Sis Tsiis Petysje Ûnderwiis Yn It Frysk

Oan it Kolleezje fan Deputearre Steaten fan de provinsje Fryslân Yn ôfskrift oan de Provinsjale Steaten

Ljouwert, 12 maaie 2017 Ûnderwerp: it Frysk yn it (hiele) ûnderwiis

Rju achte leden fan Deputearre Steaten en Provinsjale Steaten,

Freed 3 febrewaris 2017 kaam Dingtiid, it Orgaan foar de Fryske taal, mei in advys oer it Frysk yn it ûnderwiis mei as titel “Meartaligens as kwaliteit en doel”. In pear jier lyn hat de Ried fan de Fryske Beweging omtinken frege foar syn projekt “Fan ûnderen op”. Willem Verf c.s. kamen mei it plan Fierder mei Frysk foar in “Brede Maatskiplike Diskusje” en wy kamen yn desimber 2016 as Sis Tsiis mei in aksje en in needgjalp om mear te dwaan oan it Frysk yn it ûnderwiis. In aksje mei in soad sukses dy’t sa mar op de tongersdeitejûn foar krysttiid mear as 300 minsken loek. Dêr aanst mear oer. En as wy dan sjogge nei it grutte tal artikels dat de ôfrûne tiid yn kranten ferskynde, dan is der mar ien konklúzje mooglik: der binne grutte soargen oer de takomst fan it Frysk.

“Frysk op skoalle: in bernerjocht”, mei dat rjochtfeardige doel waard op tongersdeitejûn 22 desimber 2016 yn de binnenstêd fan Ljouwert de alderearste manifestaasje fan de boargerinisjatyfgroep “Sis Tsiis” holden foar mear en better Frysk ûnderwiis. Frysk op de basisskoalle is al sûnt 1980 ferplichte (it fuortset ûnderwiis kaam wat letter). Op papier liket it yn guon gefallen hiel wat, mar yn werklikheid komt der fierstente min fan op ’e hispel. De leardoelen ferplichtsje suver ta neat. De ûnderwiisynspeksje seit dat se net witte wat se ynspektearje moatte en is dus al jierren lyn mei ynspektearjen opholden. De learkrêft kin gauris net út de fuotten mei it lesmateriaal, hat sels net iens it foech om lesjaan te meien yn it Frysk of hat it te drok mei al it oare dat der op him of har ôfkomt. It skoalbestjoer bûcht te gau foar de Hollânsktalige anty-Friezen dy’t der neat fan hawwe moatte. It resultaat is: gjin Frysk, heal Frysk, min Frysk.

Dingtiid komt mei deselde konklúzje. Wy sitearje út syn rapport: “Us observaasjes binne yn twa haadlinen op te dielen. Oan de iene kant barre der moaie dingen as it om it Frysk yn it ûnderwiis giet. Der is beweging yn alle fazen yn it ûnderwiis, minsken nimme inisjativen en der wurdt gebrûk makke fan de nijste middels. Oan de oare kant is dat wat der bart, faak fersnipele, slút it net opinoar oan en hinget it ôf fan yndividueel entûsjasme. Dat fine wy spitich. Boppedat ha wy dat byld ek al fêststeld yn ús stúdzje oangeande it hiele Fryske fjild (sjoch Feroaring en ferbettering). Fierder fernimme wy dat der gjin brede stipe út it ûnderwiisfjild sels is. Rânebetingsten binne bygelyks net goed regele. It belang fan it Frysk as fak- en fiertaal yn it ûnderwiis wurdt net genôch sjoen. Mei as resultaat dat it Frysk deropta liket te wêzen.” Sis Tsiis hat mei niget it Dingtiid-rapport “Meartaligens as doel en as kwaliteit “ lêzen. Benammen advys 4 om foar leararen yn Fryslân it hawwen fan it foech Frysk yn de easken fan bekwamens op te nimmen, kin op ús ynstimming rekkenje. Advys 6 om “meartaligens” as kwaliteit en doel yn fakatuere-easken op te nimmen, fernuveret ús. Wol it mei it Frysk wat wurde, dan soe ek it Frysk eksplisyt opnommen (neamd) wurde moatte. Wy hawwe noch mear muoite mei advys 10, dêr’t yn pleite wurdt foar differinsjaasje yn it foech Frysk. Dat sil neffens ús der op ’en nij ta liede dat it Frysk der wat by begjint te hingjen. Men soe jin ôffreegje moatte oft minsken dy’t net by steat binne om yn in ridlike tiid harren it Frysk eigen te meitsjen, wol thúshearre yn it ûnderwiis. En dan: wêrom soe de provinsje of soenen de skoalbestjoeren it heljen fan in foech net ekstra beleanje? In woartel helpt better as in stôk. Ek de rol dy’t de ûnderwiisynspeksje tadield wurdt yn advys 18, liket ús wichtich.

Der is aardich wat wetjouwing (al is dy net tarikkend), sawol op Europeesk, lanlik as provinsjaal nivo stiet der genôch yn om it Frysk yn in grut part fan it ûnderwiis in folle better en grutter plak te jaan. Mar it giet fansels ek om “the hearts and minds” fan de befolking. Dêr soe de provinsje folle mear op ynsette moatte. Fansels, minsken litte har liede troch prinsipes, mar noch mear troch belangen. It ekonomysk belang fan it Frysk is der amper. Dat jildt ek foar de sichtberens fan de taal. Wy hawwe gjin Frysktalige kranten of tydskriften mear, alteast net foar in breed publyk. Ek dy bûten it ûnderwiis lizzende faktoaren meitsje de reewilligens om it Frysk in goed plak te jaan net grutter. Want wêrom soe men eins Frysk lêzen en skriuwen leare wolle as men dat (hast) nearne brûke kin of moat? Dy trochslachjaande faktor wurdt yn al it stribjen nei goed ûnderwiis yn it Frysk oer de holle sjoen. Dêr soe de provinsje ek de foarstap ta nimme moatte, bygelyks troch dúdlike easken te stellen oan minsken dy’t wurksum binne yn it iepenbier bestjoer.

Graach soenen wy de kommende tiid mei jimme yn petear wolle oer hoe’t wy tinke dat der stal jûn wurde kin en moat oan ús stribjen nei “Goed Frysk op skoalle: in bernerjocht!”, want dêr falt fansels mear oer te sizzen as wat wy hjir kwyt kinne.

Wy hawwe de muoite nommen om nei te gean wat de wet oan mooglikheden biedt foar it fuortsterkjen fan ús Fryske taal en de ferplichtings dy’t dêrút fuortkomme foar de lanlike en provinsjale polityk. En wat der fieder noch nedich is. Dat stik stjoere wy hjirby (mei bylagen) mei. Wy wachtsje jimme reaksje ôf.

Mei achtinge en freonlike groetnisse,

út namme fan Sis Tsiis,

Pier Boorsma drs. Sytze T. Hiemstra drs. Kerst Huisman drs. Friduwih Riemersma Geart Tigchelaar MA

Bylage(n): beswierskrift (mei taheak) Fiif foar tolven foar it Frysk.

By alle stribjen dat derop rjochte is it Frysk yn it ûnderwiis syn rjochtlik plak te jaan en by alle suksessen dy’t de ôfrûne desennia behelle binne, net it minst troch ferbetteringen yn de kwaliteit fan de lesmetoaden, wurdt út it each ferlern dat it Frysk yn libben gebrûk hurd ôftakket. Noch mar in tredde part fan de Fryske befolking jout it Frysk noch oan syn bern troch. Dat slûpende proses, dat noch it meast oan it ljocht komt op de skoallepleinen, dêr’t de memmetaal al linkendewei ferkrongen is troch it Hollânsk, liket net mear te kearen. Mar is dat in aliby om it Frysk dan mar slûpe te litten? Nee, sizze wy. Dêrom dogge wy in berop op al dejingen dy’t ús taal oan ’t hert giet, de leararen yn it basis- en fuortset ûnderwiis foarop, om no’t it noch net te let is, it Frysk in folweardich plak te jaan yn de skoalle. Op hieltyd mear skoallen binne de leararen har dat bewust en meitsje se der wurk fan. Mar op noch folle mear skoallen wurdt it op syn minst faak as in obstakel field of op syn bêst in suertsje by de deiske boadskippen yn it Hollânsk en, op de trijetalige skoallen, it Ingelsk. De statistiken wize it út. Dat meie wy net langer tastean. Lykweardichheid, wetlik al lang fêstlein en ek troch it Europeesk Hânfest easke, moat lang om let ek yn de praktyk sa gau mooglik realisearre wurde: IT IS FIIF FOAR TOLVEN.

Dêrom stypje wy fan herten de manifestaasje dy’t de boargerinisjatyfgroep Sis Tsiis op tongersdei 22 desimber hâlde sil yn de binnenstêd fan Ljouwert. Wy steane der tagelyk by Deputearre Steaten, yn kwestje de deputearre fan ûnderwiis Sietske Poepjes op oan mei gauwens ta aksje oer te gean.

Sis Tsiis, 14 desimber 2016

Jan Arendz Lutz Jacobi Dolf Verroen Jabik van der Bij Goffe Jensma Liuwe H. Westra Douwe de Bildt Iris Kroes Griet Wiersma Andrys de Blaauw Jelle Krol Piter Wilkens Rolf Bremmer Frâns Kuipers Baukje Wytsma Leny Dijkstra Eelke Lok Johan van der Zee Leo Dijkstra Titia Lont Wout Zijlstra Anneke Douma Sido Martens Nynke Beetstra Gurbe Douwstra Teake Oppewal Geart Benedictus Kobe Flapper Johannes Rypma Pier Bergsma Marijke Geertsma Willem Schoorstra Pier Boorsma Durk Gorter Freark Smink Pieter de Groot Rients Gratama Marcel Smit Sytze Hiemstra Josse de Haan Hylke Speerstra Kerst Huisman Carla van der Heijde Steven Sterk Susan ten Kate-Brattinga Jarich Hoekstra Rob Tielman André Looijenga Hindrik ten Hoeve Tsjerk Veenstra Tjitske Meesters Ultsje Hosper Andries Veldman Friduwih Riemersma Sjoukje Iedema Willem Verf Abe de Vries Oan: de leden fan Provinsjale Steaten (persoanlik): M. Aardema, M. Aarten, Y. de Boer, R.M. Burger, T.A. Dorrepaal, W. Eilering, frou J. Eizema, frou F. Feenstra, frou M.A. Fokkens- Kelder, K. Fokkinga, U. Frehner, H. Graansma, frou F.H. Reitsma-Hazelhoff, frou R. van der Heide, J.W. van der Hoek, R. van der Honing, D. Hoogland, frou S.L. Hosman-Benjaminse, frou H.A.M. Janssen, frou C. de Jong, R. de Jong, R. Klerks, frou N. Koopmans-van der Veen, R. van Maurik, frou M. van der Meer, frou M. Mulder, frou W.L. Ottens, D. Pool, S.S. Posthumus, frou M. Prins-Meindertsma, C. Riezebos, M. de Roo, L.P. Stoel, frou F.B. Teernstra, J.A. Tjalsma, W. Veenstra, H. Visser, T. Voigt, W. de Vries, frou J. Vroonland- Brandsen, J. Waterlander, frou R. van der Zanden, frou W. Zuidema-Haans Twibaksmerk 52 8911 KZ Ljouwert

Ljouwert, 12 maaie 2017

Ûnderwerp: berop op jo ferantwurdlikens foar it ûnderwiis yn de memmetaal oer Ofskrift fan Beswierskrift Frysk ûnderwiisbelied yntsjinne by Deputearre Steaten dd. 12-5-17

Rju achte leden fan Provinsjale Steaten,

Ynlieding 1. Hjirby meitsje wy, út namme fan boargeraksjegroep Sis Tsiis, in algemien beswier tsjin it benefterbliuwen yn it grûnfêstjen fan de Fryske taal as in wêzentlik en ferplichte part fan alle foarmen fan it ûnderwiis yn Fryslân.

2. Wy meitsje, ek út namme fan Sis Tsiis, mear konkreet, in beswier tsjin de ‘Beleidsregel voor het verkrijgen van ontheffing voor het vak Fries in het primair en voortgezet onderwijs’, lykas publisearre yn it Provinsjaal Blad, 26 juny 2015, Nû. 3671 (hjirnei: Beliedsregel; Bylage A).

Fryslân stribbet al sûnt ein njoggentjinde iuw nei foldwaande en ferplichte ûnderwiis yn it Frysk. Yn de twadde helte fan de foarige iuw binne de betingsten dêrfoar tige ferbettere trochdat it rjocht op it brûken fan de eigen taal wrâldwiid ûnderskreaun waard, ûnder mear troch de Universele Ferklearring fan de Rjochten fan de Minske. Dêrneist krige it Frysk mear rjochten troch inkelde steatsnasjonale wetten (bgl. yn de Wet op it primêr ûnderwiis [WPO, 1980] en de Wet op it fuortset ûnderwiis [WVO, 1993]). In lêste ûntjouwing op dat mêd wie yn 2014, doe’t de provinsje Fryslân wat mear foech (‘medebewind’) krige oer guon foarmen fan ûnderwiis yn it Frysk.

Beswierskrift tsjin it Frysk ûnderwiisbelied 1 Op advys fan de Stuurgroep Decentralisatie Friese taal van Rijk naar de provincie Fryslân binne de WPO en de WVO yn 2014 wat it Frysk oanbelanget sa oanpast, dat Deputearre Steaten ûnder beskate betingsten kearndoelen Frysk fêststelle meie en op fersyk fan it foechhawwende gesach parsjele of folsleine ûntheffing fan de ferplichting ûnderwiis yn it Frysk ferliene kinne.

Provinsjale Steaten (PS) stelle by feroardering kearndoelen Frysk fêst nei’t Deputearre Steaten (DS) oerlis mei it oanbelangjende ûnderwiisfjild hân hawwe. Fierder stelle Deputearre Steaten yn in beliedsregel de kritearia foar parsjele en folsleine ûntheffing fêst nei oerlis mei it ûnderwiisfjild.

De skealike gefolgen fan de saneamde’Beliedsregel’ Neffens de yn 2015 útbrochte provinsjale ‘Beleidsregel’ (nr. 3671) foar it jaan fan ûntheffing hantearje DS by de oanfraach twa kritearia: 1. In globale skatting fan it behearskingsnivo fan it Frysk yn de (skoal)mienskip (bgl. mei help fan de ynformaasje út De Fryske Taalatlas); 2. De feitlike ynfolling fan it ûnderwiis yn it Frysk op de skoalle. De skoalle kin dan kieze út in rige ûntheffingsprofilen (A-G): fan gjin ûntheffing (profyl A) oant en mei folsleine ûntheffing (profyl G), wêrby’t yn elts folgjend profyl ien kearndoel Frysk hielendal skrast wurdt. In profyl giet derfan út dat alle bern itselde behearskingsnivo hawwe en hâldt gjin rekken mei grutte ferskillen tusken learlingen (bgl. tusken Frysktalige en net-Frysktalige bern of oare eigenskippen yn de groep). In kar foar profyl E yn it basisûnderwiis betsjut bygelyks dat it oanbod fan de skoalle foar alle bern allinnich rjochte is op it ferstean fan it Frysk sûnderdat de bern de taal mûnling en skriftlik leare te brûken. Dy foarm fan differinsjaasje op skoalnivo (it meso-nivo) giet folslein foarby oan differinsjaasje binnen de klasse of yn de groep (mikro-nivo), wêrby’t de bern yndividueel en/of yn lytse groepkes de kâns krije om datjinge te learen wat se oankinne. De profilen hâlde formeel en ynhâldlik ek gjin rekken mei it wetlike ferplichte ‘passend’ ûnderwiis (adaptyf ûnderwiis of ‘onderwijs op maat’), mar komme allinnich temjitte oan in troch de skoaldireksje, gauris op foar it Frysk negative taalideologyske grûnen, útsprutsen ambysje.

Gjin frijstellings en gjin taalprofilen by Ingelsk en Nederlânsk, mar wol by Frysk Dat leit hiel oars mei de kearndoelen foar Ingelsk (fan bgl. it basisûnderwiis). De kearndoelen foar dy frjemde taal binne fierhinne op itselde ienfâldige nivo formulearre as de doelen foar it Frysk, mar der binne gjin ûntheffingsmooglikheden foar. En dat wylst it behearskingsnivo fan it Ingelsk yn de (skoal)mienskip – it wichtichste kritearium foar ûntheffing foar it Frysk – yn in protte situaasjes ferlykber is mei dat foar it Frysk. De skoallen sille lykwols besykje om de kearndoelen Ingelsk yn harren oanbod in plak te jaan en alle bern de kâns jaan harren optimaal yn dy taal te ûntwikkeljen. De nivoferskillen tusken de learlingen wurde sûnder ûntheffingsmooglikheden oplost troch differinsjaasje op groepsnivo, wylst foar it Frysk struktureel keazen wurdt foar foarmen fan ûntheffing dy’t tige skealik binne foar de Fryske taal(mienskip). En fan in lykweardige en lykberjochtige behanneling fan it Frysk, dat de grûnslach is fan it provinsjale taalbelied, fan it Frysk is gjin sprake. Krekt oarsom. Der wurdt de facto mei twa mjitten metten.

En as it ûnderwiis beheind wurdt ta ien of mear ûnderdielen (taalskiften), ynstee fan dat it him oanpast by de mooglikheden fan de bern, dan hat dat net allinnich it grutte beswier dat de didaktyske mooglikheden tige beheind wurde, mar troch de kar foar ien beskaat profyl

Beswierskrift tsjin it Frysk ûnderwiisbelied 2 ferdwynt folslein it sicht op wat der neffens ynternasjonaal fêstleine standerts bedoeld is mei it Frysk as fak en as fiertaal. Boppedat skriuwt it Ryk yn syn 5de periodike rapportaazje oangeande it Europeesk Hânfêst (2015)1 oer de nommen maatregels foar de ymplemintaasje dêrfan (ûnderwiiskêst 8) dat de oaneigening fan it ferstean en it praten fan de memmetaal hast as ‘fansels’ giet, mar om’t ‘bij zowel het mondeling als het schriftelijk gebruik van het Fries de concurrentie met andere talen steeds heviger wordt, is het leren van het lezen en schrijven van het Fries essentieel voor het voortbestaan ervan’ (‘Inleiding’, s. 3).

Yn syn 2de rapport (fan 2004) warskôge de Rie fan Europa al krêftich tsjin in beliedsadvys dat it mooglik meitsje soe dat skoallen séls op skoalnivo har Frysk lesprogramma kieze koene: “The implementation of this recommendation will constitute a step backwards compared to the existing objective of equality between the Dutch and Frisian languages” (The Netherlands, 2nd Monitoring, 2004, § 87).

Minimumbetingsten foar it goedkarren fan kearndoelen It is ek fan grut belang om te konstatearjen dat by guon profilen folslein gjin rekken holden wurdt mei de betingsten dy’t de troch de minister steld wurde oan it goedkarren fan de kearndoelen foar it Frysk. Yn de WPO (kêst 9, lid 8) en de WVO (kêst 11e, lid 4) binne ûndergrinzen opnommen, dêr’t (nije) kearndoelen Frysk oan foldwaan moatte. Yn beide ûnderwiiswetten komme alle taalskiften (ferstean, praten, lêzen, skriuwen en taalhâlding) foar dy’t omtinken krije moatte. Dat leit ek foar de hân omdat dy taalskiften by libbene talen yn de ûntwikkeling fan learlingen in organysk en yntegraal (op inoar behelle) gehiel foarmje dêr’t men net samar taalaspekten út weilitte kin, sûnder taal en bern grutte skea te dwaan. Dat wurdt dan bgl. ek net dien by de (ek ferplichte) kearndoelen foar Ingelsk en Nederlânsk. Dan moat men soks ek net besykje by it Frysk troch mei taal‘profilen’ te wurkjen. It jaan fan folsleine en parsjele frijstellings foar Frysk op skoalnivo (meso) konfliktuearret fûneminteel mei de plicht ta ynterne differinsjaasje (passend ûnderwiis) op learlingen groepsnivo (mikro). It hjoeddeistige Fryske learen lesmateriaal jout, ek digitaal, al mear as genôch mooglikheden om alle learlingen (of lytse groepkes) neffens eigen tempo en oanlis wurkje te litten oan alle kearndoelen. Boppedat binne de kearndoelen Frysk al yn 2005 op in hiel ienfâldich nivo brocht en dat nivo komt fierhinne oerien mei de boppeneamde ûndergrins dy’t de minister hantearret.

In ûnbegryplik taalprofyl foar in ûnmooglike ûnderwiislearsituaasje It is ûnderwiiskundich en taalpolityk ûnbegryplik dat bgl. profyl F (basisûnderwiis) mar ien kearndoel befettet, nammentlik dat der op skoalnivo allinnich mar wurke wurde hoecht oan in positive hâlding foar it brûken fan it Frysk oer, sûnder dat de bern blykber ek mar wat fan de taal sels hoege te learen. It soe ek by de opstellers fan kearndoelen (ynklusyf de dêrby behelle beliedsmakkers en politisy) bekend wêze moatte dat in hâldingsdoel (de motivaasje om it Frysk te brûken) learpsychologysk net streekrjocht en isolearre fan oare taalaspekten nei te stribjen falt en dat it gjin sinfol ûnderwiisdoel is sûnder nei it Frysk te harkjen, Frysk te praten, Frysk te lêzen en Frysk te skriuwen?2 It is boppedat in doel dat net of amper objektyf

1 Europees Handvest voor regionale talen of talen van minderheden 2012-2014. Vijfde periodieke rapportage inzake de maatregelen door Nederland getroffen met betrekking tot de implementatie van het Handvest, 7 okt. 2015.

2 Sjoch ek: Frysk oan bod. Learplan Frysk foar it Primêr Underwiis (Enschede: SLO, 2005). De SLO jout ek omtinken oan kearndoel 1 (Atittude: De learlingen ûntwikkelje in positve attitude foar it brûken fan it Frysk oer troch harsels en oaren) en achtet sa’n doel allinnich te realisearjen as taaltaken dy’t bern in it Frysk krije, ynbêde

Beswierskrift tsjin it Frysk ûnderwiisbelied 3 (en metodologysk ferantwurde) te mjitten is, omdat soks dan út taalgedrach blike moatte soe (út it praten, lêzen en skriuwen fan it Frysk dus). Troch it skrassen fan de besteande kearndoelen foar dy oare taalaspekten ûntstiet gjin fruchtbere, mar in ûnmooglike ûnderwiislearsituaasje. Sa’n belied wurdt ek foar it fak ‘Nederlands’ net praktisearre. Dat soe as diskriminaasje fan taal en bern sjoen wurde. Dat leit foar it Frysk prinsipieel net oars.

