Minister of education and research Jaak Aaviksoo tells Estonia’s Russian weekly Den za Dnjom of plan to seal secondary education agreement with Russia as soon as possible.
Estonia’s education minister sees need for Russian Lyceum
Please note that the article is more than five years old and belongs to our archive. We do not update the content of the archives, so it may be necessary to consult newer sources.
Starting with a question robbing me of sleep for quite a while now: what made the new national curriculum prepared by your forerunner and party pal Tõnis Lukas (left IRL on February 7th, this year – edit) so bad that it had to undergo immediate reforms? And, should it really be that bad, why has it been approved by the government?
Well, the curriculum as such is not bad; it just carries the historic tradition which, in my opinion, ought to be reviewed in the 21st century. Probably, we will not be compiling a new and better curriculum; rather, we will be looking at ways of making the practical study arrangements somewhat more flexible for schools – less dependent on the curriculum, its subjects and volumes. So, they would just focus at the competencies described in the general part. The general part is a contemporary text, carried by 21st century ideology; the subject syllabi, however, are very voluminous and slightly out of date.
I just had a talk with authors of teaching materials. Some of them say that, should the programme be shrunk even further, there would not be subjects enough for complete text books. Aren’t you afraid that, cutting the programme by half, the students’ world view would become overly narrow?
Well, this is a tricky thing. Should I ask what you remember from what you studied at school, that would probably not amount to much. Most of it is forgotten; it is forgotten rather fast.
At the same time, there are a number of things that I think should be definitely remembered in 20, 30 years. So there is something wrong with the way studies are arranged; we need to concentrate on what is more important, with less emphasis on things not so important.
Why was the requirement of three special biases removed from the programme, before gymnasiums had even time to comply? I have heard that, in some schools, it was even advised that students specialise in embroidering, but let’s be honest: in strong gymnasiums, the biases have developed long ago – and we don’t need the weak ones.
Firstly: the fact that the three fields of study were removed from the law, does not mean they may not exist. Rather the opposite: the schools are free to go even farther with that. The issue was: why prescribe it by law? The trend should be towards respecting the schools’ autonomy and freedom of choice. We have quite a number of schools, in Estonia, with over three fields of study – and that’s very good.
Recently Kalle Küttis, education ministry’s school network chief, paid a visit to Narva trying to smooth over the conflict arising from the plan to join an Estonian gymnasium with a Russian school. The scandal could have been foreseen, couldn’t it?
Foreseen or not, I cannot tell. Regrettably, however, the Narva municipal school in question falls below required levels. In Narva, the quality of Estonian language based education is unsatisfactory, we cannot ignore the situation.
How to solve the problem – whether it could be solved with the gymnasium remaining a municipal school or should the school be nationalised – or whether there’s a third way, is up for discussion. An all the ministry did, actually – Kalle Küttis sent Narva city government a letter, proposing to consider various options. In Narva, the issue was politicized and demonstrations organised – instead of discussing the problems. That is to be regretted. However, the problem is still there. Something obviously needs to be done; I think a solution will be found. After the [local] elections, people can live on peacefully and take things more easily.
It is no secret that the ministry’s relations with local powers, especially Centre Party, are far from ideal. With three state gymnasiums opened this year – is that expression of no confidence?
I would not go as far as saying that Centre Party is bad and all others good; even so, we do think there are very serious problems, in Tallinn, with the educational network and its administration.
In Tallinn, many decisions have simply been postponed; long ago, the school network ought to have been tidied up. The city government has made some moves now, very carefully – life changes faster than they can catch up with decisions. There are other problems, as well. There have been questionable moves with replacing school leadership.
But coming back to the state gymnasiums...
Largely, state gymnasiums do not concern schools with Russian as language of instruction; rather, this comes down to Estonian schools outside the big cities. Small local governments maintained very small gymnasiums; they were not able to agree how a number of local governments could merge many gymnasiums, creating a single strong one.
Pursuant to law, the state is required to provide at least one state gymnasium in every county. That’s the reason [these were created]. It is not a matter of trust or lack of it.
Maybe the headmasters don’t want to take the trouble, updating the schools – a new minister coming to power anyway, in some years, cancelling it all out and launching his own plans. Maybe it is stability that our education needs, rather that reforms?
