Czech Republic: A conversation between educators Vladimír Foist and Martin Kaleja
The monthly Romano voďi publishes a regular column entitled "Two Points of View". Two public figures, one non-Romani and one Romani, who are members of the same profession or who work in the same field, are invited to ask one another questions.
In the November issue we featured a dialogue between two educators – Vladimír Foist, director of an inclusive school in Poběžovice, and Martin Kaleja of the Special Education Department, Faculty of Pedagogy, Ostrava University.
Vladimír Foist first asked Martin Kaleja the following:
Q: Equal opportunities in schooling, the common education of pupils, inclusion, and you – what do these concepts mean to you in general?
A: Equal opportunities are a rather hot topic today. Resolutions are being sought in several places. In schooling, just like anywhere else, the topic is taking on various shades of meaning. It depends on many indicators. Understandably, it depends on what or who the target group is, what kind of group. Everyone is of the opinion that he or she is solving this problem objectively, with a clear, concrete aim, but that is not always the case. Sometimes "equal" stops being "equal" in order to create an opportunity or the potential for one. This is a deep philosophy that isn’t always necessarily understood, or if it is understood, not always correctly. Now to the topic: To talk about equal opportunities in pedagogical practice, there must be a pre-defined sequence of opportunities for all target groups. We must know the characteristics of the target group – who is considered part of it, what their potential is, what fulfills them, and what they might achieve. We should verify whether the conditions exist for reaching that aim, and if they don’t, we should provide them insofar as that is possible. The term "inclusion" has various terminological equivalents today. Some interpret it to mean common, equal, inclusive, etc. In my judgment, inclusive strategies are ones that primarily take into consideration the weak points of a group with the aim of compensating for those deficiencies or disadvantages while also helping everyone else.
Q: You are familiar with the environments of primary, secondary and tertiary education here. Could you describe your own experience from those various environments with promoting democratic education here, including the common education of pupils from various ethnic backgrounds?
A: Here I can give you both an answer based in practice and a theoretical answer. There are various aspects to my answer… I’ll start with the practical one. There are organizations offering lectures, seminars and training for educators that intend to familiarize educators with democratic or inclusive concepts of education, where teachers learn to lead their pupils toward the acceptance of human differences, toward critical thinking, toward independent decision-making, toward responsibility for their own behavior… When I worked at a primary school, it was predominantly with ethnic Romani pupils who came from socially excluded environments. Common education there took the following form: Pupils with various educational needs, pupils of at least two different ethnicities (ethnic Czech and ethnic Roma), pupils at several different grade levels, etc., were all in one classroom – this is just to point out that a common education takes various forms. At the secondary school where I worked, there was only a minimum of ethnic Romani students, but I encountered students there who were also distinguished by the educational characteristics that are generally attributed to Romani children, i.e., high levels of absence from instruction, lack of interest in the curriculum, parents who took no interest in how their children were functioning in school, etc. At the college where I work, where one expects students to perceive an education as something of value, I am again encountering the fact that some do not – not even students in the field of teaching! Students are studying not to get what an education can give them, they are studying to meet a formal requirement. They are studying for their diplomas. We can very clearly say that their approach to their own educations tells us how they perceive it. What is it all about, then?
Q: Promoting democratic, independent approaches to education also has its pitfalls. Could you describe some of the basic problems you have encountered with it?
A: The independent approach to education can look like this: An individual independently declares that he or she is not interested in education. Czech legislation, however, has established the obligation to participate in basic education, and we cannot deny anyone that right. Children’s legal guardians or parents are responsible for them, but adults are responsible for themselves. If an adult person declares that he or she has no interest in educational achievement, in schooling, then we consider that legitimate as long as he or she has completed his or her mandatory school attendance. It’s their affair whether they intend to continue their studies. However, we also encounter adults who are also not interested in education for their own children, or for the children for whom they are providing care. I have encountered various cases like that – for example, a situation in which a child’s legal guardian didn’t register the child for obligatory school attendance until the child was 10 years old. The child had never been enrolled in any school before then. Once the father of a fifth-grader asked me whether I know how to fix cars. He came in when I was teaching, without making an appointment – he just walked into my classroom and asked me that question completely out of context. When I answered that I don’t know how to fix cars, he responded by asking why I was teaching his son English. In his view, even though his son was participating in primary education, he didn’t need to master a foreign language if I, as his teacher, also have something I don’t know how to do – and if that is something that he, the parent knew how to do himself. Another example: An instructor declares she is reducing both the curriculum and her efforts in the disciplinary and educational process. In her view, the class she is instructing will either never need "that subject" or will never master "that subject". Is there any democracy in that? She made her decision democratically. As you can see, my answer is not what you might expect. I’m doing that intentionally to point out the various dimensions of how democracy in schooling is understood. There are situations that are unusual, that no one could ever have foreseen. The promotion of democratic, independent approaches to education should correspond to our society’s indicators for standard-setting. This society is in a constant regime of change, but there are rules – their interpretations just differ. That’s how it is with the laws too.