Ûntheffingsbelied fan de provinsje Yn prinsipe wurdt in ûntheffing ferliend foar in perioade fan fjouwer jier om in ûntwikkeltrajekt foar meartalich ûnderwiis ynsette te kinnen. Yn gefallen dat it Frysk yn de (skoal)mienskip in deistige omgongstaal is, tinkt de provinsje oan in groeimodel3, sadat skoallen nei fjouwer jier net wer foar deselde kearndoelen Frysk in ûntheffing oanfreegje hoege. In perioade fan fjouwer jier is lykwols fierstente lang as yn de tuskenlizzende jierren gjin jierlikse rapportaazje en evaluaasje plakfynt en der gjin oanpassings en ferbetterings yn it programma foar de ferskillende groepen oanbrocht wurde. It idee dêrefter is dat as in legere groep bygelyks dwaande west hat mei it Frysk lêzen, it jier dêrop yn de dêropfolgjende groep fierder oan wurke wurdt en in ûntheffing foar lêzen yn dy groep net mear oan de oarder is. It duorret te lang (it ‘langetermijndoel’ is te dizenich yn de tiid) en it is ûnfoldwaande (it winkend perspektyf foar Frysk op ‘de meeste Friese scholen’ en it realisearjen fan ‘zoveel mogelijk kerndoelen’ is ûnfoldwaande, want alle kearndoelen hearre [yntegraal] neistribbe te wurden foar alle learlingen, lykas dat by Nederlânsk en Ingelsk wetlik ek it gefal is). De lykberjochtiging fan it Frysk oan it Hollânsk komt dêrmei boppedat (wer) yn ’e kiif te stean.

Foar de útfiering fan it provinsjale ‘Taalplan Frysk’ wurde ûnderwiiskundigen ynset, dy’t de skoallen besykje. Fierder as stimulearjen en wize op de mooglikheden kinne en meie sokke saakkundigen net gean. Se steane foar de skoaldireksjes oer yn in ûndergeskikte relaasje. DS hawwe noch in lêste útwei om in oanfraach foar ûntheffing te wegerjen as de skoalle – ek nei ‘help’ fan de neamde saakkundigen – gjin realistysk en objektyf byld sketst fan hoe’t de skoalle omtinken oan it Frysk jout en hokfoar ambysjes oft de skoalle foar de kommende perioade hat.

Draachflak ûnder skoalbestjoeren mei gjin wetlik betingst wêze In tige swak punt is grif ek de wetlike regeling yn de WPO (kêst 9, lid 7) en de WVO (kêst 11e, lid 3), dêr’t DS yn opdroegen wurde om oan te toanen, dat der yn de skoallen foldwaande ‘draachflak’ is foar de (útstelde) kearndoelen Frysk en dat de útfiering gjin ‘taakferswierring’ betsjutte mei yn it ramt fan it totaal oan ûnderwiisaktiviteiten. It jout (guon) skoaldireksjes en learkrêften in frijbrief om op grûn fan in foar it Frysk negative taalideology en foaroardielen in ûngeunstich byld op te roppen en dêrmei de rjochtmjittichheid fan lykweardich en lykberjochtige ûnderwiis yn it Frysk slim ûnderstek te dwaan. Der binne foarbylden fan bekend dat soks feitlik ek bart. De ûnderwiisynspeksje hat wurde yn ‘[...] realistyske natuerlike konteksten, dêr’t bern it yn nedich achtsje en normaal fine om it Frysk yn- died te brûken. [...] “It brûken fan it Frysk” betsjut nei it Frysk harkje, Frysk prate, Frysk lêze en Frysk skriuwe. [...] Omtinken foar it Frysk yn ’e sprutsen en skreaune foarm by it Frysk as fak en op mominten dêr’t it Frysk as fiertaal brûkt wurdt, is in earste betingst om dit kearndoel ‘Attitude’ berikke te kinnen’ (s. 59).

3 Sjoch ek: Uitvoeringsplan ‘Mei hert, holle en hannen 2017-2018’, 20 juny [2016]: ‘Beoogde effecten: [...] d. Eind 2018 is er, in het kader van het onderdeel Taalwetgeving van het Deltaplan Fries, een volledig overzicht van de mate van (gedeeltelijke) ontheffing voor het vak Fries bij de Friese scholen voor basis- en voortgezet onderwijs, waarbij een groeimodel het wenkend perspectief vormt, immers: het langetermijndoel is dat de meeste Friese scholen zoveel mogelijk kerndoelen van het Fries weten te realiseren.” [skeanprint fan ús]

Beswierskrift tsjin it Frysk ûnderwiisbelied 4 gjin ûndersyk dien nei it draachflak by de Fryske befolking en by de provinsje Fryslân, mar wiist wol op in tekoart op ‘taalgrutskens’ by in part fan de skoallen.4 Dêr meie neffens ús de learlingen yn Fryslân, moreel en fanwegen har rjochten, net troch diskriminearre wurde.

De Rie fan Steat hat dat probleem al sinjalearre yn syn advys fan 2012 (WO5.12.0246/I) oan it Ministearje fan OC&W en by it wetsútstel opmurken: “Hoewel door de Onderwijsinspectie het draagvlak voor het Fries als probleem wordt aangeduid, richt zij zich daarbij op het draagvlak onder schoolbesturen voor het verzorgen van het onderwijs Fries en niet zozeer op het draagvlak binnen de bevolking of het provinciebestuur, zoals het onderhavige voorstel lijkt te beogen” (s. 3). Dat lêste liket ús gâns essinsjeler as it draachflak binnen (guon) skoaldireksjes.

Mei rjocht hat it Konsultatyf Orgaan foar it Frysk (in advysorgaan foar de minister fan Ynlânske Saken) by it ferskinen fan it saneamde rapport-Hoekstra, Fries in het onderwijs: meer ruimte, regie en rekenschap voor de provincie Fryslân5 opmurken dat op grûn fan it Europeesk Hânfêst (foar it Frysk) en it Ramtferdrach6 (foar de Friezen) de Fryske befolking it rjocht op (goed) ûnderwiis yn it Frysk net ûntnommen wurde mei troch it ûntbrekken fan draachflak by útfierende ûnderwiisorganisaasjes. Draachflak is grif net ûnbelangryk, mar it ferplichte oerlis is yn striid mei de skieden ferantwurdlikheden fan wetjouwer en útfierende organisaasje(s). By gjin inkeld oar fak docht him de mooglikheid foar dat skoallen it rjocht hawwe om op grûn fan de wet oan te jaan yn hoefier’t der by har ‘draachflak’ is foar de troch de oerheid winsklik achte kearndoelen yn har programma. Wy achtsje dat (wer) in foarm fan diskriminaasje fan it Frysk. De measte kearndoelen kinne almeast objektyf toetst wurde. En de útfierberens dêrfan kin hiel goed oantoand wurde troch de ‘bêst practices’ fan skoallen dy’t it slagget om de kearndoelen Frysk op in goed nivo út te fieren, sûnder dat soks op kosten giet fan de resultaten op oare fakgebieten. It draachflakartikel is neffens ús (ek) folslein yn striid mei ynternasjonale ferdraggen en moat dus sa gau mooglik út de Nederlânske ûnderwiiswet ferdwine.

Taalplan Frysk en it ûntbrekken fan differinsjaasje op mikro-nivo Yn 2017 hat de provinsje in ûndersyk op gong brocht op grûn fan in Taalplan Frysk, dat foar in part ta stân komt mei help fan ûnderwiiskundigen (it is in ûndersyk dat rjochte is op ynventarisaasje fan de stân fan saken oangeande it ûnderwiis yn it Frysk, it ôfnimmen fan in fragelist foar de skoaldireksjes oer har taalsituaasje, de winsken en ambysjes fan de skoalle, in besite fan in ûnderwiiskundige oan de skoalle, it neigean oft der ûntheffing oanfrege wurdt

4 Ynspeksje fan it Ûnderwiis, Tusken winsk en wurklikhied. De kwaliteit fan it fak Frysk yn it basisûnderwiis en it fuortset ûnderwiis yn Fryslân, Utrecht, okotber 2010: “Draachflak foar it fak Frysk. [...] It begryp ‘taalgrutskens’spilet dêr in wêzentlike rol by; in part fan de skoallen is entûsjast foar it Frysk. Dêr is dus wis wol draachflak, mar dat jildt perfoarst net foar alle skoallen. In part jout allinnich Frysk omdat it moat. Direkteuren meitsje ek útinoar rinnende ynskattings ûnder it draachflak ûnder âlden; net ien is optimistysk. Fierder is it belied en de kultuer yn in soad skoallen ûnfoldwaande stypjend om fan it Frysk ek wier wat te meitsjen” (s. 55). Faaks dat it fjirde taalsosjologyske stekproefûndersyk (survey) Taal yn Fryslân: de folgjende generaasje, dat de Fryske Akademy yn 2015 holden hat, dêr mear ynsjoch yn jaan kin.

5 Ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken en Koninkrijksrelaties, Fries in het onderwijs: meer ruimte, regie en rekenschap voor de provincie Fryslân. Advies van de Stuurgroep decentralisatie Friese taal van Rijk naar de provincie Fryslân, augustus 2010 [B-3659].

6 Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, Strasbourg, 1.II.1995 (akte fan oanfurdiging, 16 febr. 2005).

Beswierskrift tsjin it Frysk ûnderwiisbelied 5 en wat de ambysjes fan de skoalle binne foar de kommende fjouwer jier). De resultaten wurde trochjûn oan de ûnderwiisynspeksje. De provinsje tinkt dat de ûnderwiisynspeksje dan in objektyf 7 (earlik) rapport oer de kwaliteit fan it fak Frysk jaan kin. Eardere ynspeksjerapporten wiene lykwols ek ‘earlik’ en ‘dúdlik’ en sinjalearren (ek) objektyf dat der noch lang gjin sprake wie fan kwantitatyf en kwalitatyf goed ûnderwiis yn it Frysk.

Neffens ús moat der fan it begjin ôf oan neigien wurde oft it hjoeddeiske ûntheffingsbelied mei faasje en foarsje liedt ta in sterk opgeande line nei kwantitatyf (foldwaande) en kwalitatyf (goed) ûnderwiis foar it Frysk wat ûnderwiistiid en resultaten (toetsing) oanbelanget. It ûnderwiis sil dan ûnder mear folslein foldwaan moatte oan de troch it Ryk ûnderskreaune bepalings fan it Hânfêst mei syn, neffens ús, direkte wurking, ek foar it ûnderwiis yn Fryslân. Foar it primêr ûnderwiis (bgl. Hânfêst, kêst 8, 1, b, iii) is dat in ‘aanmerkelijke deel’ (mear as 6 oeren wyks neffens Mercator) en foar it fuortset ûnderwiis (bgl. kêst 8, i, c. iii) in ‘integrerend deel’ fan it learplan (minimaal 2 oeren neffens Dingtiid; yn alle klassen foarôfgeand oan de twadde faze) en foar de skiednis fan Fryslân en de Friezen (bgl. kêst 8, 1, g), en wol foar yn prinsipe foar alle learlingen en alle skoallen yn de provinsje Fryslân, sûnder útsûnderings, likegoed foar de learlingen dy’t ûnder de Wet op de ekspertizesintra falle (de hjoeddeiske WEC is ek yn striid mei it Hânfêst). De besteande ûntheffingsregeling kin neffens ús as oergongsregeling allinnich mar in tige tydlik karakter hawwe, want wy achtsje dy regeling yn striid mei frijwol alle yn de bylage(n) neamde ferdraggen, wetten, publikaasjes en oare relevante ynformaasje.

Wy bestride de opfetting fan de provinsje dat der mei it systeem fan parsjele ûntheffing, bgl. op grûn fan ynformaasje út De Fryske Taalatlas (2015), ‘Onderwijs op maat [kan] worden gegeven, passend bij de specifieke wensen van de school, wat betreft het Fries’ (Taalplan Fries, by ‘ontheffing en ambitie’). Dat kin nét mei in frijstelling op skoalnivo foar beskate kearndoelen (dat is ommers in ‘race to the bottom’), want dat liedt hast automatysk ta in ienfoarmich oanbod (dat is gjín passend ûnderwiis) en docht gjin rjocht oan de altiten besteande, gauris grutte ferskillen yn behearsking fan it Frysk tusken learlingen. Der is dan gjin sprake fan ynterne differinsjaasje rjochte op de yndividuele learling (en dat is passend ûnderwiis) dy’t (folle) mear oankin as dat in frijstelling op skoalnivo oanjout. Dy learlingen wurde dêrmei it slachtoffer fan ‘min’ ûnderwiis (ferwaarleazging) en dat is in kultuerpedagogyske deasûnde.

Yn it provinsjale belied soe der boppedat nei stribbe wurde moatte om it Hânfêst8 út te wreidzjen mei in ferplichting fan it Frysk yn it middelber en hegere beropsûnderwiis, d.w.s dat oeral dêr’t it fak ‘Nederlands’ en ‘Engels’ in ferplichting is, dat foar it Frysk in lykweardige ferplichting wurde moat. It provinsjale begjinsel fan lykweardigens en lykberjochtiging jout dêr alle oanlieding ta.

Frysk as funksje- en beneamingseask is needsaaklik

7 Taalplan Frysk: beliedsregel foar it ferkrijen fan in parsjele ûntheffing foar it fak Frysk (http://fryslan.gemeentedocumenten.nl/www.fryslan.frl/). Dy beliedsregel is as Beleidsregel voor het verkrijgen van ontheffing voor het vak Fries in het primair en voortgezet onderwijs ek te rieplachtsjen yn it Provinciaal Blad, Nr. 3671, 26 juny 2015.

8 In winsklike noch te ûndertekenjen bepaling út it Hânfêst is bgl. kêst 8, d, ii: ‘make available a substantial part of technical and vocational education […]’

Beswierskrift tsjin it Frysk ûnderwiisbelied 6 It ûntwikkeljen fan in plan om de bekwamens en kundigens fan de learkrêften foar it Frysk te ferbetterjen en systematysk op in gâns heger plan te bringen, moat neffens ús in tige hege prioriteit hawwe en binnen 4 jier syn beslach krije, want it hat al fierste lang sleept. Dat it in slim knyppunt is, docht út alle rapporten fan de ûnderwiisynspeksje bliken. It hawwen fan in foldwaande foech foar it jaan fan it Frysk as fak en foar it brûken fan it Frysk as fiertaal moat yn Fryslân dêrom ek in funksje- en beneamingseask wurde. Dat is yn it ferline by ûnderskate gelegenheden nei foarren brocht, û.o. yn it Oanfalsplan Frysk (2008). It is de learkrêft, as sintrale figuer yn it ûnderwiislearproses en de kultueroerdracht, dy’t goed omgean kinne moat mei it Fryske of meartalige (bgl. Frysk-Hollânsk-Ingelsk) lesmateriaal (foar fak en fiertaal); ynterne differinsjaasje yn de klasse goed hantearje kinne moat, sels in treflike behearsking fan it Frysk hawwe moat (bgl. frijwol sûnder flaters Frysk prate en skriuwe kinne) en in yngeande kennis fan de Fryske skiednis krije moat. Us learlingen meie net langer it slachtoffer wurde fan ynkapabele learkrêften. Ek Dingtiid lit him dêr yn syn lêste ûnderwiisadvys (‘Meartaligens as kwaliteit en doel’, 2017) oer út, sinjalearret dat it foech foar Frysk gjin sterke wetlike basis hat en jout (yn syn advys 19) dan ek mei rjocht oan om dêr wurk fan te meitsjen.

Yn har salaris (salarisskaal) soene learkrêften en dosinten mei in foech foar Frysk op heech nivo dat ek yn positive sin fernimme moatte en dat freget om nije regeljouwing. It materieel beleanjen is likegoed in effektive metoade om (mear) faasje te bringen yn de kwaliteitsferbettering fan it ûnderwiis yn de Fryske taal, kultuer en skiednis.

Tafersjoch ûnderwiisynspeksje en sanksjemooglikheden As skoallen efterbliuwe op it stik fan de kwaliteit fan it ûnderwiis yn ‘taal’ (= Hollânsk) en ‘rekenen’ dan komme se hjoed-de-dei ûnder tafersjoch te stean fan de ûnderwiisynspeksje en moatte se har op koarte termyn ferbetterje. Wy achtsje it needsaaklik dat ek foar it Frysk te dwaan en by ‘verscherpt toezicht’ sille der effektive sankjes folgje moatte as dy ferbettering útbliuwt. Wy tinke dat it foech dêrta by de provinsje Fryslân lizze moat.

By meartalich ûnderwiis heart it te gean om de kwaliteit fan sawol it (ferplichte) Frysk, it Hollânsk en it Ingelsk as mienskiplike doeltalen en dêrby sil ek it Frysk folweardich op syn resultaten toetst en beoardiele wurde moatte.

Wy moatte fêststelle dat it ûnderwizen fan it Frysk yn Fryslân en it jaan fan frijstellings dêrfoar, net foldocht oan de oanbefellings en easken fan de Rie fan Europa. It jaan fan frijstellings is boppedat folslein ûnnedich omdat de hjoeddeiske kearndoelen Frysk ek noch ris op in hiel leech nivo formulearre binne. It ûnderwiisbelied foar it Frysk, de Fryske skiednis en Fryske kultuer is noch altiten net yn oerienstimming mei in hiele rige fan ynternasjonale taalrjochten en yn de lêste tsien jier is der yn dy rjochting konkreet neat of amper wat ferbettere.

Us beswieren binne (gearfette): 1. dat de provinsje Fryslân de Fryske taal net grûnfêstet as it wêzentlike part yn it ûnderwiis, dêr’t de Fryske learling rjocht op hat neffens it Europeesk Hânfêst foar regionale talen of talen fan minderheden (EHRMT) (kêst 8), de Universele Ferklearring fan de Rjochten fan de Minske (kêst 26) en op grûn fan de oare yn bylage E neamde wetlike bepalings, en ek gjin folslein dekkend plan of foarnimmen hat om dat te grûnfêstjen, c.q. om aktyf sok ûnderwiis

Beswierskrift tsjin it Frysk ûnderwiisbelied 7 yn de Fryske taal aktyf fuort te sterkjen en te garandearjen dat der folweardich ûnderwiis yn it Frysk jûn wurdt oan alle learlingen yn Fryslân op alle skoaltypen;

2. dat de provinsje Fryslân in Beliedsregel fan krêft ferklearre hat, dêr’t it direkte gefolch fan is dat a. it oanpart fan de Fryske taal yn it ûnderwiis net beskerme en fuortsterke wurdt lykas bepaald yn de boppeneamde en bylage E neamde wetlike ynstruminten en b. net elke learling, mei troch de lege profilearring, tagong hat ta ûnderwiis yn de Fryske taal en c. de Beliedsregel net garandearje kin dat ûnheffings yn de praktyk net inkeld tydlik fan aard binne, sadat der gefaar is dat se struktureel wurde, - omdat de Wet op it primêr ûnderwiis (WPO), kêst 4, easket dat yn Fryslân ûnderwiis yn de Fryske taal jûn wurdt, mar de Beliedsregel tastiet dat oan basisskoallen ûntheffings ferliend wurde dy’t ûntheffings binne fan kearndoelen dy’t yn de WPO, kêst 9.8, krekt jilde as betingst foar it goedkarren dêrfan troch de Minister fan Underwiis en dat dit betingst in ferplichte ûndergrins oanjout dêr’t de measte profilen alhiel nét oan foldogge; - omdat allyksa de Wet op it fuortset ûnderwiis (WVO), kêst 11e, easket dat yn it fuortset ûnderwiis yn Fryslân ûnderwiis yn it Frysk jûn wurdt en dat der gjin ûntheffings foar jûn wurde kinne dy’t yn striid binne mei de ferplichte ûndergrins oan de leardoelen lykas neamd yn kêst 11e, lid 4; - omdat de Beliedsregel gjin bepalings opnommen hat dy’t ferbiede dat in skoalbestjoer nei de ûntheffingsperioade fan fjouwer jier op ’en nij in frijstelling fan deselde grutte of omfang oanfreget en takend kriget, - omdat de Beliedsregel gjin inkelde garânsje is biedt dat in ûntheffing net tydlik is en sadwaande in needsaaklik groeimodel of ûntwikkeltrajekt slim fertrage wurdt, mei as gefolch dat it programma foar Frysk net nei elts skoal- of kursusjier oanpast, ferbettere en ferantwurde wurde hoecht; - omdat yn de Beliedsregel gjin konkrete maatregels op it mêd fan toetsing en rapportaazje opnommen binne om nei te gean oft en yn hoefier’t de kwantiteit en kwaliteit fan it ûnderwiis yn it Frysk ferbettere is; - omdat de yn de Beliedregel opnommen kritearia de skoallen net stimulearje om foar alle learlingen passend ûnderwiis te bieden en om dy learlingen sadwaande net ta it leverjen fan sa heech mooglike prestaasjes oan te setten op it mêd fan alle kearndoelen Frysk.

3. omdat de provinsje yn de Beliedsregel sûnder fierder ûndersyk bûten it ûnderwiis it frege ‘draachflak’ foar it Frysk beheint ta de útfierders (skoaldireksjes) en dêrmei de emansipaasje fan it Frysk yn de skoalle (op mikro- en meso-nivo) en yn de Fryske maatskippij (op makro- nivo) slim ûnderstek docht en sadwaande ek de Fryske en Frysktalige taalmienskip yn syn bestean bedriget;

4. dat yn de Beliedsregel de foar goed en foldwaande ûnderwiis yn it Frysk (as fak en as fiertaal) fereaske profesjonele feardichheden ûntbrekke en dêrmei tagelyk de skoallen ek de romte biede om op grûn fan (negative) ideologyske motiven ûntheffing fan ûnderwiis yn it Frysk oan te freegjen;

Beswierskrift tsjin it Frysk ûnderwiisbelied 8 5. dat de provinsje sûnt 2014, likegoed as de ryksoerheid, it foech oer it útfieren fan de wet en it Hânfêst (EHRMT) oangeande it Frysk yn it ûnderwiis de facto by de skoalbestjoeren dellein hat en syn ferantwurdlikens net neikomt neffens de bedoeling fan it Hânfêst;

6. dat de provinsje it foech oer it Frysk ûnderwiis net brûkt neffens de bedoeling, nammentlik it fêststellen fan kearndoelen foar Frysk ûnderwiis yn folsleine oerienstimming mei de betingsten lykas neamd yn de WPO, kêst 9.8a oant en mei 9.8d., en WVO kêst 11e, lidden 1 oant en mei 4 (mei kêst 11e, 4 as ûndergrins), en mear yn it algemien ek net brûkt foar it aktive fuortsterkjen fan it Frysk yn it ûnderwiis en it garandearjen fan de tagong dêrta foar elts Frysk bern yn oerienstimming mei de Universele Ferklearring fan de Rjochten fan de Minske, kêst 26;

7. dat de provinsje syn belied net of amper ferbettere hat nei oanlieding fan oanwizings fan Rie fan Europa yn 2004 en ek net fan dy fan 2012 en 2016 (Bylage F en B) en dat dit belied gjin passend antwurd jout op de soargen dy’t yn Fryslân troch boargers en organisaasjes (lykas de Feriening foar Frysk Underwiis), jierrenlang en by werhelling, mûnling en skriftlik, utere binne.

