,decision-makingprocedures,ideology and socialization, in order
330

to impose their goals (Cohen 1974: xiiiff). Moreover, it is assumed that

ethnicity is of a situational nature and that ethnic cohesion can only be
analysed within the frameworkof the political and/or economic conditions
that govern a particularsocial situation(Gabbert1991: 37). Anotherfactor
to be taken into considerationin the establishmentof ethnic limits and con-
sequent ethnic identity is the specific historical context from which those
concerned have gleaned their "stores of historical experiences" (Garbers
1993: 36).
In order to describe the process by which "Mayan"ethnicity has arisen
in Guatemala,it is necessary to explore the circumstancesthat surrounded
its creation, more or less since 1980, taking into account the following
aspects:
- the past and presentsituationof ethnic delimitation;
- the resultant labels adopted by the groups themselves and assigned by
others;
- the economic, political and social situation;
- the interestgroupsthat have played a role in this context.

The 1970s: the first social and ethnic movements

The debate in Guatemalaaboutindigenous or "Mayan"ethnic identity orig-

inatedin the 1970s. A majorrole was played by groups of indigenousyoung
intellectualsthatstartedto formin the 1970s, with access to nationalandinter-
national academic study. By emphasising demands for the linguistic and
culturalrights of the Mayas, they began openingup a new sphereof political
debateunderthe bannerof "Maya"(Fischer 1996: 59, 62-64).
Other importantfactors in these new developments were the activities
carriedout by the Catholic Churchtogether with related organizationssuch
as CatholicAction, workingin the westernhighlands,and by newly formed
organizationssuch as the Committeeof RuralUnity (CUC, Comitede Unidad
Campesina).In the early days of Catholic Action in the 1950s, the Catholic
Churchset out to strengthenits presence in indigenousruralareas. Through
practicaloperationalexperience over the years, the role played by Catholic
Action in raising social awareness grew, giving rise to new organizational
moves among the Guatemalanindigenous populationin the 1970s and '80s
(Davis 1988: 16). The CUC was foundedin 1978 as an outlet for the needs
and demandsof the ruralpopulation,of agriculturalworkersand small land-
owners,both indigenousand Ladino,of men and women in the westernhigh-
lands, and it achievedbroadparticipationfrom all sections of the population,
who had previouslynever acted together.The work of CUC thus markedthe
formationof a new basis for political organization(Davis 1988: 20).
 331

The 1980s: indigenous participation in the class struggle

We must also take into account that the situationin Guatemaladuringthis

periodwas characterizedby widespreadarmedstrugglesby variousguerrilla
organizationsagainst the state and its military governments.The guerrilla
organizationssucceededin gainingextensive supportin many mainly indige-
nous regions of Guatemalaand were able to control some of the provinces
of the westernhighlandsuntil 1982.
Two of the four guerrillaorganizations(the GuerrillaArmy of the Poor,
Ejercito Guerrillero de los Pobres, and the People in Arms Organization,
Organizaci6n del Pueblo en Armas) explicitly explained the struggle in terms
of fighting for the rights of the Guatemalanindigenous population,whose
situationthey saw as one of exploitationand marginalization.
Because of internaldisagreementswithinthe guerrillaorganizations,which
were not able in everyday practice to live up to their theoreticalclaims of
participationby indigenouspeople on equalterms,criticismdevelopedwithin
these same organizations.The new ethnic identitythat had arisenas a factor
in argumentsaboutpolitical programmesbecamea focal point. In the face of
inequalityand exclusion, criticism was expressed within the guerrillaorga-
nizations,as it was more generallyin Guatemalansociety, againstmarginal-
ization and discriminationdirected against the indigenous population.The
roots of the ethnic identity of the "Mayas"can also be tracedto this period.
One of the protagonistsof the Mayanpolitical movementis JuanLe6n, a
foundermemberof CUC in the 1970s in Quiche, a vice-presidentialcandi-
date in the 1995 elections standingfor the New GuatemalaDemocraticFront,
and currentlya representativeof the Defensoria Maya organization.In an
interview (March1997), Le6n expressedhis view that althoughclear differ-
ences can be found among the various Mayan peoples living in Guatemala
in, for example, language,ways of expressingspirituality,and culturaltradi-
tions, what unites all the Mayanpeoples is theirpast and presentexperience
of marginalizationand the resistancewhich all of them have developed, in
one way or another,to combatit.
Le6n goes on to explain that the indigenous people who participatedin
the armedmovementand in the people's movementswere pursuingtwo main
aims:the fight againstpovertyandeconomicmarginalization,andthe struggle
againstdiscrimination.One problem,he suggests, was thatthe emphasiswas
put for much of the time on the first of these aims and that there was not
sufficient pressure within the opposition organizations for demands and
political action relatingto the second. Leon reaches the conclusion that the
purely economic struggle was the downfall of the guerrillamovement and
of the Guatemalanpeople's and trade union movement, because the issue
of culture was not taken seriously. Despite these problems, Le6n defends
indigenous participationin the fight because he thinks that the part indige-
nous people playedwas of considerablehelp to indigenousactivistsin current
struggles:
332