Q: You are preparing the students at pedagogical schools to work as teachers. Do you believe our colleges are preparing teachers to be ready to educate children on the basis of democratic, inclusive principles?
A: No, I definitely do not believe we are. It is hard to prepare teachers during their pre-graduate training to work with different kinds of children according to the principles of democracy, equality and fairness when they themselves (the teachers at the colleges) are not sufficiently prepared to provide that training. Some of them are completely without any teaching experience in the field. Yes, they too went through school as pupils or students themselves, but they have not had the room to acquire competency as an educator – that is acquired through immediate educational practice in the field. Those who have undergone that experience know exactly what I am talking about. I am not critical of all college educators, but it is true that some, if not most, should take courses in multicultural education, personal development, social equality and fairness, etc. – but under no circumstances should those courses be formal ones. I encounter teachers at primary and secondary schools who have formally completed such courses within the framework of the continuing education system for pedagogical staffs, and that approach is an enormous mistake. Those teachers aren’t thinking about the next level of their own self-education, to say nothing of the fact that they are losing the ethos of their profession and wasting their money and their time….
Q: For schools that have decided to promote inclusive education, doing so poses no small risk. One nightmare for principals in the Czech Republic is the economic instability of the system. Schools are forced to pay for most of their activities with development grants, programs and projects which often require a maximum expenditure of effort and entail an enormous risk of failure. In your opinion, is there enough support for this system, or do you see certain restraints on the part of the state bodies responsible?
A: The development projects, or European Structural Funds projects, or just subsidies from any program for advancement and development once primarily served to strengthen competitiveness, efficiency and productivity, even in the schools. Today it’s different. Many schools are completely dependent upon these subsidies if they want to offer what others don’t. School founders are also changing their financing systems. In my judgment, the schools have not been sufficiently trained in this matter, they were never even informed that the flow of financing was going to change. It happened and is still happening spasmodically, because it hasn’t been resolved systemically. The ministry announces subsidy programs with different focuses, with the clear aim of supporting those focuses, but the schools’ awareness of those programs is linited to how to apply for them and make use of them. That’s not enough. Moreover, at different periods this funding has begun to support what was never supported yesterday and what will never be supported tomorrow, figuratively speaking. People without any pedagogical perspective are becoming engaged in these questions of education and schooling. People without any experience in school management are being hired for various positions, and while they may manage things correctly from a technical point of view, they do not manage them correctly or dispassionately when it comes to content. That is happening in various areas of social life addressing the issue of education. The effect of it is gradually being lost.
Q: One question from my own experience: Teaching assistants in our region are expected to perform 38 hours of direct instruction a week. In our experience, this is an unsustainable amount of work to expect of a pedagogical staffer; the work is not sufficiently remunerated financially and most of the assistants are working on the basis of grants and projects that might not continue, so there is no way to ensure their professional futures. I am concerned that it might even be possible to speak of this profession as one that is discriminated against.