Fan belang foar ús beswier is dat: 1. it draachflak foar Frysk ûnderwiis by de befolking en de âlden al lang fêststiet (sjoch bygelyks The Frisian language in education in the Netherlands fan Mercator, 2007); 2. âlden en bern har ferlet fan Frysk yn it ûnderwiis útsprekke en sels de strjitte opgeane om te protestearjen tsjin it benefterbliuwen fan it foldwaande grûnfêstjen fan it Frysk yn it ûnderwiis en har ferwarre tsjin de tekoartsjittende Beliedsregel (Bylage C); 3. bern negative gefolgen ûnderfine fan it ûntbrekken fan har minderheidstaal yn it ûnderwiis, omdat dêrtroch har minsklike weardichheid, har identiteit (en de selsbeskikking dêroer) oantaast en har ûntwikkeling en ûntjouwing ûnderstek dien wurdt; en dat krekt om dy reden it rjocht op ûnderwiis yn de eigen taal fêstlein is yn ’e minskerjochten en ynternasjonale en regionale ferdraggen (Bylage E); 4. út in grut korpus fan ynternasjonaal ûndersyk en út stúdzjes fan de Fryske Akademy en Kennissintrum Mercator bliken docht dat goed en foldwaande ûnderwiis yn de eigen taal positive effekten op de yndividuele learling hat (Bylage D); 5. dat allyksa bliken docht dat it aktyf beskermjen fan it sosjale taalferskaat, as ûnderdiel fan de aktive promoasje fan maatskiplik ferskaat, geunstich is foar it minsklike basisferlet fan sosjaal wolwêzen en likegoed foar maatskiplike gearhing en maatskiplike ûntjouwing (Bylage D); 6. en dat it rjocht op it brûken fan de eigen taal, ek yn it ûnderwiis as middel en as doel, fêstleit yn in hiele rige troch de steatsnasjonale oerheid ratifisearre ynternasjonale en regionale wetten en ferdraggen, dus dat dy dêrmei gâns kleare juridyske ferplichtings oangien is om sokke foarsjennings op foldwaande nivo yn de minderheidstaal te garandearjen (Bylage E).

Dêrom fersykje wy net allinnich oan Deputearre Steaten, mar ek oan Provinsjale Steaten om ús beswieren foar grûndearre te ferklearjen en der by it Kolleezje fan Deputearre Steaten op oan te stean om (1) de Fryske taal, kultuer en skiednis op sa koart mooglike termyn in wêzentlik plak yn it hiele ûnderwiis te jaan en

Beswierskrift tsjin it Frysk ûnderwiisbelied 9 (2) om de Beliedsregel op de koartst mooglike termyn op ’en nij te formulearjen, dêrby folslein rekken hâldend mei de ûnderskreaune bepalingen foar it ûnderwiis yn it Europeesk Hânfest foar regionale of minderheidstalen, de Universele Ferklearring foar de Rjochten fan de Minske en oare relevante ynstruminten, lykas neamd yn bylage E.

Mei rju achtinge, foar en út namme fan de boargeraksjegroep Sis Tsiis,

Drs. Sytze T. Hiemstra Pier Boorsma Gerben Sondermanstrjitte 29 Violenstrjitte 9A 9203 PT Drachten 9712 RC Grins 0512-518927 0642102979

Drs. Kerst Huisman Geart Tigchelaar MA Mannagras 16 Nijlânsdyk 4 8935 RV Ljouwert 8931 GK Ljouwert 058-2880484 0641863980

Ôfskriften: Leeuwarder Courant, Friesch Dagblad, It Nijs, Omrop Fryslân

Bylagen: A. ‘Beleidsregel voor het verkrijgen van ontheffing voor het vak Fries in het primair en voortgezet onderwijs’. B. Rapport ‘Application of the Charter in the Netherlands, 5th monitoring cycle, Strasbourg, 14 December 2016, ECRML (2016) 4’. C. Materiaal oer de fakkeloptocht foar better Frysk ûnderwiis d.d. 22 desimber 2016. D. Stúdzjes nei it effekt fan taalpluralisme yn it ûnderwiis op it yndividu en stúdzjes nei it effekt fan sosjaal taalpluralisme en plurikulturalisme op ’e maatskippij. E. List mei wetlike ynstruminten dy’t ta ûnderwiis yn it Frysk ferplichtsje. F. List mei flankearjende rapporten, dêrûnder monitoring-, evaluaasje- en ymplemintaasjerapporten oangeande it ûnderwiis yn it Frysk.

Beswierskrift tsjin it Frysk ûnderwiisbelied 10 Bylage A. ‘Beleidsregel voor het verkrijgen van ontheffing voor het vak Fries in het primair en voortgezet onderwijs’.

Sis Tsiis A. Beliedsregel Nr. 3671 26 juni PROVINCIAAL BLAD 2015 Officiële uitgave van provincie Fryslân.

Beleidsregel voor het verkrijgen van ontheffing voor het vak Fries in het primair en voortgezet onderwijs

1. Begripsomschrijvingen en inleiding

Begripsomschrijvingen

Ontheffing: volledige of gedeeltelijke ontheffing van de verplichting tot realisatie van de kerndoelen Fries

WPO: Wet op het primair onderwijs

WVO: Wet op het voortgezet onderwijs

Inleiding

Scholen in de provincie Fryslân zijn op basis van de WPO en de WVO verplicht onderwijs in de Friese taal (en cultuur) te verzorgen(1). Deze verplichting houdt in dat scholen hun leerlingen een zodanig programma moeten bieden dat daarmee aan de kerndoelen voor de Friese taal (en cultuur) wordt voldaan. Voor het voortgezet onderwijs geldt die verplichting in de onderbouw, waarbij in de praktijk voornamelijk onderwijs in het vak Fries in de eerste klas wordt bedoeld. Gedeputeerde Staten kunnen volledig of gedeeltelijk ontheffing verlenen voor het aanbieden van het vak Fries en moeten over de verlening daarvan beleidsregels opstellen. Dat is het voorliggende document.

In deze beleidsregel wordt, in paragraaf 2, het kader voor de bevoegdheidsuitoefening geschetst. Dit kader bestaat uit de WPO, de WVO, het Besluit vernieuwde kerndoelen WPO en het Besluit kerndoelen onderbouw VO. Tevens zijn als achtergrond van belang de Wet gebruik Friese taal, de bestuursafspraak Friese taal en cultuur 2013-2018 (BFTC 2013-2018) en het toepasselijke provinciale beleid. De laatste drie documenten worden nader besproken in de toelichting (subsectie 2.0). In de derde paragraaf zijn profielen opgenomen voor het onderwijs in de Friese taal en cultuur op het primair en voortgezet onderwijs. De mate waarin in het onderwijs aandacht wordt besteed aan het Fries verschilt per profiel. Een school kan, in principe met hulp van een onderwijskundige, aangeven welk profiel op dit moment van toepassing is op de school. Op basis van het aangegeven profiel en aanvullende gegevens die bekend zijn over het gebruik van het Fries in de betreffende gemeente waar de school staat en de taalachtergrond, zal de aanvraag beoordeeld worden (paragraaf 3). In paragraaf 4 is bepaald hoe de aanvraagprocedure verloopt. Bij deze beleidsregel hoort een toelichting waarin de inhoud van de beleidsregel nader wordt toegelicht en waarin wordt ingegaan op de uitvoering van de beleidsregel.

2. Kaders voor bevoegdheidsuitoefening

2.1 Onderwijswetgeving

In de WPO en de WVO is aangegeven dat scholen in de provincie Fryslân verplicht zijn onderwijs in de Friese taal te verzorgen. Het onderwijs op de scholen voor speciaal onderwijs in de provincie Fryslân kan mede onderwijs in de Friese taal omvatten, maar er bestaat geen verplichting.

Voorheen kon op basis van de WPO en de WVO uitsluitend volledige - en niet partiële - ontheffing worden verleend. In 2010 heeft de Stuurgroep Hoekstra geadviseerd de WPO en de WVO zodanig aan te passen dat Gedeputeerde Staten de ontheffing van de verplichting om Fries op basisscholen of scholen voor voortgezet onderwijs niet alleen volledig maar ook partieel kunnen verlenen (2). Dit advies van de Stuurgroep Hoekstra is opgevolgd en op 1 augustus 2014 is de wijziging van de WPO en de WVO op dit punt in werking getreden.

1 Provinciaal blad 2015 nr. 3671 26 juni 2015 [1] Scholen voor speciaal onderwijs zijn niet verplicht om onderwijs in de Friese taal aan te bieden, en dus bevat de Wet op de expertisecentra ook geen ontheffingsbepaling dienaangaande.

[2] Advies van de Stuurgroep decentralisatie Friese taal van Rijk naar de provincie Fryslân (Stuurgroep Hoekstra), Fries in het onderwijs: meer ruimte, regie en rekenschap voor de provincie Fryslân, 2 juli 2010

Artikel 9, lid 4 van de WPO bepaalt het volgende:

Op de scholen in de provincie Fryslân wordt tevens onderwijs gegeven in de Friese taal. Gedeputeerde Staten kunnen op verzoek van het bevoegd gezag gedeeltelijke of volledige ontheffing van deze verplichting verlenen. Gedeputeerde Staten stellen in een beleidsregel criteria vast voor die gedeeltelijke en volledige ontheffing. De vaststelling geschiedt niet eerder dan nadat Gedeputeerde Staten overleg hebben gevoerd met het Friese primair onderwijs.

Artikel 11e, lid 1 van de WVO bepaalt het volgende:

Op de scholen in de provincie Fryslân wordt met inachtneming van de daarvoor vastgestelde kerndoelen tevens onderwijs gegeven in de Friese taal en cultuur, tenzij Gedeputeerde Staten op verzoek van het bevoegd gezag gedeeltelijke of volledige ontheffing van deze verplichting hebben verleend. Gedepu- teerde Staten stellen in een beleidsregel criteria vast voor die gedeeltelijke en volledige ontheffing. De vaststelling van deze criteria geschiedt niet eerder dan nadat Gedeputeerde Staten overleg hebben gevoerd met het Friese voortgezet onderwijs.

De doelen die scholen moeten nastreven bij het vak Fries zijn vastgelegd in zogenaamde kerndoelen. De kerndoelen zijn vastgelegd in het Besluit vernieuwde kerndoelen WPO en het Besluit kerndoelen onderbouw VO. Voor het primair onderwijs hebben de kerndoelen betrekking op attitude, luisteren, spreken, lezen, schrijven en taalbeschouwing. De kerndoelen voor het voortgezet onderwijs kennen een andere indeling, te weten: 1) kerndoelen voor deelnemers in een tweetalige cultuur, 2) kerndoelen voor leerlingen met Fries als tweede taal en 3) kerndoelen voor leerlingen met Fries als moedertaal.

2.2 Voorbereiding van de beleidsregel

Naar aanleiding van de wijziging van de WPO en de WVO is besloten dat een beleidsregel moet worden opgesteld, waarbij rekening wordt gehouden met de nieuwste afspraken, bevindingen en inzichten met betrekking tot de Friese taal in het onderwijs. Met het vaststellen van deze beleidsregel wordt voldaan aan de verplichting uit de WPO en de WVO en wordt de rechtszekerheid gediend van scholen en ouders. Ter voorbereiding van deze beleidsregel hebben Gedeputeerde Staten (conform artikel 9, lid 4, WPO en artikel 11e, lid 1, WVO) overleg gevoerd met het Friese primair en voortgezet onderwijs.

3. Profielen en beoordelingscriteria

Aan de hand van de kerndoelen voor het vak Fries zijn profielen vastgesteld door Gedeputeerde Staten. Er zijn profielen voor scholen in het primair onderwijs en profielen voor scholen in het voortgezet onderwijs.

Een school die partiële of volledige ontheffing voor het vak Fries wil ontvangen, geeft op het aanvraagformulier aan welk profiel op de betreffende school van toepassing is. Op het formulier wordt daarnaast aangegeven op welke manier op het moment van aanvraag feitelijk invulling wordt gegeven aan het onderwijs in het Fries. Scholen die aan alle kerndoelen voldoen, dienen geen aanvraag om ontheffing in. Deze scholen zijn over het algemeen drietalige scholen, of scholen die in ontwikkeling zijn om een drietalige school te worden. Het bevoegd gezag waaronder deze scholen vallen geeft in de inventarisatie aan dat deze scholen niet voor ontheffing in aanmerking hoeven te komen. Op basis van die inventarisatie en de bekende gegevens van de drietalige scholen wordt besloten of een school ook naar de informatie van de provincie geen aanvraagformulier hoeft in te vullen, of dat dit toch gewenst is.

2 Provinciaal blad 2015 nr. 3671 26 juni 2015 In het profiel dat van toepassing is op de school, zijn de kerndoelen opgenomen waar de school wél aan voldoet. De ontheffing wordt aangevraagd voor de kerndoelen die niet in het toepasselijke profiel zijn genoemd.

Op de beoordeling van de aanvraag wordt nader ingegaan in paragraaf 3.3.

3.1 Profielen voor het primair onderwijs

PO Profiel A (geen ontheffing)

Dit profiel houdt in dat het onderwijs in het vak Fries aan alle kerndoelen voldoet; attitude, luisteren, spreken, lezen, schrijven en taalbeschouwing. Als een school aan dit profiel voldoet, hoeft geen ontheffing te worden verleend.

Mondeling taalonderwijs

attitude 1.De leerlingen ontwikkelen een positieve attitude ten opzichte van het gebruik van Fries door henzelf en anderen. luisteren 2.De leerlingen leren informatie te verwerven uit gesproken Fries. Het gaat om teksten die informatie geven, plezier verschaffen, meningen of aanwijzingen bevatten over voor hen bekende onderwerpen. spreken 3.De leerlingen leren zich naar inhoud en vorm in het Fries uit te drukken in situaties uit hun dagelijks leven waarin zij informatie vragen of geven over een onderwerp waarmee zij vertrouwd zijn. Schriftelijk taalonderwijs

lezen 4.De leerlingen leren informatie te verwerven uit teksten in het Fries in frequent voorkomende teksttypen (zoals artikelen in jeugdrubrieken, liedjes, verhalen). schrijven 5.De leerlingen leren eenvoudige teksten in het Fries te schrijven over alledaagse onderwerpen met het doel met anderen over die onderwerpen te communiceren. Taalbeschouwing, waaronder strategieën

taalbeschouwing 6.De leerlingen verwerven een woordenschat van frequent gebruikte Friese woorden en strategieën voor het begrijpen van voor hen onbekende woorden.

PO Profiel B (ontheffing voor: schrijven)

Dit profiel houdt in dat aan de leerlingen onderwijs in attitude, luisteren, spreken en lezen wordt gegeven en dat er aandacht is voor taalbeschouwing.

Mondeling taalonderwijs

lezen 4.De leerlingen leren informatie te verwerven uit teksten in het Fries in frequent voorkomende teksttypen (zoals artikelen in jeugdrubrieken, liedjes, verhalen). Taalbeschouwing, waaronder strategieën

taalbeschouwing 6.De leerlingen verwerven een woordenschat van frequent gebruikte Friese woorden en strategieën voor het begrijpen van voor hen onbekende woorden.

PO Profiel C (ontheffing voor: lezen en schrijven)

3 Provinciaal blad 2015 nr. 3671 26 juni 2015 Dit profiel houdt in dat aan de leerlingen onderwijs in attitude, luisteren en spreken wordt gegeven en dat er aandacht is voor taalbeschouwing.

Mondeling taalonderwijs

taalbeschouwing 6.De leerlingen verwerven een woordenschat van frequent gebruikte Friese woorden en strategieën voor het begrijpen van voor hen onbekende woorden.

PO Profiel D (ontheffing voor: lezen, schrijven en taalbeschouwing )

Dit profiel houdt in dat aan de leerlingen onderwijs wordt gegeven in attitude, luisteren en lezen. Het mondeling taalonderwijs richt zich op de ontwikkeling van een positieve attitude ten opzichte van het gebruik van het Fries, informatie verwerven uit gesproken Fries en het zich uitdrukken in het Fries. Er wordt geen schriftelijk taalonderwijs in het Fries gegeven.

Mondeling taalonderwijs

PO Profiel E (ontheffing voor: spreken, lezen, schrijven en taalbeschouwing )

Dit profiel houdt in dat de leerlingen onderwijs krijgen in attitude en luisteren. Het mondeling taalonderwijs richt zich op de ontwikkeling van een positieve attitude ten opzichte van het gebruik van het Fries en informatie verwerven uit gesproken Fries. Er wordt geen schriftelijk taalonderwijs in het Fries gegeven en de leerlingen gebruiken de Friese taal mondeling niet actief.

Mondeling taalonderwijs

PO Profiel F (ontheffing voor: luisteren, spreken, lezen, schrijven en taalbeschouwing )

Dit profiel beperkt zich tot mondeling taalonderwijs waarbij een positieve attitude ten opzichte van het gebruik van het Fries wordt ontwikkeld.

Mondeling taalonderwijs

attitude 1.De leerlingen ontwikkelen een positieve attitude ten opzichte van het gebruik van Fries door henzelf en anderen. Ontheffing wordt aangevraagd voor: luisteren, spreken, lezen, schrijven en taalbeschouwing

4 Provinciaal blad 2015 nr. 3671 26 juni 2015

PO Profiel G (volledige ontheffing)

Dit profiel houdt in dat een school aan geen van de kerndoelen Fries hoeft te voldoen. Aan de school kan volledige ontheffing van alle kerndoelen worden verleend. Profiel G is alleen mogelijk voor scholen die zich in Fryslân, maar niet in het Friese taalgebied bevinden. Dit zijn in ieder geval de gemeenten Ameland, Schiermonnikoog, Terschelling, Vlieland en Weststellingwerf en delen van de gemeenten Ooststellingwerf en Kollumerland en Nieuwkruisland.

3.2 Profielen voor het voortgezet onderwijs

Er zijn op grond van artikel 11e van de WVO voor Friese taal en cultuur kerndoelen geformuleerd die in de provincie Fryslân dezelfde status hebben als de algemene kerndoelen op grond van artikel 11a van de WVO. Hierbij is onderscheid gemaakt tussen kerndoelen die voor alle leerlingen verplicht zijn (1–3), en kerndoelen die anders zijn uitgewerkt voor leerlingen die de Friese taal als tweede taal spreken (4a–6a), en voor leerlingen voor wie Fries de moedertaal is (4b–6b).

VO Profiel A (geen ontheffing)

Dit profiel houdt in dat het onderwijs in het vak Fries aan alle kerndoelen voldoet. Als een school aan dit profiel voldoet, hoeft geen ontheffing te worden verleend.

Deelnemer in een tweetalige cultuur

1. De leerling leert de betekenis onderkennen van de tweetalige Friese cultuur voor het dagelijks leven en leert deze te vergelijken met situaties in de rest van Nederland en daarbuiten. 2. De leerling leert aan de hand van voorbeelden de specifieke kenmerken van de Friese cultuur begrijpen en deze in verband te brengen met de historische achtergronden daarvan. 3. De leerling leert aan de hand van voorbeelden het belang van Friese cultuuruitingen onderkennen (teksten, muziek, toneel, film, TV en radio) en de betekenis die hij daaraan hecht onder woorden te brengen.

Voor leerlingen met Fries als tweede taal

4a. De leerling leert om via voor hem zinvolle contexten een Friese woordenschat op te bouwen door verschillende strategieën toe te passen. 5a. De leerling leert informatie op te zoeken en te ordenen uit schriftelijke en digitale Friestalige bronnen op basis van vragen over onderwerpen binnen zijn eigen belangstellingssfeer. 6a. De leerling leert een informeel gesprek in het Fries te voeren met leeftijdgenoten over onderwerpen uit zijn dagelijks leven.

Voor leerlingen met Fries als moedertaal

4b. De leerling leert zich mondeling en schriftelijk begrijpelijk uit te drukken en zich te houden aan taalconventies die voor het Fries gelden (spelling, grammaticaal juiste zinnen, woordgebruik). 5b. De leerling leert het belang van het communiceren volgens gangbare taalregels van het Fries in formele situaties ontdekken (werkoverleg, planning, discussie). 6b. De leerling leert Friese verhalen, gedichten en informatieve teksten te kiezen en te lezen die tege- moet komen aan zijn belangstelling en zijn belevingswereld uitbreiden.

VO Profiel B (ontheffing voor kerndoelen 4b, 5b en 6b )

Dit profiel bevat de kerndoelen die voor alle leerlingen verplicht zijn en kerndoelen die van toepassing zijn voor leerlingen met Fries als tweede taal en voor leerlingen met Fries als moedertaal. De kerndoelen die uitsluitend bestemd zijn voor leerlingen met Fries als moedertaal zijn niet opgenomen in dit profiel.

Deelnemer in een tweetalige cultuur

1. De leerling leert de betekenis onderkennen van de tweetalige Friese cultuur voor het dagelijks leven en leert deze te vergelijken met situaties in de rest van Nederland en daarbuiten.

5 Provinciaal blad 2015 nr. 3671 26 juni 2015 2. De leerling leert aan de hand van voorbeelden de specifieke kenmerken van de Friese cultuur begrijpen en deze in verband te brengen met de historische achtergronden daarvan. 3. De leerling leert aan de hand van voorbeelden het belang van Friese cultuuruitingen onderkennen (teksten, muziek, toneel, film, TV en radio) en de betekenis die hij daaraan hecht onder woorden te brengen.

Voor leerlingen met Fries als tweede taal

VO Profiel C 1 (ontheffing voor: kerndoelen 4a, 5a, 4b, 5b en 6b )

Een school die zich herkent in dit profiel verzorgt onderwijs dat is gericht op de realisatie van de kerndoelen voor de deelnemer in een tweetalige cultuur en beoogt daarnaast de leerlingen in staat te stellen een informeel gesprek in het Fries te voeren met leeftijdgenoten over onderwerpen uit zijn dagelijks leven.

VO Profiel C 2 (ontheffing voor: kerndoelen 4a, 5a, 6a, 4b, 5b en 6b )

Een school die zich herkent in dit profiel verzorgt onderwijs dat is gericht op de realisatie van de kerndoelen voor de deelnemer in een tweetalige cultuur

VO Profiel D (volledige ontheffing)

Dit profiel houdt in dat een school aan geen van de kerndoelen Fries hoeft te voldoen. Aan de school kan ontheffing worden verleend voor alle kerndoelen. Profiel D is alleen mogelijk voor scholen die zich in Fryslân, maar niet in het Friese taalgebied bevinden. Dit zijn in ieder geval de gemeenten Ameland, Schiermonnikoog, Terschelling, Vlieland en Weststellingwerf en delen van de gemeenten Ooststellingwerf en Kollumerland en Nieuwkruisland.