I believe that ... the indigenouspeople succeededin exploiting their opportuni-

ties and in accumulatingexperience, in the guerrilla war and in the people's
movements,and in strengtheningtheir demands,because most of the people who
took part in the people's movement were the same people that are now taking
partin the indigenousmovement.... The two are complementary.For us it was
of advantage.

The 1990s: the rise of the "Maya"

As the most confrontational phase of the armed struggles in Guatemala came

to an end in the mid-1980s, the Mayan groups and organizations which had
not participated in the class struggle returned to the political scene, espe-
cially in the field of educational policy. The foundation and establishment of
the Academy of Mayan Languages of Guatemala (ALMG) can be seen as
one of the first successes of a new movement, together with the holding of
various seminars and conferences for the exchange of experience at regional,
national and international level. High-level organizations of Mayan women,
Mayan priests, Mayan teachers, etc., were soon set up. As a result, there was
some advance in participation and some broadening of the influence exercised
in the Guatemalan political arena: the nomination in 1993 of two Mayas, for
example, as Minister and Deputy Minister of Education, gave Guatemala its
first Mayan Ministers.
From 1990, there has been a cautious rapprochement between the different
tendencies within the Mayan movements, between the sectors that had sup-
ported revolutionary and popular struggle, and the representatives of Mayan
organizations that had rejected the class struggle. One political field in which
the different Mayan tendencies have played a full part has been the peace
negotiations. A number of indigenous organizations have been very active
drafting proposals and demanding their right to take part in the negotiations,
pooling their efforts, for example, in the Co-ordination of Organizations of
the Mayan People of Guatemala (COPMAGUA). The Agreement on the
Identity and Rights of Indigenous Peoples, signed in 1995 as part of the peace
accord, was an important step in the struggle for equal rights for indigenous
people in Guatemalan society, but also in the struggle for their particular right
to be different. In the interview mentioned (March 1997), Juan Le6n states
that the Agreement made a major contribution to the political struggle of the
Mayan movement:
The greatest leap forwardbroughtabout by the guerrillawar - and it need not
concernus whetherits leaderswere convincedof the indigenouscause - the most
profitable,was the fact thatthey were fightingso thatthe agreementthatis in force
today or aboutto be implementedmight open up all these possibilities for growth,
for dialoguewith the state, for puttinginto effect a whole series of thingsthatwill
be of real advantage to the growth of identity and the exercise of rights. ... I
believe that both the guerrillamovementand the Governmentdid show flexibility
in acceptingeach otherandreachingagreement.And the fact thatthe Government,
as the representativeof the state,admittedsystematicdiscriminationagainstindige-
nous people and for the first time agreed that there were peoples with different
 333