A: I must admit that I have never thought of the topic of discrimination in that context. It’s clear to me how it works, I know that situation rather well. It is also new information to me that the length of direct instructional work is established across the board in your region for teaching assistants. The function of teaching assistants was introduced to Czech schooling "at march step" and has undergone a certain development. I myself keep track of the attitudes of teaching assistants toward their jobs, the attitudes of teacher with and without assistants, and I watch the pupils as well as the mutual collaboration of the assistants and the teachers… For those who don’t know this, we have to say here that we have assistants with various degrees of education in the schools, and therefore their competencies can differ from school to school. Yes, there are teaching assistants who feel "aggrieved" when they compare their job description with the work done by other assistants or the teacher. Of course, these are two different positions and the interpersonal relationship between these two kinds of pedagogical staff plays a key role in their collaboration. There are teachers who do not want any assistants in their classroom, and they either know why or they don’t want to know why. There are also teaching assistants who see their collaboration with a specific teacher in the same light. The question of financing teaching assistant positions is something else. The relevant state bodies know very well how this works, and it has long been discussed. The legislative language is clear, but changes are not happening. Any teaching assistant, therefore, is perceived as a temporary instrument for support, which is basically in accordance with the concept of inclusion. Supportive tools are used only when they are really needed. Situations arise in which the need no longer exists, in which there is no point for such an instrument to be available to a given facility, or rather, to be used there. If we count on the fact that we will make permanent use of a support tool, then we are implicitly saying that we are counting on some sort of special educational need turning up among the pupils, or we even go so far as to make sure there is such a need – and that’s not right. The financing of employment relationships is governed by legislation, and school managements have to fight with that reality. Who, therefore, is being discriminated against? The school management? The person performing the function of a teaching assistant – not the position of teaching assistant, but the person who is performing that job? Or is it the pupil who no longer needs a support mechanism but is still being provided with one? That last option definitely does not occur in our conditions, but in order to clarify the essence of this matter, I have to mention it.
Martin Kaleja then asked Vladimír Foist the following:
Q: Is there a firm concept of democracy in the schools? How do you, in your position as the head of the school, form a democracy in your pedagogical practice with respect to the education of your pupils? What are the troubling points you have to grapple with, like it or not?
A: From a conceptual standpoint, the education of democratic citizens is of a firmly established interdisciplinary, multicultural nature. It should equip the pupil with a basic level of civic literacy. It is part of the Framework Educational Program as a so-called cross-cutting theme, the purpose of which is not only to implement certain thematically-related areas, but primarily to effectively contribute toward creating a democratic climate at the school with respect to the pupils’ specific experiences and skills. From the point of view of our experience, the democratic education of pupils is not only firmly anchored in our School
Educational Program, but it closely relates to the children’s opportunity to participate in decision-making communities represented by various classes or groups where the pupils have the opportunity to express their views of what is going on through the Student Council, and where they also have the opportunity to verify the meaning of the school rules. The democratic management of the school is basically related to this concept, which provides the pupils with a practical example of how to assert those democratic principles when it comes to the behavior of their teachers. From my perspective, a troubling point is a certain despotism and intolerance in society, in many cases enhanced by the media, which very often permeates the lives of families even in closed communities and does not makes it easy to convince children that the principles of democracy do apply. Everything depends on the quality of the specific relationship between the educator and the pupil.
Q: You have many years of experience as an educator. Is there something that Czech schools lack in comparison with other countries? Can Czech schools, in your opinion, be compared in general to schools where the curricular and systemic conditions are completely different? This is done rather often – is it legitimate?
A: Personally, most of the comparisons I have seen frighten me a bit. I have experience with very close collaborations with schools from Austria, Germany, Italy and Switzerland. I still teach once a week at the local primary school in the German town of Oberviechtach. Any comparison with the practices of our partners would be unequivocally misleading, it’s not possible to objectively compare the incomparable. A Czech school has its own image, its own specifics, just as a German school creates its own image. It definitely is not possible to say that our educational facilities could seamlessly import models from other countries. Naturally, it is possible to compare curricula, economic standpoints, and outcomes, but in my opinion the information must be viewed with respect to the specific conditions in a given region. On the other hand, I am not against exchanging experiences and I am very glad to make use of the inspiration acquired abroad in my own practice. What Czech schools, compared to those in the countries I have mentioned, really lack is economic stability and support from the entities responsible for them, taking the specific needs of the region into account. The concept of school inspections is very different and does not benefit us here; abroad, inspectors are usually involved in the life of a school and contribute methodically to its development, they don’t just perform authoritative, repressive audits. The Czech Republic can only envy the public’s admirable perception of the schools and the work of teachers in other countries. I can also say, on the basis of my own experience, that school management here is disproportionately overworked compared to our colleagues elsewhere in Europe.