3.3 Beoordelingscriteria

a. De beoordeling van de aanvraag vindt plaats aan de hand van de beantwoording van de vragen op door Gedeputeerde Staten vastgestelde aanvraagformulieren over de invulling van het onderwijs met betrekking tot het vak Fries. Deze toelichting kan mede worden onderbouwd door middel van de toepasselijke passage uit het verplichte schoolplan of het optionele taalbeleidsplan. Deze documenten kunnen als aanvulling meegestuurd worden bij de aanvraag, maar kunnen niet als vervanging van de beantwoording van de vragen dienen.

6 Provinciaal blad 2015 nr. 3671 26 juni 2015 b. Bij de beoordeling van de aanvraag hanteren Gedeputeerde Staten twee criteria: 1. het ingeschatte gebruik van het Fries binnen de school(gemeenschap) 2. de feitelijke invulling van het onderwijs in het Fries

c. In de beslissing op de aanvraag voor ontheffing wordt gemotiveerd waarom ontheffing op basis van het betreffende profiel wordt gegeven. In de beslissing op de aanvraag voor ontheffing kunnen Gedeputeerde Staten gemotiveerd afwijken van de door de school aangevraagde ontheffing, als daar op basis van de invulling van het onderwijs of het relatieve gebruik van het Fries binnen de schoolgemeenschap aanleiding voor is.

4. Procedure

Hoewel scholen altijd een extra inspanning moeten doen om de benodigde informatie aan te leveren, is er de provincie veel aan gelegen om de administratieve druk van de scholen zo beperkt mogelijk te houden. De aanvraagprocedure wordt in onderstaand artikel 1 uitgewerkt. De procedure om de aanvraag te beoordelen is uitgewerkt in artikel 2. Overige consequenties worden in artikel 3 besproken.

Artikel 1 De aanvraag

a) Schoolbesturen maken in eerste instantie een inventarisatie van welke scholen (individuele vestigingen) onder hun gezag in welke categorie van profielen vallen. De onderverdeling in categorieën waar de bestuurders de scholen in kunnen plaatsen is: 1) geen ontheffing, 2) partiële ontheffing, 3) volledige ontheffing. Op basis van die inventarisatie zullen minimaal de scholen die volgens het bestuur voor een bepaalde mate van ontheffing in aanmerking komen een aanvraagformulier in moeten vullen. b) De aanvraag voor een ontheffing wordt ingediend door de directeur van een school. Per vestiging wordt een aanvraag ingediend. Ook als een directeur de bevoegdheid over meerdere scholen heeft worden er meerdere aanvraagformulieren gevraagd, omdat de taalsituatie op de diverse vestigingen kan verschillen. Het formulier zal gezamenlijk ingevuld worden met een onderwijskundige, die in opdracht van de provincie de scholen helpt om het formulier in te vullen. c) De aanvraag kan tijdens deze eerste ronde in schooljaar 2016/2017 het gehele jaar ingediend worden bij Gedeputeerde Staten en de verleende ontheffing wordt aan het begin van het volgende schooljaar van kracht. d) De aanvraag wordt ingediend op een door Gedeputeerde Staten vastgesteld aanvraagformulier, welke digitaal beschikbaar komt. e) Op het aanvraagformulier wordt aangegeven welk profiel bij de school past en wordt kort toegelicht op welke wijze de kerndoelen in het profiel worden gerealiseerd. Indien volledige ontheffing wordt aangevraagd, blijft deze toelichting achterwege.

Artikel 2 Beoordeling van de aanvraag

a. Gedeputeerde Staten nemen binnen acht (8) weken na het indienen van een aanvraag een besluit. b. Bij een gemotiveerd afwijken van een besluit zal, voorafgaand aan het uitbrengen van het besluit, contact opgenomen worden met de betreffende school.

Artikel 3 Geldigheidsduur en consequenties

a. De ontheffing wordt in principe verleend voor een periode van vier schooljaren. De vier jaar waarin een ontheffing is verleend, wordt gebruikt om een ontwikkeltraject te vormen van meertalig onderwijs dat past bij de school en de gemeenschap waarin de school staat. In de scholen die gevestigd zijn binnen het Friese taalgebied, en waar het Fries een dagelijkse omgangstaal is, wordt gestreefd naar een groeimodel, in scholen in die gebieden hoeft bij voorkeur niet iedere vier jaar opnieuw dezelfde ontheffing te worden verleend. Dit is ook de reden waarom er een periode van vier jaar wordt voorgesteld. Over het algemeen loopt dit gelijk met de periode van de schoolplannen, waarin tegenwoordig vaak taalplannen opgenomen zijn. Door deze periode aan te houden wordt het ontwikkeltraject realistisch en kan het integraal opgepakt worden met andere ontwikkelingen op de betreffende school. Het is echter realistisch dat op andere geografi- sche locaties de mate van ontheffing voor meerdere schoolplannen achtereen hetzelfde zal zijn. b. Als gevolg van de beslissing op de aanvraag om ontheffing wordt een besluit genomen over de toekenning van de bijdrage uit de Materiële Instandhouding Fries (MIF). Uitgangspunt daarbij is dat scholen die meer kerndoelen realiseren een grotere bijdrage ontvangen uit de MIF. Scholen die volledige ontheffing krijgen, ontvangen geen bijdrage uit de MIF. Scholen die alle kerndoelen

7 Provinciaal blad 2015 nr. 3671 26 juni 2015 behalen ontvangen het maximale bedrag per leerling uit de MIF. Elk jaar wordt de hoogte van het bedrag per leerling opnieuw vastgesteld, omdat het leerlingenaantal en daarmee de verhou- dingen van het aantal leerlingen per profiel verschoven kan zijn. c. De profielen die de mate van ontheffing aangeven worden gedeeld met de Inspectie voor het Onderwijs. Dit heeft als gevolg dat de inspecteur de school kan beoordelen op wat deze volgens het profiel aan het vak Fries doet.

5. Citeertitel en inwerkingtreding

Deze beleidsregel wordt aangehaald als Beleidsregel ontheffing vak Fries en treedt in werking op de eerste dag na bekendmaking in het Provinciaal Blad.

Toelichting op de Beleidsregel voor het verkrijgen van ontheffing voor het vak Fries in het pr i mair en voortgezet onderwijs

Er is geen toelichting bij hoofdstuk 1, paragrafen 3.1 en 3.2 en hoofdstuk 5. Deze onderdelen worden geacht zonder toelichting voor zichzelf te spreken.

2. Kaders voor de bevoegdheidsuitoefening

2.0 Algeme en wettelijk kader

De Wet gebruik Friese taal bepaalt dat de officiële talen in de provincie Fryslân het Nederlands en het Fries zijn. Artikel 2a van de Wet gebruik Friese taal bepaalt dat het Rijk en de provincie Fryslân een gezamenlijke verantwoordelijkheid en zorgplicht voor de Friese taal en cultuur hebben. Met het oog daarop maken het Rijk en de provincie Fryslân periodiek bestuursafspraken ter uitwerking van de verantwoordelijkheid op het gebied van de Friese taal en cultuur. Vanwege de internationale verdragsaf- spraken op dit terrein kunnen de bestuursafspraken ook voor de Friese taal en cultuur relevante beleids- terreinen omvatten die liggen buiten het gebruik van de Friese taal in het bestuurlijk verkeer en in het rechtsverkeer. Deze bestuursafspraken, die laatstelijk zijn vastgelegd in de Bestuursafspraak Friese Taal en Cultuur 2013-2018, hebben mede betrekking op onderwijs.

Artikel 5, lid 3, van de Wet gebruik Friese taal bepaalt dat de bestuursorganen van de gemeenten Ameland, Schiermonnikoog, Terschelling, Vlieland en Weststellingwerf zijn vrijgesteld van de verplichting tot het opstellen van regels over het gebruik van de Friese taal in schriftelijke stukken en in het mondeling verkeer en van de verplichting tot het opstellen van een beleidsplan inzake het gebruik van de Friese taal. De reden hiervoor is dat de Friese taal niet de dagelijkse omgangstaal is van de bevolking. Daarbij kan naast de in de Wet gebruik Friese taal genoemde gemeenten ook worden gedacht aan delen van Ooststellingwerf waarin het Fries niet de dagelijkse omgangstaal is en delen van gemeente Kollumerland en Nieuwkruisland. Door de laatstgenoemde gemeente loopt de Gronings-Friese taalgrens. De scholen in de gebieden waarin de Friese taal niet de dagelijkse omgangstaal is, kunnen er voor kiezen om wel onderwijs in de Friese taal en cultuur te verzorgen, maar Gedeputeerde Staten behouden ook de mogelijkheid om deze scholen volledig ontheffing te verlenen.

In de Bestuursafspraak Friese Taal en Cultuur, waarin het Rijk en provincie Fryslân afspraken hebben vastgelegd met betrekking tot de bescherming en promotie van de Friese taal, zijn onderdelen opgenomen die slaan op de ontheffingsregeling. Zo staat er in hoofdstuk 2, subsectie 2.2.2. en 2.3.2 - respec- tievelijk voor het primair en voortgezet onderwijs - dat Gedeputeerde Staten in overleg met het onderwijsveld criteria vaststelt voor partiële ontheffing van het vak Fries. Ten tijde van het opstellen van de bestuursafspraak was dit vooruitlopend op de wetsbehandeling. In de bestuursafspraak staat dat de invoering van partiële ontheffing een gezamenlijke inspanning van Rijk en provincie is. Dat is ook het geval, bij het opstellen van de beleidsregel en voorgenomen uitvoering is overleg gevoerd met het Ministerie van Onderwijs, Cultuur en Wetenschappen, zodat het voorgenomen beleid past in de huidige wetgeving. De geldende bestuursafspraak heeft een looptijd van 2013 tot en met 2018. Bij de voorbereiding van een nieuwe bestuursafspraak omtrent de bescherming en promotie van het Fries zal weer aandacht uitgaan naar het dan lopende beleid waarin het ontheffingsbeleid, naar verwachting, dan een duidelijke plaats heeft gekregen.

8 Provinciaal blad 2015 nr. 3671 26 juni 2015 Ook in het provinciale beleid wordt gesproken van de ontheffing voor het vak Fries. In hoofdstuk 4, subsectie Meertaligheid in het onderwijs, wordt - net als in de bestuursafspraak - gesproken over een op handen zijnde wetswijziging met betrekking tot partiële ontheffingen. Omdat ten tijde van de publi- catie van deze integrale beleidsnota ‘Grinzen Oer’ de wetswijziging nog niet gerealiseerd was, wordt hier verder niet op ingegaan. Het spreekt voor zich dat in een volgende nota, die vanaf 2017 van kracht zal zijn, hier meer aandacht aan besteed wordt.

2. 1 Onderwijswetgeving

Artikel 1 en bijlage van het Besluit vernieuwde kerndoelen WPO bevat de Kerndoelen Friese taal voor het primair onderwijs:

Mondeling taalonderwijs

17. De leerlingen ontwikkelen een positieve attitude ten opzichte van het gebruik van Fries door henzelf en anderen. 18. De leerlingen leren informatie te verwerven uit gesproken Fries. Het gaat om teksten die informatie geven, plezier verschaffen, meningen of aanwijzingen bevatten over voor hen bekende onderwerpen. 19. De leerlingen leren zich naar inhoud en vorm in het Fries uit te drukken in situaties uit hun dagelijks leven waarin zij informatie vragen of geven over een onderwerp waarmee zij vertrouwd zijn.

Schriftelijk taalonderwijs

20. De leerlingen leren informatie te verwerven uit teksten in het Fries in frequent voorkomende teksttypen (zoals artikelen in jeugdrubrieken, liedjes, verhalen). 21. De leerlingen leren eenvoudige teksten in het Fries te schrijven over alledaagse onderwerpen met het doel met anderen over die onderwerpen te communiceren.

Taalbeschouwing, waaronder strategieën

22.De leerlingen verwerven een woordenschat van frequent gebruikte Friese woorden en strategieën voor het begrijpen van voor hen onbekende woorden.

Artikel 1 en bijlage van het Besluit kerndoelen onderbouw VO bevat de kerndoelen Friese taal en cultuur voor het voortgezet onderwijs:

Deelnemer in een tweetalige cultuur

Voor leerlingen met Fries als tweede taal en voor leerlingen met Fries als moedertaal

9 Provinciaal blad 2015 nr. 3671 26 juni 2015 6a. De leerling leert een informeel gesprek in het Fries te voeren met leeftijdgenoten over onderwerpen uit zijn dagelijks leven.

Voor leerlingen met Fries als moedertaal

Op basis van het overgangsrecht zijn de bovengenoemde kerndoelen van toepassing totdat Provinciale Staten bij verordening nieuwe kerndoelen hebben vastgesteld. Provinciale Staten hebben de bevoegdheid tot het vaststellen van kerndoelen met ingang van 1 augustus 2014 op basis van artikel 9, lid 6, WPO en artikel 11e, lid 2, WVO.

2. 2 Voorbereiding van de beleidsregel

In 2009 heeft de Inspectie voor het Onderwijs een onderzoek uitgevoerd naar de kwaliteit van het vak Fries in het primair en voortgezet onderwijs. In het rapport naar aanleiding van dit onderzoek werd onder andere de aanbeveling gedaan dat het ontheffingsbeleid van de provincie Fryslân zou moeten worden uitgekristalliseerd en geactualiseerd. Tevens beveelt de inspectie aan om vraaggestuurd te gaan werken, waarbij scholen hun taalbeleidsplan omzetten in concrete vragen aan instellingen die hen kunnen ondersteunen bij het Fries in het onderwijs.

Voorheen werd gewerkt met een beleidsregel uit 2009 die voorzag in volledige en gedeeltelijke ontheffing. Deze beleidsregel is na overleg tussen het ministerie en de provincie buiten toepassing verklaard, omdat de wet toen nog geen gedeeltelijke ontheffing toestond. Naar aanleiding van het advies van de Stuurgroep Hoekstra[3] is de mogelijkheid om gedeeltelijke ontheffing te verlenen bij wet geregeld. Daarop is besloten en bij wet geregeld dat opnieuw een beleidsregel moet worden opgesteld, waarbij rekening wordt gehouden met de nieuwste afspraken, bevindingen en inzichten met betrekking tot de Friese taal in het onderwijs.

[3] Advies van de Stuurgroep decentralisatie Friese taal van Rijk naar de provincie Fryslân (Stuurgroep Hoekstra), Fries in het onderwijs: meer ruimte, regie en rekenschap voor de provincie Fryslân, 2 juli 2010

Ter voorbereiding van deze beleidsregel hebben Gedeputeerde Staten (conform artikel 9, lid 4, WPO) advies gevraagd aan de Coördinatie en Advies Groep Primair Onderwijs. Zij heeft Gedeputeerde Staten op 15 februari 2013 geadviseerd scholen alleen in uitzonderlijke gevallen gedeeltelijke ontheffing te geven van de wettelijke verplichting om onderwijs in het Fries te geven. Zij acht onderwijs in het Fries van onderwijskundig en maatschappelijk belang. Zij wijst er op dat meertalig onderwijs de taal- en leerontwikkeling van kinderen positief beïnvloedt en dat het draagvlak voor het Fries de afgelopen jaren is toegenomen, zoals onder andere blijkt uit de recentste Taalnota. Tevens wordt er op gewezen dat iedereen in Fryslân het recht en de ruimte moet hebben om in het maatschappelijke en rechtsverkeer binnen de grenzen van de provincie Fryslân te kiezen voor het gebruik van een van de beide rijkstalen (Nederlands of Fries). De Coördinatie en Advies Groep Primair Onderwijs adviseert daarom in te zetten op een systeem van partiële ontheffing aan een aantal scholen, waarbij die scholen wel een eigen route naar meertalig onderwijs moeten ontwikkelen. Dit advies is meegenomen en deels overgenomen in de ontwikkeling van de huidige beleidsregel.

In navolging van de wet is het primaire en voortgezette onderwijsveld in Fryslân geconsulteerd op basis van de concept beleidsregel met betrekking tot de ontheffingen. Zowel op koepel-, bestuurlijk als schoolniveau is er gesproken met diverse afgevaardigden, die vanuit hun functie dichterbij of verder van de onderwijspraktijk af stonden. Naar aanleiding van de informatieronde is de beleidsregel bijge- schaafd. Op hoofdlijnen bleken de vertegenwoordigers uit het veld zich goed te kunnen vinden in de voorgestelde beleidsregel en de consequenties van de uitvoering daarvan (zoals het delen van de gegevens met de onderwijsinspectie en het koppelen van de Materiële Instandhouding Fries aan de mate van ontheffing). Op detailniveau zijn enkele aanwijzingen gegeven door de diverse contactpersonen, waarna aanpassingen doorgevoerd zijn, waar dat mogelijk was. Ook zijn de aanvraagformulieren uit- gebreid getest met twee besturen en 30 scholen. De informatieronde heeft veel nuttige feedback opge-

10 Provinciaal blad 2015 nr. 3671 26 juni 2015 leverd, waardoor de beleidsregel sterker geworden is en de aanvraagformulieren duidelijker zijn geworden.

Naast overleg met het Friese onderwijsveld is ook afstemming geweest met het Ministerie van Onderwijs, Cultuur en Wetenschap en met de Inspectie van het Onderwijs in Fryslân. Met het ministerie van OCW is voornamelijk besproken of de voorgestelde beleidsregel paste in (de geest van) de vernieuwde WPO en WVO. Ook is met hen besproken welke overige ontwikkelingen in het onderwijsveld spelen, die de komende jaren relevant kunnen zijn voor de uitvoering van de beleidsregel, zoals de koppeling van de profielen aan de kerndoelen. Afgesproken is om hierin met elkaar in contact te blijven, omdat onder andere de kerndoelen onderwijsbreed aan verandering onderhevig zijn. Met de Inspectie van het On- derwijs zal ten tijde van de uitvoering van het ontheffingsbeleid afstemming zijn over welke scholen welke profielen hebben. Bovendien is in de voorbereiding op de beleidsregel contact met de Inspectie geweest om de voorgenomen beleidsregel aan te laten sluiten bij het geldende waarderingskader. Ook hier geldt dat de kaders in beweging zijn en het zodoende belangrijk is om elkaar van de recente ontwikkelingen op de hoogte te blijven houden. Uitgangspunt daarbij is dat het Fries, ook al is het een bijzonder vak uitgaande van de landelijke situatie, niet een op zichzelf staand vak is, maar mee moet en kan bewegen met het onderwijsveld in de breedte.

3. Profielen

Het uitgangspunt bij de totstandkoming van de profielen is het beheersingsniveau van het Fries binnen de schoolgemeenschap of de gemeente(n) waarbinnen de schoolgemeenschap zich bevindt. Dit heeft de Coördinatie en Advies Groep Primair Onderwijs ook benadrukt in haar advies, waarin is aangegeven dat de samenstelling van de schoolbevolking en de schoolomgeving het belangrijkste criterium voor het verlenen van ontheffing is. Het in kaart brengen van de taalachtergrond van de schoolpopulatie is vooral bedoeld om een globale inschatting te geven. Het is voor het invullen van het formulier niet nodig dat de scholen een aanvullend onderzoek doen naar de taalachtergrond van de kinderen. De concrete invulling van de profielen is mede gebaseerd op de informatie die opgehaald is in het onderwijsveld, waarbij het uitgangspunt was dat de profielen logisch volgen uit het aangeboden onderwijsprogramma.

In een profiel is aangegeven wat de school wél doet aan onderwijs in de Friese taal. Aan ieder profiel is een mate van ontheffing gekoppeld. Bijvoorbeeld profiel C voor het primair onderwijs houdt in dat het onderwijs van de school voldoet aan de kerndoelen attitude, luisteren, spreken en taalbeschouwing en dat de school ontheffing heeft voor de kerndoelen lezen en schrijven. Waar de scheiding in het primair onderwijs meer gebaseerd is op het mondeling en het schriftelijk taalgebruik van de leerling, is de scheiding in het voortgezet onderwijs meer gebaseerd op de passieve en actieve beheerding van de taal. Dit laatste uitgaande van de talige beginsituatie van de leerlingen.

3.3 Beoordelingscriteria

Gedeputeerde Staten hanteren twee criteria bij de aanvraag om ontheffing:

1.het beheersingsniveau van het Fries binnen de school(gemeenschap)

Een aanknopingspunt voor het beheersingsniveau kan worden gevonden in de meest recente Fryske Taalatlas, ten tijde van het publiceren van deze beleidsregel is dat de Taalatlas uit 2011, de verwachting is dat eind 2015 een nieuwe Taalatlas gepubliceerd zal worden. De Fryske Taalatlas geeft een overzicht van het beheersingsniveau en het gebruik van de Friese taal onder de inwoners van Fryslân. Bovendien worden de scholen op het aanvraagformulier gevraagd om zelf een inschatting te maken van de taalachtergrond van de leerlingen.

2.de feitelijke invulling van het onderwijs in het Fries

De invulling van het onderwijs wordt door de school aangegeven op het aanvraagformulier. Hierop kan bijvoorbeeld worden aangegeven welke lesmethode wordt gebruikt en welke activiteiten er worden ondernomen in het kader van onderwijs in het Fries. Als aanvulling op de ingezette materialen/methoden en activiteiten kan een school tevens het schoolplan of taalbeleidsplan toevoegen.

In de regel zullen Gedeputeerde Staten een ontheffing verlenen conform de aanvraag die door de school is ingediend. In de volgende gevallen kunnen Gedeputeerde Staten daarvan afwijken:

11 Provinciaal blad 2015 nr. 3671 26 juni 2015 - De feitelijke invulling van het onderwijs sluit niet aan bij het gekozen profiel. Dit is bijvoorbeeld het geval als uit de beschrijving van de feitelijke invulling blijkt dat de leerlingen naar de Friese schooltelevisie kijken en een school volledige ontheffing aanvraagt. - Het profiel sluit niet aan bij het beheersingsniveau van het Fries op de betreffende school(gemeenschap). Dit is bijvoorbeeld het geval als een school aangeeft dat PO profiel F van toepassing is (uitsluitend onderwijs in attitude) en uit de Fryske Taalatlas blijkt dat 90-100% van de inwoners van de betreffende gemeente Fries spreken. - Een school vraagt twee maal achtereen ontheffing aan voor dezelfde kerndoelen. Een van de uitgangspunten van deze beleidsregel is dat sprake is van een ontwikkeltraject van onderwijs in het Fries. In regio’s waar het Fries de dagelijkse omgangstaal is, is het streven om na een periode van vier jaar niet opnieuw voor een periode van vier jaar ontheffing te verlenen voor dezelfde kerndoelen. Het kan echter wel voorkomen dat een school niet een ontwikkeling in de ontheffing kan realiseren, dan zal Gedeputeerde Staten wel akkoord gaan met de voorliggende aanvraag.

In alle voornoemde gevallen met betrekking tot afwijkingen is Gedeputeerde Staten voornemens om voorafgaand aan het nemen van een besluit contact op te nemen met de betreffende school en in overleg te treden over de gewenste ontheffing.