identities,is a majoradvanceand now it will not be possible to go back, because

they have enteredinto commitmentsand have to standby them. There was wide
agreementbetweenindigenouspeople and it openedthe doors to work.
Given the recent history of Guatemala, and its social and political devel-
opments, we can conclude that the 1990s were an important stage in the
creation of Mayan organizations with a "Mayan identity". Against a back-
ground of continent-wide activities opposing the celebration of the anniver-
sary of the first arrival of Columbus in America, and the award of the Nobel
Peace Prize to the Guatemalan human rights activist Rigoberta Menchui, new
movement has been in evidence. A new "Mayan" collective identity has been
created by reference to common historical experiences.
Another factor has been the new sources of international funding
(UNESCO, UNICEF, European Union, etc.), which have been opening their
doors to the work of ethnic organizations and ethnic issues. From the 1990s,
with a new interpretation of the world political situation, attention has shifted
from the class struggle to ethnic struggles, and this has opened up new areas
of political analysis and activity.
At the end of the 1990s it can be seen that the Mayan organizations, which
still represent a very heterogeneous spectrum, have become a key factor that
is present in all the social conflicts in Guatemala. They have been able to
exploit the new opportunities for participation that have been created for them
at a political level. In an interview in June 1997, the co-ordinator of the
UNESCO MAYA project in Guatemala, Federico Figueroa, described the
situation as follows:

It was in the late 1980s and early 1990s that Mayanstudies began, and that con-
siderationwas given to what Maya means. Logically speaking, the Maya has a
grandpoliticaldesign, the Mayaunites all the ethnic groups,which have theirdif-
ferences, above all historical and territorial .... We should also remember that
there have been confrontationsbetween indigenous groups. And so what really
unites them is the Maya.

Mayan education as a point of reference for educational reform in

Guatemala

Returning to the topic of Mayan education, we turn in this last part of the
article to the existing relationship between family and community education
on the one hand, and official, formal education on the other. We shall also
reflect on the role that Mayan education is playing in the debate about edu-
cational reform in Guatemala.

The creation of a new form of Mayan education

Taking as our starting point the essence of the concept of "Maya" outlined
above, we should like to suggest here that Mayan education, besides being
334

an educational concept, can be seen as a political concept which is developing

out of a particular social and political situation in Guatemala. Like the moder
concept of "Mayan identity", the concept of "Mayan education" is perceived
as having been created within a specific historical and social context and as
being associated with the particular political aims of its protagonists. Since
Mayan ethnicity is based on the shared historical experiences and interests of
an ethnic group and, moreover, is the outcome of organized activities, Mayan
education must also be understood in these wider social contexts. (This is
not to say that "Maya"was not real or legitimate. However, as indicated above,
it is not possible to determine objectively from the outside whether the points
of reference for the formation of an ethnic identity are real or imaginary.)
From this perspective, Mayan education can clearly be explained also as
a means of criticizing the educational situation and concepts that prevail gen-
erally in Guatemala. Figueroa (June 1997) describes the situation in the fol-
lowing way:
In an analysis of education in Guatemala,it must be borne in mind in respect
of formal educationthat school educationis somethingextra for the indigenous
populations,especially in ruralareas.They are able to handlefar more clearly the
concept of communityeducation,the philosophicalconcept of educationin which
school is an extra.The educationthat is given is educationfor all, as UNESCOis
now saying with far greaterforce, and is lifelong education,educationat all times,
startingfrom the family and complementedby school. And that is why schools of
any type are rejectedin many cases because they do not respondto, or contradict,
indigenousthinkingaboutthe meaningof education.
We can see that the debate about the promotion and official recognition of
values and skills taught in Mayan families and communities, about the estab-
lishment of Mayan schools and a Mayan university, and about the promotion
of teaching in Mayan languages, always carries within it elements of criticism
of the official education system.
Taking into account that the formation of ideas of what is or might be
Mayan education is a an ongoing process, it is not possible to put forward any
definite conclusions. We can, however, suggest some key points to be borne
in mind in consideration of this phenomenon, which will obviously continue
to evolve.