Q: Experts involved with inclusive education have been defining various key competencies, strategies, support mechanisms, etc., for it. Is there something that you perceive to be inclusion which others do not, or rather, do others see inclusion differently? If so, why? Is inclusion purely a (special) educational category? Is there something missing here with respect to the essence of this matter, in your opinion?
A: I am concerned that the topic of inclusion, including the definition of various mechanisms and strategies, whether viewed as pedagogical strategy or evaluated from the general level of ethics or from the standpoint of social interaction, is drifting far afield from its basic essence, that of a fundamental human attitude. I am convinced that the common education of pupils with all of their differences is simply a normal concept for the education of the younger generation. What seems not normal to me is any form of segregation. The constant publicizing and raising of difference, some efforts at focusing, with "good" intentions, on ethnically and socially different groups in the population, is prompting a disproportionate reaction from society. It is supporting animosity and intolerant behavior as well as all forms of segregation. I think the only way out of this vicious circle is common education, raising people to mutually respect and tolerate one another, whether this has to do with people who are mentally or physically disabled or people from different ethnicities and social backgrounds. Unfortunately, I regret that I must say that my generation, even though we had a very good chance after the fall of communism, has been significantly held back in this process by the persistence of some of the totalitarian principles we have inherited.
Q: The readiness and willingness of pedagogical staffs to work with pupils of various ethnicities is significantly variable… Generally, Czech society displays a great deal of animosity in general, as well as racism and xenophobia…. What would help educators, both in practice and during their pre-graduate preparations, to break down these received behavioral models?
A: The inclusive concept of education is part of the whole complex system of this society’s development and transformation. Young people should definitely see more examples of good practice during their pre-graduate training. I know many schools that have set off down the path of common education. In most of those institutions, efforts to develop a concept for the relationships within the school environment predominates over a focus on performance. All of these schools are open and prepared to share their experiences with college students and with teachers from other schools. Mutual collaborations and support as well as the sharing of opinions can create the necessary momentum for significant changes in the system. For example, the Czech Professional Association for Inclusive Education (Česká odborná společnost pro inkluzivní vzdělávání – ČOSIV) supports a network of schools aiming at inclusion through which like-minded educators from all over the country can support one another. What all these schools have in common is the ability to accept each and every pupil; educators capable of working on themselves; and teams that collaborate. They also dedicate a significant proportion of their work to creating relationships with the local community.
Q: "Romani people do not consider education to be a value." That is stated rather often in the media and is even presented as a fact by academics at universities. However, there are no empirical studies that methodologically, precisely support this pseudo-finding. I myself have been involved in one such research project, and I would like to point out that statements formulated this way are completely vague and not based in any irrefutable educational or psychological research. What do you think of this?
A: I completely agree with you and I unequivocally reject that claim, which in my opinion is just a carbon copy of the received prejudices of the majority society. I know many educated Romani people, and not just in my neighborhood, who are willing to educate themselves, to participate in the life of their region, and to work on themselves. Unfortunately, I also encounter such opinions and "research" rather often, and this ails me just as it does when a teacher at a high school says: "Dyslexic… what is he doing in high school?" It is completely evident that the alleged "ineducability" of Romani children has been connected to their unjustified segregation into the "special" schools. I even know cases where Romani people themselves have accepted this "fact" as something that they identify with. This is precisely where there is room for field social workers and support organizations to do their work. Their task is to establish bilateral communications with such families as equals.
Q: What kinds of "extremes" have you encountered during your work in the schools? What was curious about them?
A: Life in a school reflects life in general. There are moments that can fill an educator’s soul with joy, you experience good days you will remember for the rest of your life, days that give you élan and energy for a long time. There are also moments one would rather immediately forget, moments when you believe you have lost the ground beneath your feet during the battle for your ideals. One of the worst moments I ever experienced was when my vice-principal was assaulted by a dissatisfied parent. I have also had to testify to the court as a witness in a child abuse case, I have had to help children who have run away from home, and after a political reversal on the town council I have had to leave my work undone… but I’ve forgotten all of that, those experiences are balanced out by the smiles of children who have "found themselves" in our system, and by my faith that my colleagues and I are on the right path for humanity.