4. Procedure

Om de administratieve lasten voor scholen zo laag mogelijk te houden, zetten Gedeputeerde Staten de hieronder beschreven instrumenten in. Deze instrumenten zijn voor een groot deel reeds genoemd in de Bestuursafspraak Friese Taal en Cultuur 2013-2018 [4], de integrale beleidsnota cultuur, taal en onderwijs 2013-2016 ‘Grinzen oer’ [5] en het inspectierapport ‘Tussen wens en werkelijkheid’ [6]. Ten tijde van de inwerkingtreding van deze beleidsregel zijn diverse onderdelen nog in ontwikkeling. Door de inzet van onderwijskundigen, genoemd onder punt 2, is direct het passende ontwikkeltraject en zijn de daarbij gewenste instrumenten onder punten 3 tot en met 8 te bespreken en te selecteren. De faciliteiten onder punten 3 tot en met 8 geven echter slechts een indicatie van de categorieën van faciliteiten. Omdat het uitgangspunt juist is om maatwerk te kunnen leveren om de scholen te faciliteren waar nodig, is de inzet van onderwijskundigen nodig.

[4] http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten-en-publicaties/convenanten/2013/04/16/bestuursafspraak- friese-taal-en-cultuur-2013.html

[5] http://www.fryslan.frl/notacto

[6] http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten-en-publicaties/rapporten/2010/11/24/inspectierapport-tussen- wens-en-werkelijkheid.html

1. Om een selectie te kunnen maken van scholen die in aanmerking willen komen voor een tijdelijke, partiële ontheffing worden de schoolbesturen gevraagd welke scholen naar hun inschatting daarvoor in aanmerking (willen) komen. Deze inventarisatie op bovenschools niveau is een eerste stap om inzicht te krijgen in de stand van zaken met betrekking tot het vak Fries. De bestuurders krijgen een digitaal formulier toegestuurd waarop zij de inventarisatie aan kunnen geven. Indien gewenst kan de provincie assistentie bieden bij het invullen van dat formulier.

2. De provincie zet onderwijskundigen in die, in gesprek met de schooldirectie aan de hand van het digitale aanvraagformulier, nagaan welk profiel en welke ontwikkelruimte het beste bij de school past. De focus bij deze inzet zal in eerste instantie liggen op de scholen die zich in Friestalige gemeenten bevinden, maar waarvan op dit moment niet duidelijk is wat de inhoud van het vak Fries is op de betreffende scholen en die volgens het bovenschools bestuur voor een bepaalde mate van partiële ontheffing in aanmerking willen komen (zie punt 1). De verwachting is dat dit om ongeveer 300 scholen in het primair onderwijs en ongeveer 50 scholen in het voortgezet onderwijs gaat.

3. Er is een format taalbeleidsplan beschikbaar. Daarnaast kunnen individuele scholen ondersteuning van taalcoördinatoren krijgen bij het opstellen/invullen van een taalbeleidsplan en het jaarlijks evalueren van de uitvoering van het taalbeleidsplan.

4. De provincie Fryslân geeft opdracht tot het ontwikkelen van een breed, hoogwaardig en gediffe- rentieerd aanbod Friestalig onderwijsmateriaal voor het primair onderwijs en de eerste fase van

12 Provinciaal blad 2015 nr. 3671 26 juni 2015 het voortgezet onderwijs aan, waarbij ict-applicaties een belangrijke positie innemen. Dit aanbod is in 2015 volop in ontwikkeling en zal vanaf schooljaar 2016-2017 te gebruiken zijn.

5. In 2015 is er een provinciaal dekkend netwerk van taalcoördinatoren in Fryslân, waar de scholen een beroep op kunnen doen bij het opstellen en evalueren van taalbeleidsplannen en de invoering van nieuwe methoden voor het vak Fries.

6. De provincie Fryslân biedt instrumenten aan waarmee de persoonlijke ontwikkeling van leerlingen wordt bijgehouden, bijvoorbeeld in een leerlingvolgsysteem Fries en methodeonafhankelijke toetsen voor het Fries. De verwachting is dat het leerlingvolgsysteem en de methodeonafhankelijke toetsen vanaf schooljaar 2016-2017 in te zetten zijn.

7. De provincie Fryslân stimuleert schoolbesturen om hun taalbeleid om te zetten in concrete vragen aan het taalcentrum Fries van Cedin. Dit centrum verzorgt onderwijskundige ondersteuning en advisering ten aanzien van Fries/meertalig onderwijs voor het PO en VO. De begeleiding is er op gericht scholen op de juiste, gedifferentieerde wijze met het leerstofaanbod te laten werken.

8. Middelen voor het verder onderwijzen en begeleiden van leerkrachten om gestalte te geven aan de meertalige didactiek worden zoveel mogelijk aangepast op de wensen van het onderwijsveld. Hierbij wordt van de (onderwijs)organisaties die werkzaam zijn in Fryslân verwacht dat zij maatwerk kunnen leveren om de scholen te kunnen faciliteren.

9. Gedeputeerde Staten willen de scholen die volledig ontheffing krijgen omdat zij gevestigd zijn in een gebied waar het Fries niet de dagelijkse omgangstaal is, stimuleren in het onderwijs aandacht te besteden aan de streektaal van het betreffende gebied. Er is echter geen wettelijke basis om aan een volledige ontheffing de voorwaarde te verbinden dat in een schoolplan (of taalbeleidsplan) een plan aangaande streektalen wordt opgenomen.

10. De koppeling met de Materiële Instandhouding Fries kan alleen dan plaatsvinden als de mate van ontheffing van alle scholen in Fryslân in beeld is gebracht. De verwachting is dat dit proces meer dan een jaar in beslag zal nemen. Zodra de consequenties daarvan doorberekend zijn, zal dit ge- communiceerd worden naar de scholen zodat zij het eventueel aangepaste bedrag kunnen opnemen in de (meerjarige) begroting.

13 Provinciaal blad 2015 nr. 3671 26 juni 2015 Bylage B. Rapport ‘Application of the Charter in the Netherlands, 5th monitoring cycle, Strasbourg, 14 December 2016, ECRML (2016) 4’.

Sis Tsiis B. ECRML 5th Monitoring

Strasbourg, 14 December 2016 ECRML (2016) 4

EUROPEAN CHARTER FOR REGIONAL OR MINORITY LANGUAGES

APPLICATION OF THE CHARTER IN THE NETHERLANDS

5th monitoring cycle

A. Report of the Committee of Experts on the Charter (adopted on 16 June 2016)

B. Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on the application of the Charter by the Netherlands (adopted on 14 December 2016)

ECRML(2016)4 2

The European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages provides for a control mechanism to evaluate how the Charter is applied in a States Parties with a view to, where necessary, making recommendations for improving its their legislation, policy and practices. The central element of this procedure is the Committee of Experts, set up under Article 17 of the Charter. Its principal purpose is to report to the Committee of Ministers on its evaluation of compliance by a Party with its undertakings, to examine the real situation of regional or minority languages in the State and, where appropriate, to encourage the Party to gradually reach a higher level of commitment.

To facilitate this task, the Committee of Ministers adopted, in accordance with Article 15, paragraph 1, an outline for periodical reports that a Party is required to submit to the Secretary General. This outline requires the State to give an account of the concrete application of the Charter, the general policy for the languages protected under Part II and, in more precise terms, all measures that have been taken in application of the provisions chosen for each language protected under Part III of the Charter. The Committee of Experts’ first task is therefore to examine the information contained in the periodical report for all the relevant regional or minority languages on the territory of the State concerned. The periodical report shall be made public by the State in accordance with Article 15, paragraph 2.

The Committee of Experts’ role is to evaluate the existing legal acts, regulations and real practice applied in each State for its regional or minority languages. It has established its working methods accordingly. The Committee of Experts gathers information from the respective authorities and from independent sources within the State, in order to obtain a fair and just overview of the real language situation. After a preliminary examination of a periodical report, the Committee of Experts submits, if necessary, a number of questions to each Party to obtain supplementary information from the authorities on matters it considers insufficiently developed in the report itself. This written procedure is usually followed up by an on-the-spot visit by a delegation of the Committee of Experts to the State in question. During this visit the delegation meets bodies and associations whose work is closely related to the use of the relevant languages, and consults the authorities on matters that have been brought to its attention. This information-gathering process is designed to enable the Committee of Experts to evaluate more effectively the application of the Charter in the State concerned.

Having concluded this process, the Committee of Experts adopts its own report. Once adopted by the Committee of Experts, this evaluation report is submitted to the authorities of the respective State Party for possible comments within a given deadline. Subsequently, the This evaluation report is submitted to the Committee of Ministers, together with suggestions for recommendations that, once adopted by the latter, will be the latter may decide to addressed to the State Party. The full report also contains the comments which the authorities of the State Party may have made.

3 ECRML(2016)4

CONTENTS

A. Report of the Committee of Experts on the application of the Charter in the Netherlands ...... 4

Executive Summary ...... 4

Chapter 1 Background information ...... 5

1.1. Introductory remarks ...... 5 1.2. The work of the Committee of Experts ...... 5 1.3. Presentation of the regional or minority language situation: update ...... 5 1.4. General issues arising from the evaluation of the periodical report ...... 6

Chapter 2 Conclusions of the Committee of Experts on how the Dutch authorities reacted to the recommendations of the Committee of Ministers ...... 8

Chapter 3 The Committee of Experts’ evaluation of Parts II and III of the Charter ...... 9

3.1. The Committee of Experts’ evaluation in respect of Part II of the Charter ...... 9 3.2. The Committee of Experts’ evaluation of the application of Part III of the Charter: Frisian ...... 19

Chapter 4 Findings of the Committee of Experts in the fifth monitoring round ...... 29

Appendix I: Instrument of Acceptance ...... 31

Appendix II: Comments from the Dutch authorities ...... 33

B. Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on the application of the Charter by the Netherlands ...... 36

ECRML(2016)4 4

A. Report of the Committee of Experts on the application of the Charter in the Netherlands

adopted by the Committee of Experts on 16 June 2016 and presented to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe in accordance with Article 16 of the Charter

Executive Summary

1. The Kingdom of the Netherlands protects and promotes Frisian, Limburgish, Low Saxon, Romanes and Yiddish under the Charter. Frisian is the only language protected under Part III and it is an official language in the Province of Fryslân. During the current monitoring cycle, a new Use of Frisian Act was adopted.

2. Increased funds for the teaching of Frisian have been made available during the current monitoring cycle. The share of Frisian in trilingual schools remains rather low. At secondary level, most schools offer Frisian for only one hour per week and for one year only. Combined with the lack of sufficient teaching of Frisian at primary school level, this is not sufficient for the development of an adequate level of literacy.

3. The ongoing mergers of municipalities around large cities seem to lead to a reduced use of Frisian in practice.

4. For the other languages – Limburgish, Low Saxon, Romanes and Yiddish - there is neither a structured policy to promote and protect them, nor a dialogue on the Charter with the speakers. For Limburgish and Low Saxon, the regional and local authorities play a central role in promoting them. Both languages are used in cultural activities, on the internet and in social media, but they are only present as projects and activities in primary schools. Romanes is not included in the educational system and is used in the media and cultural activities only to a limited extent. Yiddish is taught in only one school in Amsterdam.

5. The Amendments to the Media Act and the financial cuts in this field raise particular concerns among the speakers of all languages, especially the Frisians.

5 ECRML(2016)4

Chapter 1 Background information

1.1. Introductory remarks

6. The Kingdom of the Netherlands signed the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (hereafter referred to as “the Charter”) on 5 November 1992 and accepted it on 2 May 1996. On 19 March 1997, a supplementary declaration was submitted in a Note Verbale to the Council of Europe by the Permanent Representation of the Netherlands (attached in Appendix I). The Charter entered into force for the Netherlands on 1 March 1998.

7. Article 15.1 of the Charter requires States Parties to submit three-yearly reports in a form prescribed by the Committee of Ministers. The fifth periodical report was submitted by the Dutch authorities on 16 November 2015, with a delay of over one year. The report has been made public.

1.2. The work of the Committee of Experts

8. The fifth evaluation report is based on the information the Committee of Experts obtained through the fifth periodical report of the Netherlands and through meetings held with representatives of the speakers of the regional or minority languages and the Dutch authorities during the on-the-spot visit, which took place on 1-3 March 2016. The Committee of Experts also received several comments from bodies and associations legally established in the Netherlands, submitted pursuant to Article 16.2 of the Charter.

9. In the present fifth evaluation report, the Committee of Experts will focus on the provisions and issues under both Part II and Part III which were singled out in the previous evaluation report as raising particular problems. It will evaluate, in particular, how the Dutch authorities have reacted to the issues identified by the Committee of Experts and, where relevant, to the recommendations made by the Committee of Ministers. The report will firstly recall the key elements of each issue. The Committee of Experts will also look at new issues found during the fifth monitoring round.

10. The present report contains detailed observations and recommendations which the Dutch authorities are urged to take into account when developing their policy on regional or minority languages. The Committee of Experts has, on the basis of its detailed recommendations, also established a list of proposals for general recommendations to be addressed to the Netherlands by the Committee of Ministers, as provided in Article 16.4 of the Charter.

11. The present report reflects the policies, legislation and practice prevailing at the time of the on-the-spot visit (March 2016). Any changes after that time will be taken into account in the next report of the Committee of Experts concerning the Netherlands.

12. The present report was adopted by the Committee of Experts on 16 June 2016.

1.3. Presentation of the regional or minority language situation: update

Papiamentu 13. In the current monitoring cycle, the Committee of Experts received information about Papiamentu and the wish of its speakers that it receives protection under the Charter.

14. Papiamentu is a Creole language, traditionally used on the Caribbean islands of Aruba, Bonaire and Curaçao. Since 1986, Aruba has been a constituent country of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, while Bonaire and Curaçao, along with Saba, Sint Eustatius and Sint Maarten formed the Netherlands Antilles, another constituent country of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. On 10 October 2010, the Netherlands Antilles ceased to exist and the composing islands acquired different statuses: Curaçao and Sint Maarten became constituent ECRML(2016)4 6

countries in the Kingdom of the Netherlands, while Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba became part of the Netherlands itself1. They are “special municipalities” and considered as “public bodies” under the Dutch law2.

15. This raises legal questions on the status of the “special municipalities” and the application of the Charter. While they appear, according to the Charter of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, to be part of the Netherlands, “rules and specific measures may be established, bearing in mind the economic and social conditions, remoteness from the European part of the Netherlands, insularity, small size and population, geography, climate and other factors whereby these islands differ substantially from the European part of the Netherlands”3. Furthermore, the Committee of Experts was informed that, when preparing the changes in the status of Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba, the Dutch authorities limited the scope of the treaties in force to the geographical European part of the Netherlands, unless the treaty was placed on a “positive list”; neither the Charter, nor the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities appear on the “positive list”.

16. Pursuant to Article 2.1 of the Charter, Part II of the Charter applies to all languages spoken within the territory of a state which comply with the definition of a regional or minority language in Article 1 of the Charter. It follows from this that Part II would apply to Papiamentu if Bonaire can be considered an integral part of the Netherlands, like any other municipality in the European part of the Netherlands. The Committee of Experts encourages the Dutch authorities to clarify this aspect in the next periodical report. It should be borne in mind that the Dutch authorities have also the possibility to add the Charter to the so-called “positive list”, in order to protect and promote regional or minority languages.

Bildts 17. In the current monitoring cycle, the Committee of Experts also received information about Bildts and the wish of its speakers to have it protected under the Charter. Bildts is spoken in the municipality Het Bildt, in the Province of Fryslân, by approximately 6000 people. The municipality will be dissolved on 1 January 2018, as part of the ongoing administrative reform (see below) and this appears to be one of the reasons which prompted the speakers to seek the protection of Bildts under the Charter. According to the information received from the speakers, the origins of Bildts date back to the 16th century, when people from the south of Holland arrived in Fryslân to build dykes and create polders in the area now largely covered by the municipality of Het Bildt; it has old Hollandic roots, but developed in a completely Frisian-language environment. Bildts is taught in schools and is used by locals in contacts with the administration, as well as by local media. Support comes from the municipality and the Province of Fryslân. Both the speakers and some linguists4 consider Bildts as a language in its own right that cannot be considered a variety of Dutch or of Frisian.

18. The Committee of Experts encourages the Dutch authorities to clarify the status of Bildts in co-operation with its speakers5.

1.4. General issues arising from the evaluation of the periodical report

Possible application of Part III to Low Saxon 19. During the previous monitoring cycle, the umbrella organisation of the Low Saxon speakers informed the Committee of Experts of their wish to obtain Part III protection for their language. In the fourth evaluation report, the Committee of Experts therefore encouraged the Dutch authorities to continue the dialogue with the Low Saxon speakers in order to find adequate ways of improving the situation of Low Saxon.

20. According to the fifth periodical report and the information received during the on-the-spot visit, the Dutch authorities and the representatives of the speakers reached no consensus on the application of Part III of the Charter to Low Saxon. In May 2013, the issue was a subject of a debate in the Lower House of the Dutch Parliament, where the Ministry of the Interior again expressed its opposition to granting Low Saxon protection under Part III. However, the Ministry of the Interior and SONT, the Low Saxon umbrella organisation, have since

1 The Kingdom of the Netherlands is composed nowadays of the countries of Netherlands, Aruba, Curacao and Sint Maarten. 2 The other public bodies in the Netherlands are the national government, the municipalities, the provinces and the water boards, see https://www.government.nl/topics/caribbean-parts-of-the-kingdom/contents/bonaire-st-eustatius-and-saba 3 Statuut voor het Koninkrijk der Nederlanden, Article 1, http://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0002154/2010-10-10 4 See study “Seven Perspectives on Bildts” http://www.mercator- research.eu/fileadmin/mercator/publications_pdf/Mercator_report_Seven_perspectives_on_Bildts_June2015.pdf 5 See 4th report of the Committee of Experts on Sweden, ECRML (2011) 4, paragraph 46 7 ECRML(2016)4

started a dialogue aimed at clarifying their diverging positions concerning this issue. As a result of this dialogue, an agreement was reached on preparing a covenant on Low Saxon, as a means to strengthen the recognition and protection of the language. At the time of the on-the-spot visit, no draft was yet available, nor a timetable for the preparation and adoption of the covenant.

21. The Committee of Experts welcomes the dialogue between the Dutch authorities and the Low Saxon speakers. It encourages the Dutch authorities to pursue the dialogue in order to find adequate ways of improving the situation and strengthening the protection of Low Saxon, including the possible application of Part III to the language. The Committee of Experts looks forward to receiving more information on the covenant on Low Saxon in the next periodical report.

Delayed submission and information provided in the periodical report 22. The fifth periodical report was submitted by the Dutch authorities with a delay of over one year. This was also the case for the previous periodical reports of the Netherlands. The repeated delayed submissions of the periodical reports hamper the effectiveness of the monitoring mechanism. The Committee of Experts reminds the authorities of their duty to submit periodical reports “at three-yearly intervals after the first report”, in accordance with Article 15.1 of the Charter.

23. Besides the delayed submission of the periodical report, the Committee of Experts notes, as it was also the case in the previous monitoring cycle, that the fifth periodical report contains very limited information, in particular about the application of the Charter to the Part II languages. In the view of the Committee of Experts, this is linked to the fact that the Dutch authorities consider Part II languages as the responsibility of local or provincial authorities. In the case of Yiddish, the report contains no information. The Committee of Experts reiterates that the Committee of Ministers’ outline for three-yearly periodical reports6 requires States Parties inter alia to provide “information regarding measures which have been taken in response to the recommendations adopted by the Committee of Ministers, and to the questions and box recommendations made by the Committee of Experts” in the previous evaluation report. The Committee of Experts urges the Dutch authorities to provide precise information about the implementation of the Charter, involving also the speakers, so as to allow it to fulfil the mandate of monitoring the implementation of this convention.

6 MIN-LANG (2009) 8, http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/education/minlang/StatesParties/Outline3yearly_en.pdf ECRML(2016)4 8

Chapter 2 Conclusions of the Committee of Experts on how the Dutch authorities reacted to the recommendations of the Committee of Ministers

Recommendation no. 1: “establish a structured dialogue with representatives of the regional or minority language speakers about the implementation of the Charter and the recommendations evolving from its monitoring mechanism”

24. A structured dialogue at national level with the representatives of the regional or minority language speakers on the implementation of the Charter and the recommendations evolving from its monitoring mechanism has not been established by the Dutch authorities. Dialogue and co-operation for the promotion of the regional or minority languages, however, exist between the local authorities or provinces and the speakers’ organisations.

Recommendation no. 2: “continue to strengthen the teaching of and in Frisian at all levels of education”

25. The Frisian Language Attainment Targets Act was adopted and entered into force in 2014, increasing the competences of the Province of Fryslân in the field of Frisian language teaching. The number of Frisian-speaking or bilingual day-care centres and playgrounds has increased, but the offer is still insufficient in large urban settlements. At primary level the number of trilingual (Frisian-Dutch-English) schools has also increased and five secondary schools also offer a trilingual programme. Nevertheless, the share dedicated to Frisian in the trilingual system varies between schools and is rather low. Moreover, in most of the secondary schools Frisian is only taught for one hour per week and for one year only, which is insufficient compared to the requirements of the Charter and the need to ensure continuity throughout all levels of education. However, additional funds have been made available for the teaching of Frisian. Ensuring the necessary number of adequately trained teachers and pre-school staff remains an issue.

Recommendation no. 3: “upgrade the teaching of Limburgish and Low Saxon to the status of regular school subjects and extend the offer of education in these languages, including pre-school”

26. Both Limburgish and Low Saxon are included in education via school projects and activities. These depend on the initiative of the schools, support of the provinces or involvement of the speakers’ organisations and do not amount to the level of teaching Limburgish and Low Saxon as regular school subjects. These activities focus mainly on the primary level and are almost non-existent at pre-school level.

Recommendation no. 4: “explore, in co-operation with representatives of the speakers, possibilities to teach Romanes and to secure and extend the teaching of Yiddish”

27. The Dutch authorities maintain the view that they are not responsible for promoting Part II languages, such as Romanes and Yiddish. While contacts with some Roma and Sinti representatives exist, no structured dialogue is in place on how to teach Romanes. Yiddish continues to be taught at only one school. 9 ECRML(2016)4

Chapter 3 The Committee of Experts’ evaluation of Parts II and III of the Charter

3.1. The Committee of Experts’ evaluation in respect of Part II of the Charter

28. In the Netherlands, Part II of the Charter applies to Frisian, Limburgish, Low Saxon, Romanes and Yiddish.

29. The Committee of Experts will focus on the provisions of Part II which were singled out in the previous evaluation reports as raising particular problems. It will therefore not comment in the present report on provisions where the Committee of Experts was satisfied with their implementation and for which it did not receive any new information requiring their reassessment. Under Part II, this concerns Article 7.1.a, g, h and 7.2.

Article 7 - Objectives and principles

Paragraph 1

In respect of regional or minority languages, within the territories in which such languages are used and according to the situation of each language, the Parties shall base their policies, legislation and practice on the following objectives and principles:

b the respect of the geographical area of each regional or minority language in order to ensure that existing or new administrative divisions do not constitute an obstacle to the promotion of the regional or minority language in question;

30. The fifth periodical report indicates that on 1 January 2014 a new administrative organisation of municipalities in the province of Fryslân entered into force. In order to safeguard linguistic rights, an Administrative Agreement on Frisian Language Policy was concluded in November 2013 between the central authorities, the province of Fryslân and the municipalities concerned. According to the representatives of the Frisian speakers, in practice the position and protection of Frisian has weakened in the new municipalities (see also in Art. 10).