Much has been said about the reforms, but looking at the school network, it is very very outdated. Regarding how the teachers are paid, this is done on basis of a 1984 regulation by Communist Party of the Soviet Union. Some things do change slowly indeed. Schools cannot wait for decades.
This summer, for the second time, the government said no to Russian gymnasiums applying to continue with Russian as the language of instruction. Why?
First, let me remind us that the decision to switch over to Estonian as language of instruction, in gymnasiums, was taken 20 years ago. Over that time, there have been quite a number of ministers. For me, it is the second time to be in this house. Tõnis Lukas and Mailis Reps have also been here twice. An entire generation has grown up. Basically, the only new decision was to decide the date the switch would start.
The reasons? The most substantial one being that, regrettably, graduates of Estonian schools are paid better wages, in Estonia, than the Russian language based graduates. The wage gap is mainly caused by official language skills. Official language skills must be improved, studies in the official language being quite an effective method for that. In my opinion, the other reasons are secondary; definitely, the political aspect is to be considered.
Maybe the state vainly tries to play the strict disciplinarian, telling stupid people how to be happy. If you desire to grant schools greater freedom, would it not be easier to allow for exceptions, as provided for by law? Seeing the issue is about bid cities where students can choose between several gymnasiums.
The law provides for exceptions. Even so, the corresponding applications need to be substantiated. And when ten schools – or, rather, their boards of trustees – have, within three days decided in one accord to file in such applications, then, as you well understand, this was no free-will option but a politically orchestrated manoeuvre.
Even so, I would heartily welcome a Russian Lyceum in Tallinn, and why not in other places in Estonia, should the need arise – in cooperation with Russian Federation; as we do have a German Gymnasium, in Tallinn. Estonia would definitely need a good Russian Lyceum where Russian language, literature and culture could be taught entirely in Russian if so desired. But that would take an international agreement; and I do sincerely hope that negotiations with Russian Federation will lead us to that.
In what way does your plan differ from the one the government remodelled, this summer?
Well, the orientation is different, somewhat. The German Gymnasium also not equalling a German language based education in Estonia; rather, it is a narrow specialisation, in a certain area, in cooperation with another state – and supported by the latter. First and foremost, this is meant for more in-depth studies in German – or Russian – language, literature and culture. This is somewhat different than taking an ordinary school and declaring that in this school we use Russian as language of instruction.
There is a difference between the two. In one case, the result will be – as it often happens – that the graduates possess poor skills in official language. In the other case, excellence in Russian language, literature and culture is guaranteed.
Who must take steps towards signing an agreement like this – a school or the ministry?
This is an idea proposed by me, and I will definitely stand for it. I am fully convinced there would be schools, in Tallinn, that are willing to be involved. Let us first wait for the opinion of the Russian ministry of education. Soon, I will be meeting the [Russian] ambassador; also, I have planned a trip to Moscow. Maybe we will succeed in arranging a meeting with my Russian colleague, to discuss all these options.
We do already have a higher education cooperation agreement; and we would welcome a general and vocational education agreement to be prepared and signed. An object of that agreement, in our cooperation, could be a Russian [langue and culture biased] school.
In your mind, would that be a school with in-depth Russian for Estonian children, or a Russian school? Or could both be considered?
I really hope children of both kinds of families would enrol. Surely, there are quite a few children from Estonian families here, studying in Russian language based schools. However, a school based on international cooperation would add prestige and be more attractive for young people from various backgrounds.
In my opinion, both versions would be both prudent and possible. There have been no direct discussion with my participation; however, the expectations are definitely there. And surely we stand ready to meet these expectations.
Comment
Embassy of Russian Federation
Hereby, we confirm that just this past week Estonia’s minister of education and research J. Aaviksoo, during his conversation with Russian ambassador J. Merzlyakov, raised, among other things, the issue of entering into cooperation agreement in the area of secondary education. The embassy, in its turn, has informed Russian ministry of education and research of the said initiative. Possibly, such perspectives of cooperation between the two countries, as well as details thereof, will be discussed during minister J. Aaviksoo’s visit to Moscow where he is participating in the event EU-Russia Year of Science Cooperation, on November 25th, this year.