Recognising the dynamic and creative process of ethnogenesis

Our initial conclusion is the recognition that the outcomes of these processes
of creating Mayan ethnicity and Mayan education are significant. They are
logical and functional processes that take place within the socio-political
context of their creation, and which represent and support the political
interests of their promoters. Moreover, we must take into account that these
processes arise out of a specific historical and social situation, and are a
response to the historical marginalization of indigenous people in Guatemala
that is evident in education among other fields.
 335

Not confusing the "new Mayas" with the "historical Mayas"

Our second conclusion is the recognition that collective ethnic identity, in this
case that of the Mayas, is not something pure, natural and primordial, nor a
predetermined, inevitable and compulsory cultural and biological heritage
which "descends on peoples". Mayan identity is not sustained primarily by a
shared, given cosmic vision and philosophy; nor are there Mayan practices,
attitudes or characteristics per se (acquired from birth, from the blood, from
genes, mother's milk, etc.). What does exist is constructs and perceptions of
Mayan identity, philosophy, cosmic vision, etc., that are shared and are valid
in themselves, but their content depends on the perceptions which their pro-
tagonists deduce from their environments, from their reflections on their social
and political situation, and from their visions of history.

Recognising Mayan education as part of the process of ethnogenesis

From this second conclusion derives the third, which is the recognition of
Mayan education as an integral part of the complex, dynamic, creative and
unfinished process of ethnogenesis. Depending on the way in which the sectors
in society define their identity in specific contexts, so will they also define
the bases of their education systems and concepts of education.

Looking back and planning ahead

In conclusion, we should like to suggest that the dynamic and creative process
of building Mayan ethnicity is of positive value. We regard as extremely
positive the opportunity to recognise and strengthen the "new Mayas", without
wishing to reconstruct history. Instead of looking for and reconstructing
supposed historical truths, we prefer to stress the dynamic processes of change
and cultural interchange.
Finally, we can state that one interesting aspect of the successful promo-
tion of Mayan education in the case of Guatemala is the fact that certain
institutions, which were used historically to reinforce the exclusion and mar-
ginalization of indigenous populations by official Guatemalan government
bodies, have been taken over once more by representatives of the marginal-
ized population and now serve to strengthen the cultural identity of the Mayas.
By exploiting these, indigenous peoples are reclaiming their rights and are
questioning the education system itself. Against this background, Mayan edu-
cation is a creation that acts as a highly functional, efficient and successful
means of criticism.
336

Notes

1. ASIES (1995) makes no distinction between the K'iche' and Q'eqchi' communi-
ties which it investigated. FRMT and UNESCO (1997) carried out research in 96
indigenous communities in 14 different ethnolinguistic regions, but does not give
regional sources in its findings.
2. Ramirez and Mazariegos (1993) does not identify the ethnolinguistic groups to
which it refers.
3. Interviews Nos. 2 and 9. Nine educators were interviewed, two of whom were
Ladinos and seven Mayan. The two Ladinos (2, 9) mentioned this aspect. See also
CECMA (1992: 37). The author, a K'iche' from the region of Quetzaltenango,
describes the distinctions between Mayan and Ladino education.
4. Cojti and CISMA (1990) refers to the K'iche', Mam and Q'eqchi' regions.
5. Loukota Soler and Chacach (1992) is a study carried out in the Kaqchikel region.

References

ASIES (Asociaci6n de Investigaciones y Estudios Sociales). 1995. Educacion Familiar