31. Possible mergers of provinces have been also discussed. However, the fifth periodical report states that, at governmental level, there are no intentions to include the Province of Fryslân in these mergers.

c the need for resolute action to promote regional or minority languages in order to safeguard them;

Frisian 32. In the fourth evaluation report, the Committee of Experts encouraged the Dutch authorities to consider the Frisian speakers’ proposals to cover, in the text of the new Use of Frisian Act, policy fields reflecting the ratification for this language (e.g. education, media, healthcare and the use of Frisian place names), in addition to its use in legal and administrative matters.

33. According to the fifth periodical report, the Use of Frisian Act entered into force on 1 January 2014. The law provides that Frisian and Dutch are official languages in the Province of Fryslân and regulates the use of Frisian in courts and in relations with the administrative authorities, building on the already existing provisions. The Act contains additional clauses on the setting up of a Frisian Language Body and shared responsibility (“the duty of care”) of the central authorities and the Province of Fryslân for the Frisian language and culture. The Act does not deal with the other fields covered by the Charter, such as education, media, healthcare and the use of Frisian place names.

34. A new Administrative Agreement (covenant) on the Frisian Language and Culture 2013-2018 (hereafter, the Administrative Agreement) was signed between the central authorities and the Province of Fryslân. The text follows the structure of the Charter and contains actions to be undertaken in the fields of education, justice, administration, etc., by the central authorities or the Province of Fryslân in order to further promote Frisian. The Committee of Experts welcomes this and is pleased that the Charter serves as a policy framework for the promotion of Frisian.

All languages 35. Provincial or local authorities and regional or minority language speakers (institutes, organisations, volunteers, etc.) play the central role in the protection and promotion of these languages in the Netherlands. In the ECRML(2016)4 10

fifth monitoring cycle, the national authorities reiterated that they do not implement a language policy for the languages protected only by Part II; such tasks are delegated to provincial or local authorities and the speakers. The Committee of Experts underlines that a national policy is needed for all languages, in particular since some domains, such as education, fall into the competence of the national authorities.

36. The Committee of Experts reiterates that the Dutch national authorities are responsible for the implementation of the Charter, even if this obligation is delegated to the provincial or local authorities and the regional of minority language speakers7. The Charter places legal obligations on its States Parties which need to be implemented in practice, taking account of the situation of each language. Implementing these legal obligations requires that States Parties take positive measures, on their own initiative, with a view to protecting and promoting the minority languages8.

The Committee of Experts encourages the Dutch authorities to establish a structured policy for the implementation of the Charter with regard to all regional or minority languages, in close co-operation with the speakers.

d the facilitation and/or encouragement of the use of regional or minority languages, in speech and writing, in public and private life;

37. The Committee of Experts points out that the term “public” should be interpreted in a broad sense to include the use of languages in the courts, administration, media and economic, social and cultural life. Education is also included in public life, but is covered by a special provision under Article 7 paragraph 1.f. It further underlines that Article 7.1.d not only implies passive permission to use regional or minority languages in public and private life, but also requires the authorities to facilitate and/or encourage the use of the languages in these specific public spheres. This would require a pro-active approach of the authorities to promote the use of these languages9.

General issues 38. In the fourth evaluation report, the Committee of Experts encouraged the Dutch authorities to take measures so that the new media legislation improves the presence of Limburgish and Low Saxon in the media.

39. The fifth periodical report does not provide specific information in this respect. However, it describes changes taking place in the media sector. These consist of cuts to the budget for regional broadcasting by € 17 million as of 1 January 2017 and amendments to the Media Act. Pursuant to these amendments, a new Regional Public Broadcaster is to be set up, which will be responsible for national policy and administrative matters (such as staff, technology, funding), while regional editorial teams will be in charge of the regional content and media diversity. The amendment concerning the new regional broadcasting structure was adopted in March 2016 (after the on-the-spot visit of the Committee of Experts) by the Dutch Parliament, while the legislative proposal regulating the role of the regional editorial teams is still to be presented to the Parliament. All representatives of the regional or minority languages speakers whom the Committee of Experts met during the on-the-spot visit expressed their concern about the new financial and legal framework and their effect on the capacity of regional broadcasters to produce and broadcast programmes in the regional or minority languages.

40. The Committee of Experts underlines that broadcast media, especially television, have a great importance for the promotion of regional or minority languages and for their social prestige. Moreover, as already noted above, promoting minority languages in the media requires positive action of the authorities. As far as financial cuts are concerned, these are not to affect regional or minority languages disproportionately.

The Committee of Experts urges the Dutch authorities to ensure that legal and financial changes in the media sector do not negatively affect regional or minority language broadcasting and to take positive measures to support such broadcasting.

7 See also 4th report of the Committee of Experts on the Netherlands, paragraph 21, 3rd report of the Committee of Experts on the Netherlands, paragraphs 29 and 31 8 See 1st report of the Committee of Experts on Bosnia and Herzegovina ECRML, (2013) 5, paragraph 26 9 See 2st report of the Committee of Experts on the Czech Republic, ECRML, (2013) 2, paragraph 65, 1st report of the Committee of Experts on Denmark, ERCML (2004)2, paragraph 36 11 ECRML(2016)4

Limburgish 41. In the fourth evaluation report, the Committee of Experts encouraged the Dutch authorities to continue developing the provision of broadcasts in Limburgish, if necessary through financial incentives. It also encouraged the authorities, bearing in mind the high number of speakers, to promote Limburgish in the economic field (private companies) and in social life (e.g. health and elderly care).

42. The fifth periodical report does not provide any information in this respect. According to the information received during the on-the-spot visit, Limburgish is used in the programmes of the regional public radio and TV broadcaster L1, in music, sport, and cultural programmes or spontaneously during interviews; news programmes are, however, in Dutch. The financial cuts concerning regional broadcasters have negatively affected L1, while the amendments to the Media Act are another reason for concern about the presence of the language in the media. Limburgish is also present in the programmes of the private channel TV Limburg as well as of local radio and TV stations.

43. As far as written media is concerned, the newspapers Dagblad De Limburger and Limburgs Dagblad continue to publish weekly articles in Limburgish. The language is very much employed in the cultural field, such as literature, poetry or the traditional carnival. The organisation Veldeke Limburg promotes Limburgish in public, by displaying texts in the language in the public space. The language is also present on the internet and on social media and is increasingly used by young people. The Province of Limburg continues to support Limburgish and this objective is part of the 2015-2017 Culture Implementation Programme. Limburgish is also part of the intangible heritage and of the related policy that the province plans to pursue in 2016-2017.

44. As far as the economic field is concerned, the use of Limburgish is limited to the companies promoting regional products. In health and social care, there is no policy promoting the use of Limburgish, but the language is sometimes used by doctors or other staff.

45. During the on-the-spot visit, the Committee of Experts was also informed that three additional municipalities - Vaals/Vols, Voerendaal/Voelender and Schinnen/Sjènne - have bilingual place name signs. In the administrative field, Limburgish is used mainly in informal and oral contexts. Dutch is the language of written documents, but applications in Limburgish are accepted, including at provincial level.

46. The Committee of Experts urges the Dutch authorities to adopt a structured approach and encourage the use of Limburgish in public life, especially in the media, economic field and in social life (e.g. health and elderly care).

Low Saxon 47. In the fourth evaluation report, the Committee of Experts asked the Dutch authorities to provide general information about the possibility to use Low Saxon10 before judicial authorities.

48. The fifth periodical report does not provide information in this respect. During the on-the-spot visit, the Committee of Experts was informed that Low Saxon is occasionally used in the court in Groningen.

49. The Committee of Experts was also informed during the on-the-spot visit that Low Saxon is used to some extent by and in relations with the administrative authorities in the municipalities of Ooststellingwerf and Weststellingwerf, mainly orally, but sometimes also in written applications. The Province of Drenthe accepts written applications in Low Saxon, but the replies are drafted in Dutch, which is the only language used in formal contexts. Individuals may also address the Province of Groningen in Low Saxon and the reply depends on the language skills of the civil servant involved, but they are usually in Dutch. At local level the use of Low Saxon is more common and in the Province of Overijssel some local council meetings are held in Low Saxon. There are no bilingual place name signs in Low Saxon, nor is there a policy to promote the use of the language in this domain.

50. As far as media is concerned, RTV Noord (Province of Groningen) broadcasts about 15 hours/week in Low Saxon on the radio, while RTV Drenthe’s Low Saxon radio programmes amount to 20 hours/week. Sixteen local radio stations in the Province of Groningen broadcast programmes in Low Saxon. On television there is a ten

10 Low Saxon is used, in different varieties, in the Provinces of Drenthe, Groningen, Overijssel, Gelderland (regions of Achterhoek and Veluwe) and in the municipalities of Oostellingwerf and Weststellingwerf in the Province of Fryslân (see 3rd report of the Committee of Experts on the Netherlands, paragraph 15). ECRML(2016)4 12

minute daily broadcast on TV Noord. In the Province of Drenthe the regular two-minute daily Low Saxon programme Jasbuus vol Drents was discontinued and has not yet been replaced; Low Saxon is used in occasional programmes, such as the language quiz LOOS (20 broadcasts) or Drents Liedties Festival; and for one day each year all television programmes are in Low Saxon. There are no broadcasts in Low Saxon in the Province of Overijssel, except some advertising on the radio. Local radio stations in Ooststellingwerf and Weststellingwerf broadcast in Low Saxon two hours per week. As far as written media is concerned, there is one weekly column in Low Saxon in the Groningen and Drenthe regional newspapers and weekly news articles in the local newspapers in Ooststellingwerf and Weststellingwerf. Leeuwarder Courant publishes a column every two weeks. Low Saxon is increasingly used on the internet and social media, especially among young people.

51. In the economic field, companies use Low Saxon mainly for advertising. As far as health and social care are concerned, activities such as readings or music evenings in Low Saxon are organised in homes for the elderly. In addition, there is an ongoing project promoting the use of Low Saxon in hospitals in the Provinces of Drenthe and Groningen. In the Province of Overijssel, Low Saxon courses are offered as part of the vocational training. However, the Committee of Experts was also informed that staff of health and social care facilities is often instructed by managers not to use Low Saxon.

52. Low Saxon is used to a large extent in cultural life. In the Province of Drenthe, Huus van de Taol publishes three magazines (two completely in Low Saxon) as well as eight books annually. Since 2012, it has also been organising the Drents Liedties Festival and supported the writing of songs for children. Stellingwarver Schrieversronte also publishes a bimonthly magazine.

53. The Provinces of Groningen and Overijssel intend to maintain support to Low Saxon as priority in the culture and budget plans for 2017-2020; the situation seems to be similar in the Province of Drenthe. The Committee of Experts has received very little information about the situation of Low Saxon in the Province of Gelderland (see below), but expects that support to Low Saxon will be maintained.

54. The Committee of Experts encourages the Dutch authorities to adopt a structured approach and promote the use of Low Saxon in public life, especially in the media, economic field and in social life (e.g. health and elderly care).

Romanes 55. In the fourth evaluation report, the Committee of Experts urged the Dutch authorities to consult with the speakers in order to establish how the use of Romanes could be facilitated and/or encouraged, in speech and writing, in public and private life.

56. According to the information from the fifth periodical report and received during the on-the-spot visit, it does not appear that such consultations have taken place. The Dutch authorities indicated during the on-the-spot visit that there are two different views among the Roma and Sinti, one rejecting the use of the language outside the community, while the other agrees to it. The meeting of the Committee of Experts with representatives of the Roma and Sinti also confirmed that a part of the community does not want to have the language used in public. However, there is an interest in promoting knowledge about the Roma and Sinti history and culture.

57. Nevertheless, the Committee of Experts also received information about Radio Patrin broadcasting programmes in Romanes, about the launching of a CD with song texts in Romanes and of a biography (Zoni. De vergeten Holocaust), which also contains poems and song texts in Romanes. The Committee of Experts was also informed about the possibility to receive funding for projects, covering inter alia education, culture and identity in the framework of the Post-War Compensation Fund.

58. The Committee of Experts underlines that the Charter requires the authorities to take positive measures to promote and protect Romanes. It also notes that the Charter must be implemented bearing in mind the wishes of the speakers. It therefore urges the authorities to consult the Romanes speakers and to identify, in co-operation with them, ways and areas in which the use of Romanes could be facilitated and/or encouraged, taking into consideration the different views within the community.

13 ECRML(2016)4

Yiddish 59. In the fourth evaluation report, the Committee of Experts urged the Dutch authorities to consult with the speakers in order to establish how the use of Yiddish could be facilitated and/or encouraged, in speech and writing, in public and private life, and whether structured financial support could be provided to the cultural journal “Grine Medine”.

60. The fifth periodical report does not provide any information in this respect. The Dutch authorities informed the Committee of Experts that, as a Part II language, they do not promote Yiddish. No financial support is granted to the cultural journal “Grine Medine”. Furthermore, the authorities seem to consider that languages like Yiddish have their place in private life only.

61. The Committee of Experts considers these views as incompatible with the Charter and regrets that the Dutch authorities maintain this position in the fifth monitoring cycle. The Committee of Experts refers to its previous comments under Articles 7.1.c and 7.1.d and underlines that the Charter requires that the authorities promote the regional or minority languages in public life. Since Yiddish is a non-territorial language, the role of the national authorities is all the more important.

62. The Committee of Experts strongly urges the Dutch authorities to consult with the speakers and facilitate the use of Yiddish, in speech and writing, in public and private life.

e the maintenance and development of links, in the fields covered by this Charter, between groups using a regional or minority language and other groups in the State employing a language used in identical or similar form, as well as the establishment of cultural relations with other groups in the State using different languages;

63. In the fourth evaluation report, the Committee of Experts urged the Dutch authorities to develop links between speakers of the regional or minority languages.

64. The fifth periodical report does not provide information in this respect. The Dutch authorities reiterated that regional or minority language speakers are responsible for establishing the relevant links themselves.

65. The Committee of Experts reiterates that Article 7.1.e puts an obligation on the Dutch authorities which cannot simply be delegated to the regional or minority language speakers. It therefore again urges the Dutch authorities to develop links between speakers of the regional or minority languages.

Romanes 66. In the fourth evaluation report, the Committee of Experts encouraged the Dutch authorities to continue their initiatives facilitating links between all the organisations representing the Roma and Sinti, with particular emphasis on the protection and promotion of Romanes.

67. The fifth periodical report does not provide information in this respect. The Committee of Experts was informed that the authorities are in contact with a few Roma and Sinti representatives, but it does not appear that any initiatives facilitating links between all the organisations representing the Roma and Sinti, with particular emphasis on the protection and promotion of Romanes, are in place.

68. The Committee of Experts urges the Dutch authorities to facilitate links between all the organisations representing the Roma and Sinti, with particular emphasis on the protection and promotion of Romanes.

f the provision of appropriate forms and means for the teaching and study of regional or minority languages at all appropriate stages;

Limburgish 69. In the fourth monitoring cycle, the Committee of Ministers recommended the Dutch authorities to “upgrade the teaching of Limburgish […] to the status of regular school subjects and extend the offer of education in [this language], including in pre-schools”. A similar recommendation was made by the Committee of Experts. Furthermore, the Committee of Experts also urged the Dutch authorities to continue extending the offer ECRML(2016)4 14

of teaching Limburgish11 at primary and secondary level, in particular regarding the varieties Northern Limburgish, in the municipalities of Horst and Venray, and Ripuarian, in the municipalities of Simpelveld and Vaals. It also asked the authorities to provide information on whether Limburgish is used in technical and vocational education.

70. The fifth periodical report does not provide any information in this respect. During the on-the-spot visit, the Committee of Experts was informed that the situation of Limburgish in education has largely remained the same as in the previous monitoring cycle. Eighty primary schools (20% of the primary schools in the province), twelve secondary schools (17% of the secondary schools in the province), and one technical/vocational school integrate Limburgish in their activities, through projects. The use of Limburgish is estimated to be 45 minutes per week over a period of two months.

71. The representatives of the speakers have voiced particular concern about pre-school education, where only Dutch is used. While the declared aim is to ensure that children are adequately prepared to join the primary school, the result is that Limburgish-speaking children lose the ability to speak their mother tongue within a few months. Furthermore, pre-school staff and teachers at all levels do not seem to be aware of the advantages of bi/multilingualism. Currently, an initiative at Maastricht University proposes to include a module on Limburgish in teacher training, thus allowing future teachers to be better informed about bi/multilingualism.

72. The issue of pre-school education was regularly raised by regional or minority language speakers during the on-the-spot visit in the Netherlands. The Committee of Experts considers that awareness-raising about the values of bilingualism is needed during training for pre-school staff and teachers and that bilingual education models should be integrated into pre-school education, so as to ensure that, while learning the official language, children maintain and develop their mother tongue.

73. The Committee of Experts notes that Limburgish is not yet taught as a school subject in its own right. Teaching Limburgish depends on schools’ initiatives and is very limited in primary and secondary education and practically non-existent in pre-schools. There is no scheme for teacher training either. Considering the high number of Limburgish speakers, the Committee of Experts considers that a more structured approach is needed and that teaching of Limburgish should be offered as a regular school subject.12

74. The Committee of Experts urges the Dutch authorities to extend the offer of teaching Limburgish in primary and secondary education, in particular regarding the varieties Northern Limburgish, in the municipalities of Horst and Venray, and Ripuarian, in the municipalities of Simpelveld and Vaals.

The Committee of Experts urges the Dutch authorities to upgrade the teaching of Limburgish to the status of a regular school subject and intensify it, including in pre-school education.

Low Saxon 75. In the fourth monitoring cycle, the Committee of Ministers recommended the Dutch authorities to “upgrade the teaching of […] Low Saxon to the status of regular school subjects and extend the offer of education in [this language], including in pre-schools”. A similar recommendation was made by the Committee of Experts.

76. The fifth periodical report does not provide information in this respect. According to the information received during the on-the-spot visit, Low Saxon continues to be used in activities or projects financed by the provinces, to a varying degree depending on the region. A four years project - Drents en Duits in het onderwijs - has been initiated and financed by the Province of Drenthe, in co-operation with Stenden University, promoting Low Saxon and German in education. In this framework, students enrolled in teacher training receive additional training in German, Low Saxon and multilingualism; in addition, in six primary schools, Low Saxon is used every week; funds have also been provided for the creation of a website (www.wiesneus.nl) where poems, songs, stories, games and films for children, as well as materials for teachers, parents, policy makers, are made available. In addition, in 154 other primary schools (65% of the schools in the Province of Drenthe), reading is organised for children by Huus van de

11 The Dutch authorities have specified that, for the purpose of teaching and textbook development, the six local varieties of Limburgish are grouped into three main varieties: Northern Limburgish is used in education in the Bergen, Gennep, Horst, Mook en Middelaar, Venlo and Venray municipalities, Ripuarian (West Central Germanic) in Kerkrade/Kirchroa, Simpelveld and Vaals, and Central and Southern Limburgish in the remaining parts of the province, see Province of Limburg: Limburgse dialecten, Maastricht 2016, p. 2; 4th evaluation report of the Committee of Experts, paragraph 8. 12 See 4th report of the Committee of Experts on the Netherlands ECRML (2012) 6, paragraph 59 15 ECRML(2016)4

Taol and its volunteers, who are sometimes local or provincial officials. In 20 schools music lessons take place in Low Saxon. However, at secondary level, Low Saxon is present to a very limited extent. As far as pre-school staff training is concerned, Huus van de Taol organises workshops dedicated to Low Saxon.

77. In the Province of Overijssel, teaching materials for Low Saxon at pre-school level, as well as lesson series for primary education, are available and used to some extent. An educational project of the IJsselacademie and Deltion College promotes Low Saxon in vocational training for the future health care staff, but lessons are not regular.

78. In the municipalities of Ooststellingwerf and Weststellingwerf, Stellingwarver Schrieversronte implements a reading project for pre-school children annually. Low Saxon is included in teaching regional culture and teaching materials are available. However, after primary school, Low Saxon is used to a very limited extent.

79. In the Province of Groningen, a number of schools integrate Low Saxon into their activities through projects and educational kits made available by the Huis van de Groninger Cultuur. Teaching materials are also made available on the internet (www.klunderloa.nl). While there seems to be an interest from schools and parents in including Low Saxon in education, the Committee of Experts was informed that the presence of the language is still limited, inter alia because the new generations of teachers have very little knowledge of Low Saxon, if at all, and the topic is not a priority according to the curriculum.

80. The Committee of Experts notes that, despite positive initiatives at local and provincial level, a more structured approach with respect to Low Saxon in education is needed.

The Committee of Experts encourages the Dutch authorities to upgrade the teaching of Low Saxon to the status of a regular school subject and intensify it, in particular in pre-school education and secondary education.

Romanes 81. In the fourth monitoring cycle, the Committee of Ministers recommended the Dutch authorities to “explore, in co-operation with representatives of the speakers, possibilities to teach Romanes […]”. A similar recommendation was made by the Committee of Experts.

82. The fifth periodical report reiterated that consultations within the National Information and Support Centre for Specific Target Groups did not reveal a need for Romanes education. It is not clear to the Committee of Experts whether this structure can be considered as representing the Romanes speakers.

83. The Committee of Experts is aware that there are different views about the use of Romanes among the speakers. Representatives whom the Committee of Experts met during the on-the-spot visit were against teaching the language in school and writing it. However, they were aware that, in the long term, Romanes needs protection and promotion and were of the view that this should be done in a way that respects the community’s traditions and views.

84. The Committee of Experts encourages the Dutch authorities to explore, in co-operation with the speakers, ways of teaching Romanes to those interested, taking into consideration the views of the community.

Yiddish 85. In the fourth monitoring cycle, the Committee of Ministers recommended the Dutch authorities to “explore, in co-operation with representatives of the speakers, possibilities to […] secure and extend the teaching of Yiddish”. Furthermore, the Committee of Experts urged the Dutch authorities to ensure, in co-operation with the Cheider school in Amsterdam, the continued teaching of Yiddish and to provide the necessary financial support.

86. The fifth periodical report does not provide any information in this respect. During the on-the-spot visit, the authorities informed the Committee of Experts that Cheider School is the only school in the Netherlands teaching Yiddish. In primary school, Yiddish can be taught outside regular school hours, while in secondary school it can be an optional subject. The school receives increased financing per pupil. However, it remains unclear what the teaching time dedicated in practice to Yiddish is and how teacher training and the development of teaching materials are supported by the Dutch authorities. ECRML(2016)4 16

87. The Committee of Experts encourages the Dutch authorities to ensure the continued teaching of Yiddish, in co-operation with the speakers and to provide it with the necessary financial support.

h the promotion of study and research on regional or minority languages at universities or equivalent institutions

Limburgish 88. In 2015, the Province of Limburg withdrew its support to the Chair of Language Culture in Limburg at Maastricht University. It continues to exist with support from the university.

Low Saxon 89. During the on-the-spot visit the Committee of Experts was informed that in, 2014, the Province of Gelderland reduced the subsidies to the Erfgoedcentrum Achterhoek en Liemers (Achterhoek and Liemers Heritage Centre), which had to reduce its staff and activities. Among others, the centre is no longer in a position to finance the editor of the dictionary of Low Saxon in Achterhoek and Liemers. Project-based financing continues to be available, but, according to the representatives of this institute, this does not allow for an adequate and structured implementation of the activities.

90. Similar concerns were expressed by the representatives of Ijsselacademy and Twentsewelle, who fear that their activities will be in danger in the coming years. In 2012, the Province of Overissjel discontinued the funding of the dictionary of Low Saxon; in 2014, IJsselacademie and Twentsewelle resumed work on it, in the framework of projects. The Committee of Experts was informed by representatives of the province that in 2017-2020 Low Saxon will be a priority and project-based funding will be available.

91. The Chair of Low Saxon at the University of Groningen increased its co-operation with Huis van de Groninger Cultuur and the Department for Frisian Language and Culture. In this framework, the setting up of a Low Saxon specialisation, similar to the Frisian one, within the new BA Minorities and Multilingualism, is under consideration. With the retirement of the incumbent professor, there are, however, concerns about the continuation of the Chair.

92. The Committee of Experts encourages the Dutch authorities to ensure a stable financial framework for the promotion of study and research on regional or minority languages at universities or equivalent institutions.

i the promotion of appropriate types of transnational exchanges, in the fields covered by this Charter, for regional or minority languages used in identical or similar form in two or more States.

Limburgish 93. The border municipalities of Landgraaf (Netherlands) and Übach-Palenberg (Germany) have a joint municipal magazine (genial-nah) which also contains articles in Ripuarian. The regional public broadcaster, L1, co-operates across the border with broadcasters in Aachen (Germany).

Low Saxon 94. A cross-border Dutch-German cultural project, with a language component, is under preparation in the Province of Overijssel.

Romanes and Yiddish 95. In the fourth evaluation report, the Committee of Experts urged the Dutch authorities to promote appropriate types of transnational exchanges, in the fields covered by the Charter, for Romanes and Yiddish.

96. The fifth periodical report does not provide any information in this respect. The Dutch authorities are of the view that it is up to the respective communities to engage in international exchanges.

97. The Committee of Experts encourage the Dutch authorities to promote appropriate types of transnational exchanges, in the fields covered by the Charter, for Romanes and Yiddish

17 ECRML(2016)4

Paragraph 3

The Parties undertake to promote, by appropriate measures, mutual understanding between all the linguistic groups of the country and in particular the inclusion of respect, understanding and tolerance in relation to regional or minority languages among the objectives of education and training provided within their countries and encouragement of the mass media to pursue the same objective.

98. In the fourth evaluation report, the Committee of Experts asked the Dutch authorities to provide information on the implementation of this provision. It also encouraged the Dutch authorities to use the opportunity of revising the media act in order to include in this law an objective for the media to pursue respect, understanding and tolerance in relation to regional or minority languages in the Netherlands.

99. The fifth periodical report does not provide information in this respect. The Dutch authorities have subsequently informed the Committee of Experts that the Media Act will not cover such issues. As far as education is concerned, schools are obliged to promote active citizenship and social integration. A reform of the curriculum has recently started and clearer objectives for citizenship education will be established. Citizenship, which includes respect, understanding and tolerance for people with different backgrounds and their languages, will be given a more prominent place in the curriculum.

100. The Committee of Experts noted that there is little knowledge in the Netherlands about regional or minority languages and their contribution to the cultural wealth of the country.

101. The Committee of Experts was informed by the representatives of the Roma and Sinti of prejudiced and stereotyped views concerning them in the Dutch society. The results of the 2015 Monitor of Social Inclusion of Roma in the Netherlands13 also show that there are stereotypes about Roma and that they are negatively portrayed by the media.

102. The Committee of Experts encourages the Dutch authorities to ensure that respect, understanding and tolerance in relation to regional or minority languages are specifically included in the new curriculum and to promote awareness and tolerance in Dutch society at large vis-à-vis the regional or minority languages and the cultures they represent, including through the media.

Paragraph 4

In determining their policy with regard to regional or minority languages, the Parties shall take into consideration the needs and wishes expressed by the groups which use such languages. They are encouraged to establish bodies, if necessary, for the purpose of advising the authorities on all matters pertaining to regional or minority languages.

General issues 103. In the fourth monitoring cycle, the Committee of Ministers recommended the Dutch authorities to “establish a structured dialogue with representatives of the regional or minority language speakers about the implementation of the Charter and the recommendations evolving from its monitoring mechanism”. A similar recommendation was made by the Committee of Experts.

104. The fifth periodical report does not provide information in this respect. During the on-the spot visit, the Committee of Experts noted the overall good co-operation and dialogue between the provincial authorities and the regional or minority languages speakers’ organisations. However, at national level a structured dialogue is missing. No structured dialogue with representatives of the regional or minority language speakers about the implementation of the Charter and the recommendations evolving from its monitoring mechanism appears to be in place. Furthermore, no comprehensive consultations have taken place in the framework of the drafting of the periodical report. The Committee of Experts underlines that a dialogue between the authorities and the associations representing the regional or minority language speakers about the application of the Charter is indispensable for a state in determining its policy with regard to regional or minority languages14.

13 This analysis is based on responses from 67 experts who took part in an online survey and 31 interviews with professionals and Roma and Sinti. 14 See also 4th report on the Netherlands ECRML (2012) 6, paragraph 92 ECRML(2016)4 18

The Committee of Experts urges the Dutch authorities to initiate a structured dialogue with the representatives of the regional or minority language speakers about the implementation of the Charter and the recommendations evolving from its monitoring mechanism.

Frisian 105. In compliance with the new Use of Frisian Act, a new Frisian Language Body (DINGtiid) was set up on 1 January 2014, replacing the Advisory Body for Matters pertaining to Frisian Language Policy. It is composed of five people and acts as an advisory body both to the national authorities and to the province. The representatives of the DINGtiid whom the Committee of Experts met during the on-the-spot visit underlined, however, that they do not have sufficient competences and were not involved in the preparation of the periodical report.

Low Saxon 106. In the fourth evaluation report, the Committee of Experts encouraged the Dutch authorities to take into consideration the needs and wishes expressed by the Low Saxon speakers in the work of the Low Saxon Consultative Body.

107. According to the fifth periodical report and the information received during the on-the-spot visit, the Low Saxon Consultative Body has had a modest role until now. Other organisations, such as SONT (umbrella NGO), are dialogue and consultation partners for the authorities.

Romanes 108. In the fourth evaluation report, the Committee of Experts urged the Dutch authorities to ensure that a structured dialogue is developed with the representatives of the Romanes speakers.

109. According to the fifth periodical report, the Dutch national authorities are in contact with Roma and Sinti representatives, but no structured dialogue or policy for the promotion of Romanes is in place. The tasks and competencies pertaining to Roma and Sinti have been transferred to the local authorities. Therefore, the National Platform for Roma Municipalities is considered an important partner by the national authorities and has received financial support (€60 000 in 2013) for activities such as exchanges of best practices on integration. The Committee of Experts underlines that, as a non-territorial language, the role of the national authorities in promoting Romanes is all the more important.

110. The representatives of the Roma and Sinti whom the Committee of Experts met during the on-the-spot visit indicated that the relations with the authorities are practically non-existent. They indicated that the authorities do not involve the Roma and Sinti in the activities or decisions concerning the Charter. The 2015 Monitor of Social Inclusion of Roma in the Netherlands shows that the contacts with the authorities do not always run smoothly and that Roma and Sinti feel that they are not being heard.

111. The Committee of Experts urges the Dutch authorities to ensure that a structured dialogue is developed with the representatives of the Romanes speakers.

Paragraph 5

The Parties undertake to apply, mutatis mutandis, the principles listed in paragraphs 1 to 4 above to non-territorial languages. However, as far as these languages are concerned, the nature and scope of the measures to be taken to give effect to this Charter shall be determined in a flexible manner, bearing in mind the needs and wishes, and respecting the traditions and characteristics, of the groups which use the languages concerned.

112. In its assessment of the situation of Yiddish and Romanes vis-à-vis Article 7 paragraphs 1-4 of the Charter, the Committee of Experts has kept in mind that those principles should be applied mutatis mutandis.

19 ECRML(2016)4

3.2. The Committee of Experts’ evaluation of the application of Part III of the Charter: Frisian

113. The Committee of Experts will not comment on provisions which were regarded as fulfilled in the previous reports and for which it has not received any new information which would have required a reassessment of its previous findings. It reserves, however, the right to evaluate the situation again at a later stage. These provisions are listed below:

Article 8.1.f i, i; 8.2; Article 9.1.a iii, b iii, c iii; 9.2.b; Article 10.1.a v; 10.2.a, b, c, d, e, f, g; 10.4.a; 10.5; Article 11.1 f ii; 11.2; Article 12.1 a, b, d, e, f, g, h; 12.2; Article 13.1.a, c, d; Article 14.a

Article 8 - Education

Preliminary remarks 114. In the fourth monitoring cycle, the Committee of Ministers recommended the Dutch authorities to “continue to strengthen the teaching of and in Frisian at all levels of education”. A similar recommendation was made by the Committee of Experts.

115. The Frisian Language Attainment Targets Act entered into force on 1 August 2014, decentralising the competencies and entrusting the Province of Fryslân with setting the attainment targets (core objectives) for the teaching of Frisian. Nevertheless, representatives of primary education should be consulted and the minister of education must approve these objectives.

116. Before the entry into force of this act, only full exemptions from the legal obligation to teach Frisian in primary and secondary schools could be granted, but now the Province is also allowed to grant partial exemptions. As a result, different profiles have been developed for the schools in Fryslân. The process of implementing these provisions has only begun. It is expected that the first exemptions will come into force in the 2017-2018 school year.

117. The Committee of Experts notes, however, that most profiles are focused on oral use and developing a positive attitude towards Frisian. This might not be in line with the undertakings chosen under Part III of the Charter.

Paragraph 1

With regard to education, the Parties undertake, within the territory in which such languages are used, according to the situation of each of these languages, and without prejudice to the teaching of the official language(s) of the State:

Pre-school education

a ii to make available a substantial part of pre-school education in the relevant regional or minority languages; 118. In the fourth evaluation report, the Committee of Experts was not in a position to conclude on the fulfilment of this undertaking. It asked the Dutch authorities to provide information on the proportion of Frisian- language education in the bilingual model and on the degree to which the offer of Frisian-speaking and bilingual playgroups really meet the demand of parents.

119. According to the fifth periodical report and the additional information received by the Committee of Experts, there are about 180 Frisian-medium or bilingual day-care centres or playgroups in Fryslân (out of a total of 375 such institutions in the province). Between 30-35% of the children below four years old attend them. In order to qualify as bilingual, Frisian has to be used for at least 50% of the time; usually the time allotted to Frisian is between 60-80%.

ECRML(2016)4 20

120. However, the Committee of Experts was also informed that the bilingual offer does not meet the demand, in particular in large towns, and this has a negative impact on language transmission15.

121. In view of the existing offer, the Committee of Experts considers the undertaking partly fulfilled. It encourages the Dutch authorities to develop a structured policy for day-care centres or playgroups offering bilingual pre-school education, as well as to increase the number of them.

Primary education

b ii to make available a substantial part of primary education in the relevant regional or minority languages;

122. In the fourth evaluation report, the Committee of Experts was not in a position to conclude on the fulfilment of this undertaking. It asked the Dutch authorities to submit more detailed information about the concrete set-up of the trilingual educational model in primary education and also information on the strategy to meet the demand for Frisian language education in the future.

123. Out of the 428 primary schools in Fryslân, 73 are included in the network of trilingual schools (Dutch, Frisian and English as languages of instruction), which represents an increase of 30 schools compared to the previous monitoring cycle. However, only 30 of these trilingual schools are certified (as 3TS basic, 3TS plus and 3TS star) as offering Frisian as a subject and as a medium of instruction; over 30 schools are in the process of certification. The degree to which Frisian is used as a language of instruction varies among schools. Teaching Frisian as a subject should take place for at least one hour per week. Between 1 ¼ hours and 3 ½ hours are used as a medium of instruction (CLIL). The subjects taught in Frisian are usually music, world orientation, gymnastics and creative subjects. In general, Frisian is used between 10-25% of the time.

124. The Committee of Experts has been informed that the trilingual system is undergoing changes, with the introduction of English from the 1st grade onwards and of a more integrated use of languages (so-called “translanguaging”), instead of a strict division of time and themes. Furthermore, trilingual schools, of which many are small institutions in rural areas, might be at risk in the future, since a recommendation of the National Council of Education proposes to raise the minimum number of pupils in a primary school from 23 to 100 as of 2019. The Committee of Experts recalls that in many cases where general measures are taken, regional or minority languages are particularly at risk. Special measures should be adopted to ensure that these languages are not disproportionately affected16.

125. As far as the other schools are concerned, the fifth periodical report indicates that, as a result of the Administrative Agreement, the budget for the Material Preservation of Frisian (funds for teaching Frisian) has increased by € 90 000, to allow for the teaching of Frisian also in the first two years of primary education. The Committee of Experts welcomes this development.

126. According to additional information received by the Committee of Experts, apart from trilingual education, primary schools generally offer teaching of Frisian. The teaching time is, however, limited to only one lesson of 30-40 minutes per week or is used for simple tasks or activities (understanding the language, using school television programmes and reading materials).

127. The Committee of Experts considers that the current offer of teaching Frisian for one lesson per week or using it as a medium of instruction for only a few hours per week in some schools is too low to meet the requirements of the undertaking. In addition, this is too restricted to develop a sufficient level of literacy in Frisian.

128. The Committee of Experts considers the undertaking not fulfilled. It encourages the authorities to strengthen the use of Frisian as a medium of instruction in primary education.

15 Studies carried out by Sintrum Frysktalige Berne-opfang (SFBO) showed that the more Frisian is used at pre-school, the more chance the child using this language to communicate with the parents increases. 40% of Frisian-speaking parents in large towns, where bilingual education is insufficient, fail in transmitting Frisian to the children; although they use Frisian at home, the children tend to use only Dutch once in pre-school. 16 See 4th report of the Committee of Experts on Slovakia ECRML (2016) 2, paragraph 62 21 ECRML(2016)4

Secondary education

c iii to provide, within secondary education, for the teaching of the relevant regional or minority languages as an integral part of the curriculum;

129. In the fourth evaluation report, the Committee of Experts considered this undertaking partly fulfilled. It strongly urged the Dutch authorities to improve the situation of the teaching of Frisian in secondary education.

130. According to the fifth periodical report, five secondary schools offer trilingual education. The authorities plan to increase their number to at least ten by 2018. The Committee of Experts has, however, been informed that the share of subjects taught in Frisian is very low (for example, in one case, only history and physical education). The aim to use the three languages according to a share of 30%-30%-40% of the time has not yet been reached. In general, Frisian is used for about 16% of the time (taught as a subject and used as a medium of instruction).

131. As far as is the other schools are concerned, at secondary level teaching Frisian is compulsory only during the first year, for one hour per week. Most of the 87 secondary schools in the Province of Fryslân teach it only in this format, while only 15 schools teach it after the first year. Efforts are being made to encourage schools to extend the teaching of Frisian. Since the 2013-2014 school year, the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science makes available € 65 000 annually for teaching Frisian also at secondary schools. Frisian is an optional exam subject and approximately 50 pupils choose it every year.

132. The Committee of Experts notes that the offer of Frisian in secondary education of one hour per week for one year is too low to meet the requirements of the undertaking and to ensure adequate knowledge of Frisian to a sufficient number of pupils. Secondary level lays the foundation for future studies, including teacher training and if pupils do not acquire adequate skills in Frisian at the end of secondary education, the chances of them enrolling in or graduating with Frisian at university or teacher training diminish. The Committee of Experts welcomes the use of Frisian as a medium of instruction in some secondary schools, but this offer is at present too limited, both as far as the number of schools and the share of Frisian are concerned.

133. Based on the available information, it is not clear to the Committee of Experts how many pupils study Frisian as a subject throughout secondary education. The Committee of Experts cannot conclude on the fulfilment of the undertaking and asks the authorities to provide additional information in the next periodical report.

The Committee of Experts again strongly urges the Dutch authorities to continue strengthening the teaching of and in Frisian at all levels of education.

University and higher education

e ii to provide facilities for the study of these languages as university and higher education subjects.

134. In the fourth evaluation report, the Committee of Experts considered this undertaking fulfilled at present. It nevertheless urged the Dutch authorities to strengthen the position of Frisian in university and higher education, and asked them to comment on the issue of students having to pay the usual fees twice in order to follow two studies, as a result of the new Law on Education.

135. According to the fifth periodical report and the information received during the on-the-spot visit, the University of Groningen offers a new bachelor programme in Minorities and multilingualism, replacing the Frisian Language and Culture bachelor programme. The new bachelor programme includes a specialisation in Frisian (60 ECTS), covering language, history and culture. The bachelor programme is financed by the Ministry of Education and the Province of Fryslân. Twenty-eight students are enrolled, while one student specialises in Frisian language and culture at master’s level. In relation to the new bachelor programme, a master’s programme in multilingualism has been set up by the University of Groningen at the University Campus Fryslân in Leeuwarden (21 students have completed the programme and 45 are currently enrolled). The University of Groningen also offers a master’s in Frisian Linguistics or Literature and has also six PhD students in these fields.

ECRML(2016)4 22

136. As far as the fees are concerned, the Dutch authorities informed the Committee of Experts that financing higher education institutions is based on one bachelor and one master programme for each student. Students following a second set of studies have to pay the tuition fee established by each institution.

137. The Committee of Experts considers this undertaking fulfilled.

Teaching of history and culture

g to make arrangements to ensure the teaching of the history and the culture which is reflected by the regional or minority language;

138. In the fourth evaluation report, the Committee of Experts considered this undertaking not fulfilled. It urged the Dutch authorities to continue their efforts to ensure the teaching of the history and the culture which is reflected by Frisian and to provide the relevant information.

139. The fifth periodical report does not provide any information in this respect. According to the information received during the on-the-spot visit, teaching Frisian history and culture is not part of the national curriculum. Some schools, however, offer such information. They use the Frisian history “Canon” (Kanon fan de Fryske skiednis), which presents major topics of Frisian history and is developed following the model of the Canon van Nederland. Generally, only some topics are presented to the pupils. There are no exact data on how many schools use the Frisian history “Canon”. The information available to the Committee of Experts is based on the use of the Edufrysk platform (digital education platform for pupils studying Frisian, developed by the Afûk organisation), as schools using it also use the Frisian history “Canon”. It is the case of 20 secondary schools. In primary education a pilot project is ongoing and the aim is to have 30 primary schools using Edufrysk and the related “Canon” parts in September 2016.

140. The Committee of Experts welcomes the fact that at least some information about the Frisian history and culture is offered in some schools. However, bearing in mind that the undertaking requires states to ensure the teaching of the history and the culture reflected by Frisian to all pupils living in the relevant territory, the Committee of Experts considers the undertaking not fulfilled.

141. The Committee of Experts strongly urges the Dutch authorities to ensure the teaching of the history and the culture which is reflected by Frisian.

Teacher training

h to provide the basic and further training of the teachers required to implement those of paragraphs a to g accepted by the Party;

142. In the fourth evaluation report, the Committee of Experts considered this undertaking partly fulfilled with regard to primary and secondary education and not fulfilled for pre-school education. It strongly urged the Dutch authorities to take active measures to provide the necessary basic and further training for pre-school teachers of Frisian.

143. The authorities indicate in the fifth periodical report that the lack of qualified teachers is a major concern both for the national and for the provincial authorities. According to the Education Inspectorate, 40% of the primary and secondary school teachers do not have an adequate qualification or competence for teaching Frisian language and culture.

144. During the on-the-spot visit, the Committee of Experts was informed that, as of the 2015-2016 school year, optional courses of Frisian (three hours per week for one semester) have been introduced in the vocational training of education assistants.

145. The NHL and Stenden Colleges provide teacher training for Frisian education, both for primary and secondary levels. A lectureship in Multilingualism in Education and Teaching has been jointly created by the two colleges. A trilingual stream has also been put in place for future teachers of trilingual primary schools. All students enrolled in primary teacher training take part in Frisian lessons in the first two years. However, not all continue in the following two years nor take the exam for the official qualification. This has only been the case for 23 ECRML(2016)4

36 students in 2012, 25 students in 2013, 29 students in 2014 and 17 students in 2015, for both colleges. In addition to this, a small number of students of a combined track of teacher training and pedagogy also take the exam for official qualification. A minor in Multilingual Education in International Perspective is also available and 20 students are currently enrolled. NHL offers, in addition, courses for primary school teachers on Language Policy at School, attended to this date by approximately 100 teachers. The number of students in teacher training for secondary schools is very low (12 bachelors students and 2 masters students in the current academic year). This is influenced by the low number of Frisian lessons in secondary education, which are not enough to cover a full time job as teacher of Frisian. Often, teachers of other subjects are appointed as teachers of Frisian. In an effort to improve the situation and in the framework of the restructuring of language teacher training, NHL started recently to reorganise the curriculum of teacher training for secondary schools, aiming to offer a double qualification for Dutch and Frisian.

146. The University of Groningen also offers a two-year master in Frisian Language and Culture: Pre-higher Education Teacher Training and one student has graduated since 2012.

147. The Committee of Experts considers this undertaking partly fulfilled with regard to primary and secondary education. While welcoming the introduction of Frisian courses in vocational education for training assistants, it maintains its view that the undertaking is not fulfilled for pre-school education. It strongly urges the Dutch authorities to continue to take active measures to provide the necessary basic and further training of teachers for teaching in and of Frisian at all levels.

Monitoring

i to set up a supervisory body or bodies responsible for monitoring the measures taken and progress achieved in establishing or developing the teaching of regional or minority languages and for drawing up periodic reports of their findings, which will be made public.

148. In the previous monitoring cycles, the Committee of Experts considered the undertaking fulfilled.

149. Bearing in mind the adoption of the new Frisian Education Attainment Acts, the Committee of Experts invites the authorities to provide more information on the role of the Education Inspectorate and on the year when a new report on Frisian education can be expected.

Article 9 Justice

Paragraph 1

The Parties undertake, in respect of those judicial districts in which the number of residents using the regional or minority languages justifies the measures specified below, according to the situation of each of these languages and on condition that the use of the facilities afforded by the present paragraph is not considered by the judge to hamper the proper administration of justice:

a in criminal proceedings:

ii to guarantee the accused the right to use his/her regional or minority language;

c in proceedings before courts concerning administrative matters:

ii to allow, whenever a litigant has to appear in person before a court, that he or she may use his or her regional or minority language without thereby incurring additional expense; and/or

if necessary by the use of interpreters and translations involving no extra expense for the persons concerned;

Reform of judicial authorities and police administration 150. In the fourth evaluation report, the Committee of Experts encouraged the Dutch authorities to consult the representatives of the Frisian speakers in the context of the preparation of the draft law restructuring the courts and police administration, so as to make sure that the implementation of the Charter undertakings is not affected by the pending reforms.