en Comunidades Indfgenas. Guatemala: ASIES.
ASIES. 1997. Reforma Educativa en Guatemala. Guatemala: ASIES & PREAL.
Barth, Frederik. 1969. Ethnic Groups and Boundaries. Bergen: Universitetsforlaget.
Brown, R. McKenna and Fischer, Edward F. 1996. Maya Cultural Activism in
Guatemala. Austin: University of Texas Press.
CECMA (Centro de Estudios de la Cultura Maya). 1992. Hacia una Educacion Maya.
Encuentro Taller de Escuelas con Programas de Cultura Maya. Chichicastenango,
El Quiche. Chaclan Solis, Celso Bonifacio. 1995. Enfoques Curriculares Mayas, en
los programas educativos bilingiies. Iximulew, Guatemala: CEDIM & CHOLWUJ
CHOLNA'OJ.
CNEM (Consejo Nacional de Educaci6n Maya). 1996. Propuesta Maya de
Reforma Educativa. Seminario Nacional de Educaci6n Maya por la Paz. Xelju',
Quetzaltenango.
Cohen, Abner (ed.) 1974. Urban Ethnicity. London: Tavistock.
Cojti, Demetrio and CISMA (Centro de Investigaci6n Social Maya). 1990. Pautas de
crianza y necesidades educativas de la niiez maya. Estudio realizado en aldeas de
las regiones II y VII de Guatemala. Guatemala: Fondo de las Naciones Unidas para
la Infancia, UNICEF.
Cojti Cuxil, Demetrio (Waqi' Q'anil). 1997. Ri Maya' Moloj pa Iximulew. El
Movimiento Maya (en Guatemala). Guatemala: CHOLSAMAJ.
Davis, Shelton H. 1988. Introduction: Sowing the Seeds of Violence. In: Carmack,
Robert M., ed., Harvest of Violence. The Maya Indians and the Guatemalan Crisis.
Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
Fundaci6n Rigoberta Menchu Tum (FRMT) and UNESCO. 1997. Realidad Educativa
de Guatemala. Diagn6stico de la realidad educativa de los pueblos indigenas y otros
pueblos de Mesoamerica. Iximulew: FRMT, UNESCO.
 337

Gabbert, Wolfgang. 1991. Creoles - Afroamerikaner im karibischen Tiefland von

Nicaragua. Hamburg: LIT.
Garbers, Frank. 1993. Guatemaltekische Fliichtlinge in Mexiko: Ausgrenzung und
Flucht als Hintergrund fir ein neues ethnisches Selbstbewujitsein. Master's thesis,
University of Hamburg.
Heckt, Meike. 1997. Educacion intercultural. Futuro para una Guatemala multilingiie
y pluricultural.Guatemala:CIDECA,Colecci6n Debates.
Loukota Soler, Eresto and Chacach,Martin. 1992. Hogar y Escuela. Guatemala:
UniversidadRafael Landivar.
MAYA UNESCO (ed.). 1995. Educacion Maya. Experiencia y Expectativas en
Guatemala.Guatemala:UNESCO.
Ramirez,Margaritaand Mazariegos,Luisa. 1993. Tradiciony Modernidad.Lecturas
sobre la CulturaMaya actual. Guatemala:UniversidadRafael Landivar,Institutode
Linguistica.
Smith, Carol A. (ed.) 1990. Guatemalan Indians and the State, 1540 to 1988. Austin:
Universityof Texas Press.
Weber, Max. 1972. Wirtschaftund Gesellschaft. Grundrifader verstehenden Soziologie.
Tiibingen.

Interviews

GuillerminaHerrera,UniversidadRafael Landivar,June 94
OscarAzmitia, PRODESSA,July 94
RigobertoVasquez,CEDIM,July 94
ErnestinaReyes, PRONEBI,July 94
JuanaVasquez,Movimiento500 Aniosde Resistencia,July 94
DemetrioCojti, UNICEF,February97
Virgilio Alvarado,CNEM,March97
GustavoPalma,AVANCSO,March97
Jose Angel Zapeta,FRMT/DIREPI,March97
JuanLe6n, DefensoriaMaya, March97
Eva Sazo, PRONADE,April 97
FedericoFigueroa,UNESCOMAYA, June 97
ManuelSalazar,CNEM,June 97

The author

Meike Heckt lecturesin Americananthropologyat the Universityof Hamburg.She

is currentlywritingher doctoralthesis on InterculturalEducationin Guatemala,and
spent 18 months researchingin Alta Verapaz, Guatemala,in 1995-1997. She is a
member of the CIDECA research group in Guatemala.She has published several
articleson interculturalissues.
Contact address: Meike Heckt, InterculturalStudies, Faculty of Education,
Universityof Hamburg,Von-Melle-Park8, 20146 Hamburg,Germany.