151. The Judicial Map (Revision) Act entered into force on 1 January 2013. The number of district courts has been reduced from 19 to 11; the number of courts of appeal from 5 to 4. Fryslân is covered by the district Court ECRML(2016)4 24

of North Netherlands and the Arnhem-Leeuwarden Court of Appeal. According to the information available to the Committee of Experts, the reform of police administration has not been yet pursued.

Court interpreters 152. In the fourth evaluation report, the Committee of Experts asked the Dutch authorities to provide information on the possibility to use Frisian in practice in court cases, including whether there is a need to recruit and train more Frisian-speaking interpreters.

153. According to the information received from the Dutch authorities, Frisian may be used both before the Court of North Netherlands and before the Arnhem-Leeuwarden Court of Appeal. The Committee of Experts was, however, informed by the representatives of the speakers that it is increasingly difficult to speak Frisian before courts, when cases are assigned to the two locations of the Court of North Netherlands outside Leeuwarden, in Groningen or Assen, or to courts in Zwolle and Almelo. Since there is still only one certified interpreter for Frisian and in the absence of Frisian-speaking lawyers, judges, prosecutors and other staff, the trial takes place in Dutch. The Dutch authorities informed the Committee of Experts that criminal cases should, with very rare exceptions, be tried in Leeuwarden; however, due to the agenda of the judges and the specialisation, some cases are tried in Groningen or Assen. The existence of only one interpreter is recognised as problematic, and the courts, interpreters’ associations and Frisian organisations are making efforts to solve this issue. The Committee of Experts was also informed that the Ministry of Justice and the Council for Judiciary are monitoring the use of Frisian in courts and will prepare a report on this topic.

154. In light of the information above and bearing in mind that the current situation does not guarantee the right to use Frisian before courts in practice, the Committee of Experts must revise its conclusion and consider the undertaking partly fulfilled. The Committee of Experts encourages the Dutch authorities to take practical steps to ensure the right to use Frisian before courts.

Article 10 - Administrative authorities and public services

155. During the on-the-spot visit, the Committee of Experts was informed that the re-organisation of Frisian municipalities is ongoing (see under 7.1.b). The Frisian speakers consider that this process affects the position of Frisian. During this re-organisation, mainly rural municipalities were merged or split and attached to other municipalities. For example, in 2014, the municipality of Boarnsterhim, with a majority of Frisian speakers, was split between Leeuwarden, Heerenveen and a new municipality, Súdwest-Fryslân; in 2018, the municipality of Littenseradiel, over 80% Frisian-speaking, will be split between Leeuwarden, Súdwest-Fryslân and a new municipality, Wandhoeke. New municipalities have their administrative centre in larger cities (Leeuwarden, Heerenveen, Sneek), where Frisian is spoken to a lower extent, and no longer in the rural area, largely Frisian- speaking. Although agreements have been concluded with the new municipalities, in practice the protection of Frisian has weakened. According to the Frisian speakers, the language receives less attention and support and its use decreases. Although the above-mentioned agreements state that the Frisian language policy level cannot decrease, in fact this falls back to the lowest level in the merging municipalities. The Committee of Experts encourages the authorities to ensure that Frisian can be used in practice in the new municipalities and to provide detailed information on its use in the new framework.

156. The Use of Frisian Act entered into force in 2014 and provides that Frisian can be used in dealings with the administrative bodies located in the province of Fryslân and by such bodies. Nevertheless, the Act also states that the administrative bodies and other parties may ask for Dutch to be used, on the grounds that the use of Frisian would lead to a disproportionate burden on administrative matters or unsatisfactory oral communications.17 The Committee of Experts underlines that these provisions, depending on how they are implemented, can undermine the right of the speakers to use Frisian in relation with administrative authorities. Administrative bodies in Fryslân that are not part of the central administration are under an obligation to prepare rules and policy plans concerning the use of Frisian. The administrative bodies situated outside Fryslân, but responsible for the province, may also set such rules, in particular for written communication. Ministries may also ask their local offices in Fryslân to adopt rules on the use of Frisian, although the Committee of Experts was informed that this has not been yet the case.

17 http://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0034047/2014-01-01

25 ECRML(2016)4

State authorities

Paragraph 1

Within the administrative districts of the State in which the number of residents who are users of regional or minority languages justifies the measures specified below and according to the situation of each language, the Parties undertake, as far as this is reasonably possible:

c to allow the administrative authorities to draft documents in a regional or minority language.

157. In the fourth monitoring cycle, the Committee of Experts considered this undertaking not fulfilled. It encouraged the Dutch authorities to implement the necessary legal and practical measures so as to ensure that the present undertaking is fulfilled.

158. According to the fifth periodical report, the authorities enable, as much as possible, the use of Frisian in relations with the police, the fire or the ambulance services. The Use of Frisian Act indicates that a central authority may ask its local branch to prepare rules on the use of Frisian. The Dutch authorities informed the Committee of Experts that this has not yet been the case.

159. In the absence of any information on the practical implementation of the undertaking, the Committee of Experts maintains its previous conclusion that the undertaking is not fulfilled. The Committee of Experts urges the Dutch authorities to implement the necessary legal and practical measures so as to ensure that the present undertaking is fulfilled.

g the use or adoption, if necessary in conjunction with the name in the official language(s), of traditional and correct forms of place-names in regional or minority languages.

160. In the previous monitoring cycles, the Committee of Experts considered the undertaking fulfilled.

161. During the on-the-spot visit, the Committee of Experts noted that Frisian place names are used only to a limited extent, in particular in Leeuwarden. The Committee of Experts underlines that the term “place-names” within the meaning of the present undertaking concerns not only the name of a municipality, but all topographical names in that municipality that can be officially used, for example in texts produced by the authority (e.g. documents, forms, public relations material, websites) or in signage (e.g. street name signs, signposts and public transport signs, indications for tourists).

162. The Committee of Experts encourages the authorities to ensure the use or adoption of traditional and correct forms of place names in Frisian.18

Implementation measures

Paragraph 4

With a view to putting into effect those provisions of paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 accepted by them, the Parties undertake to take one or more of the following measures:

c compliance as far as possible with requests from public service employees having a knowledge of a regional or minority language to be appointed in the territory in which that language is used.

163. In the fourth evaluation report, the Committee of Experts considered this undertaking not fulfilled.

164. The Committee of Experts received no relevant information in this respect. It therefore maintains its previous conclusion that the undertaking is not fulfilled.

165. The Committee of Experts encourages the authorities to ensure compliance, as far as possible, with requests from public service employees who speak Frisian to be appointed in the territory in which this language is used.

18 See also Second Opinion of the Advisory Committee of the FCNM, ACFC/OP/II(2013)003 2013, paragraph 96 ECRML(2016)4 26

Article 11 - Media

Paragraph 1

The Parties undertake, for the users of the regional or minority languages within the territories in which those languages are spoken, according to the situation of each language, to the extent that the public authorities, directly or indirectly, are competent, have power or play a role in this field, and respecting the principle of the independence and autonomy of the media:

a to the extent that radio and television carry out a public service mission:

iii to make adequate provision so that broadcasters offer programmes in the regional or minority languages;

166. In the fourth evaluation report, the Committee of Experts considered this undertaking fulfilled. It nonetheless encouraged the Dutch authorities to consult representatives of the Frisian speakers in the context of the preparation of the draft Media Act and to take measures so that the new media legislation will improve the presence of Frisian in the media.

167. According to the information received from the authorities in this monitoring cycle, changes are ongoing in the media sector. In addition to budgetary cuts, a new structure of regional broadcasting is foreseen by amending the Media Act (see under Article 7.1.d.). The authorities underlined that special guarantees are foreseen for Omrop Fryslân and that programming also remains independent within the new structure. They are aware, however, that the fact that funding will be centralised will have an influence on programmes.

168. The representatives of the Frisian speakers and of Omrop Fryslân express serious concerns about the amendments to the Media Act and the future of Frisian-language broadcasting. Omrop Fryslân will no longer have its own board and will lose influence on the programmes, also due to the funding set-up in the new structure (there will be no earmarked funding for Omrop Fryslân). They fear that many of the programmes, starting with Frisian drama or children programmes, will no longer be produced and that the overall quality will decrease.

169. The new set-up does not seem to improve the presence of Frisian in the media, as recommended by the Committee of Experts. As the legislation is not yet finalised, the Committee of Experts cannot conclude on the fulfilment of the undertaking. It urges the Dutch authorities to ensure that the position of Frisian in media is not negatively affected.

b ii to encourage and/or facilitate the broadcasting of radio programmes in the regional or minority languages on a regular basis; c ii to encourage and/or facilitate the broadcasting of television programmes in the regional or minority languages on a regular basis;

170. In the fourth evaluation report, the Committee of Experts considered these undertakings not fulfilled. It strongly urged the Dutch authorities to take steps to promote the use of Frisian in private broadcasting.

171. The fifth periodical report does not provide specific information in this respect. It indicates that the Province of Fryslân set up a Frisian Media Fund, to promote innovations in media and investigative journalism. Until 2015, €100 000 was made available annually to Frisian language media. However, the Committee of Experts has not been informed of any private radio stations or television channels broadcasting in Frisian.

172. The Committee of Experts considers these undertakings not fulfilled. It again strongly urges the Dutch authorities to take steps to promote the use of Frisian in private broadcasting

Article 12 - Cultural activities and facilities

173. In the fourth evaluation report, the Committee of Experts encouraged the Dutch authorities to ensure that the budget cuts do not affect the implementation of the relevant undertakings under the Charter.

174. The fifth periodical report indicates that changes to the funding of the Frisian cultural institutions are to be discussed with the Province of Fryslân. To this date, an important network of cultural bodies promoting Frisian is 27 ECRML(2016)4

active in Fryslân. The Committee of Experts asks the authorities to provide information on the funding of cultural institutions in the next periodical report.

Paragraph 3

The Parties undertake to make appropriate provision, in pursuing their cultural policy abroad, for regional or minority languages and the cultures they reflect.

175. In the fourth evaluation report, the Committee of Experts considered this undertaking not fulfilled. It strongly urged the Dutch authorities to include the Frisian language and the culture it reflects in its cultural policy abroad.

176. The fifth periodical report does not provide information in this respect. According to information received from the authorities, Frisian is not actively included in the Dutch policy abroad.

177. The Committee of Experts reiterates that the present undertaking concerns above all the way in which the country presents its own diverse linguistic and cultural heritage abroad. This could consist of cultural exchanges, references to the regional or minority languages spoken in the Netherlands in the context of exhibitions or events, or information material aimed at an international public.19

178. The Committee of Experts considers this undertaking not fulfilled. It again strongly urges the Dutch authorities to include the Frisian language and the culture it reflects in its cultural policy abroad.

Article 13 - Economic and social life

Paragraph 2

With regard to economic and social activities, the Parties undertake, in so far as the public authorities are competent, within the territory in which the regional or minority languages are used, and as far as this is reasonably possible:

b in the economic and social sectors directly under their control (public sector), to organise activities to promote the use of regional or minority languages;

179. In the fourth evaluation report, the Committee of Experts considered this undertaking partly fulfilled. It encouraged the Dutch authorities to identify the economic and social sectors that are relevant for this undertaking, to raise their awareness of the promotion of Frisian and to organise activities promoting this language.

180. The fifth periodical report does not provide specific information in this respect.

181. The Committee of Experts maintains its previous conclusion that the undertaking is partly fulfilled. It urges the Dutch authorities to identify the economic and social sectors that are relevant for this undertaking, to raise their awareness of the promotion of Frisian and to organise activities promoting this language.

c to ensure that social care facilities such as hospitals, retirement homes and hostels offer the possibility of receiving and treating in their own language persons using a regional or minority language who are in need of care on grounds of ill-health, old age or for other reasons;

182. In the fourth evaluation report, the Committee of Experts considered this undertaking partly fulfilled. It asked the Dutch authorities to provide, in their next periodical report, information about the implementation of this undertaking in practice.

183. According to the fifth periodical report, the Province of Fryslân committed itself in the Administrative Agreement to implement an integral language policy in the social care sector. The project “Frysk yn ‘e Soarch” (Frisian in Health(care)) is ongoing and will continue until 2018.

19 See 3rd report of the Committee of Experts on the Czech Republic, ECRML (2015) 6, paragraph 179, 2nd report of the Committee of Experts on Austria, ECRML (2009) 1, paragraph 176 ECRML(2016)4 28

184. During the on-the-spot visit, the Committee of Experts was informed that there is no law or regulation in place requesting that health and social care facilities offer the possibility to use Frisian. In practice, Frisian is used in health care provision, especially in small places, but its use is not guaranteed on a general level. According to the representatives of the speakers, in some cases the use of Frisian was even discouraged. The Committee of Experts asks the authorities to clarify whether in some domains Dutch is obligatory.

185. As far as the training of staff is concerned, the Committee of Experts was informed that in the 2015-2016 school year optional courses of Frisian were introduced in the vocational training of health care workers, at the initiative of the vocational training institutions, for three hours per week during one semester.

186. The Committee of Experts welcomes the development concerning the teaching of Frisian in vocation training of health care staff. It underlines that the undertaking requires the authorities to ensure that social care facilities offer the possibility of receiving and treating Frisian-speakers in their own language. A comprehensive and structured approach is therefore needed, comprising clear legal guidelines ensuring the possibility to use Frisian, a human resources policy (which includes regulations governing the relevant qualifications and takes account of a person’s knowledge of Frisian, or facilities and incentives for the existing personnel to improve their language skills) and ensuring that both staff and persons concerned are aware of the possibility to use Frisian.

187. Bearing in mind the current existing practical use of Frisian, the Committee of Experts maintains its previous conclusion that the undertaking is partly fulfilled. It encourages the authorities to adopt a structured policy with a view to ensuring that social care facilities may receive and treat those concerned in Frisian.20

Article 14 - Transfrontier exchanges

The Parties undertake:

b for the benefit of regional or minority languages, to facilitate and/or promote co-operation across borders, in particular between regional or local authorities in whose territory the same language is used in identical or similar form.

188. In the fourth evaluation report, the Committee of Experts considered this undertaking fulfilled. It nevertheless urged the Dutch authorities to actively promote co-operation between regional or local authorities in the Province of Fryslân and in the Frisian-speaking areas of Germany on a more structured basis.

189. The fifth periodical report indicates that relations to the Frisian-speaking areas in Germany have been, for a long time, important for Fryslân.

190. The Committee of Experts maintains its previous conclusion that the undertaking is fulfilled.

20 See 4th report of the Committee of Experts on Germany ECRML (2011) 2, paragraph 560, 4th report of the Committee of Experts on Slovakia, ECRML (2016) 2, paragraph 197 29 ECRML(2016)4

Chapter 4 Findings of the Committee of Experts in the fifth monitoring round

A. The Committee of Experts would like to thank the Dutch authorities for their co-operation during the preparation as well as at the on-the-spot visit itself. In addition, the co-operation with the provincial authorities and the bodies and associations representing the speakers of regional or minority languages was very positive.

B. The Committee of Experts notes some positive developments, in particular with respect to Frisian. However, the general approach of the Dutch authorities towards their obligations arising from the Charter, as well as ongoing changes in the media sector, courts and administration, remain issues of concern.

C. During the current monitoring cycle, the issue of the possible protection of Papiamentu under the Charter was raised, due to the new status of some of the overseas islands. In Fryslân, the situation of Bildts has been brought to the attention of the Committee of Experts. The Dutch authorities are invited to clarify both issues.

D. The Dutch authorities maintain their view that the promotion of the regional or minority languages is the responsibility of local and provincial authorities, as well of the speakers themselves. In particular with respect to the Part II languages – Limburgish, Low Saxon, Romanes and Yiddish, there is no structured approach for their protection and promotion at national level. The Committee of Experts reiterates that the Charter places legal obligations on its States Parties and their implementation requires them to take positive measures with a view to protecting and promoting the regional or minority languages. The national authorities have the international responsibility and it is crucial that they ensure the application of the Charter.

E. There is still no structured dialogue with the representatives of the regional or minority language speakers about the implementation of the Charter and the recommendations evolving from its monitoring mechanism. Furthermore, no comprehensive consultations have taken place in the framework of the drafting of the periodical report. A dialogue between the national authorities and the speakers is, however, indispensable for a state in determining its policy with regard to regional or minority languages.

F. The situation of Limburgish in education has largely remained the same. Limburgish is present to some extent in school activities, but it is not yet taught as a school subject in its own right. The situation in pre-school raises particular concerns, as the use of Limburgish is even discouraged at pre-school level. There is still no scheme for teacher training. Limburgish continues to be present in regional media and cultural activities. It is also increasingly used in online communication, on the internet and in social media.

G. Low Saxon is used in school projects and activities to varying degrees, but there is still no structured approach for its teaching at all relevant levels or for teacher training. Low Saxon is also used in television and on the radio, in cultural activities and, to some extent, by administrative authorities.

H. Romanes is not taught in Dutch schools. It is, however, present to a limited extent in the media and in cultural activities. Some Roma and Sinti representatives are hesitant about promoting the language outside the community. However, they are aware that, in the long term, the language will need protection and promotion. No structured dialogue between the Dutch authorities and the Roma and Sinti is in place about the promotion of Romanes. It has also been reported that Roma and Sinti are subject to stereotypes and prejudiced views and are negatively portrayed in the media.

I. Yiddish continues to be taught only at the Cheider school in Amsterdam. There is no structured approach of the Dutch authorities to promote Yiddish in other domains of public life outside education.

J. A new Administrative Agreement (covenant) on the Frisian Language and Culture for the years 2013- 2018 was signed between the central authorities and the Province of Fryslân. Some developments are to be noted regarding Frisian language education. The number of Frisian-speaking or bilingual day-care centres and playgroups has increased, although the offer remains insufficient in large urban settlements. Furthermore, the number of trilingual (Frisian-Dutch-English) primary schools is slowly increasing, making up about 17% of all primary schools in the province. With regard to secondary schools, five offer a trilingual programme. However, most of the primary and secondary schools only offer Frisian for about one hour per week and, in secondary education, only during the first year. This is not sufficient for the development of an adequate level of literacy. The Frisian Language Attainment Targets Act entered into force on 1 August 2014, increasing the competences ECRML(2016)4 30

of the Province of Fryslân in setting the attainment targets (core objectives). Additional funds for the teaching of Frisian at primary and secondary level have also been made available. The low number of qualified teachers for Frisian remains problematic for the further development of Frisian education.

K. The Use of Frisian Act, regulating the use of Frisian in courts and in relations with the administrative authorities, entered into force on 1 January 2014. In practice, however, the use of Frisian tends to meet with difficulties. Frisian is in general used in relations with the local authorities. However, the ongoing mergers of municipalities might lead to a reduced use of Frisian in the long term. The reform of courts has also lead to shortcomings in the use of Frisian in the judicial field.

L. For all languages, Frisian included, the media sector raises particular concerns in the context of the amendments to the Media Act. These partly re-centralise regional broadcasting, by setting up a body responsible for the national policy and matters such as staff, technology and funding. It is feared that this will have an impact on the production of programmes in the regional or minority languages. In addition, financial cuts are foreseen in the media field as of 2017, which might lead to a reduction of programmes in the regional or minority languages. In the long run, this might have a negative impact on the implementation of the undertakings under the Charter.

M. The provincial authorities of Fryslân have continued to take steps to promote Frisian in the social care sector. However, a more structured approach is needed in this field.

The Dutch government was invited to comment on the content of this report in accordance with Article 16.3 of the Charter. The comments received are attached in Appendix II.

On the basis of this report and its findings, the Committee of Experts submitted its proposals to the Committee of Ministers for recommendations to be addressed to the Netherlands. At the same time, it emphasised the need for the Dutch authorities to take into account, in addition to these general recommendations, the more detailed observations contained in the body of the report.

At its 1273bis meeting on 14 December 2016, the Committee of Ministers adopted its Recommendation addressed to the Netherlands, which is set out in Part B of this document.

31 ECRML(2016)4

Appendix I: Instrument of Acceptance

Netherlands

Declaration contained in the instrument of acceptance, deposited on 2 May 1996 - Or. Engl.

The Kingdom of the Netherlands accepts the said Charter for the Kingdom in Europe.

Period covered: 01/03/1998 - Articles concerned : -

Declarations contained in a Note Verbale handed over by the Permanent Representative of the Netherlands at the time of deposit of the instrument of acceptance, on 2 May 1996 - Or. Engl.

The Kingdom of the Netherlands declares, in accordance with Article 2, paragraph 2, and Article 3, paragraph 1, of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, that it will apply to the Frisian language in the province of Friesland the following provisions of Part III of the Charter:

In Article 8: Paragraph 1, sub-paragraphs a (ii), b (ii), c (iii), e (ii), f (i), g, h, i. Paragraph 2.

In Article 9: Paragraph 1, sub-paragraphs a (ii), a (iii), b (iii), c (ii), c (iii). Paragraph 2, sub-paragraph b.

In Article 10: Paragraph 1, sub-paragraphs a (v), c. Paragraph 2, sub-paragraphs a, b, c, d, e, f, g. Paragraph 4, sub-paragraphs a, c. Paragraph 5.

In Article 11: Paragraph 1, sub-paragraphs a (iii), b (ii), c (ii), f (ii). Paragraph 2.

In Article 12: Paragraph 1, sub-paragraphs a, b, d, e, f, g, h. Paragraph 2. Paragraph 3.

In Article 13: Paragraph 1, sub-paragraphs a, c, d. Paragraph 2, sub-paragraphs b, c.

In Article 14: Paragraph a. Paragraph b.

The Kingdom of the Netherlands further declares that the principles enumerated in Part II of the Charter will be applied to the Lower-Saxon languages used in the Netherlands, and, in accordance with Article 7, paragraph 5, to Yiddish and the Romanes languages.

ECRML(2016)4 32

Period covered: 01/03/1998 - Articles concerned : 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9

Declaration contained in a Note Verbale from the Permanent Representation of the Netherlands, dated 18 March 1997, registered at the Secretariat General on 19 March 1997 - Or. Engl.

The Kingdom of the Netherlands declares, in accordance with Article 2, paragraph 1, of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages of 5 November 1992, that the principles enumerated in Part II of the Charter will be applied to the Limburger language used in the Netherlands.

Period covered: 01/03/1998 - Articles concerned : 2

33 ECRML(2016)4

Appendix II: Comments from the Dutch authorities

On 16 July 2016, I received from you the fifth report of the committee of experts of the Council of Europe on the implementation of the European Charter for regional or minority languages regarding the Netherlands. I would like to thank the committee for its detailed report. Please find enclosed my reaction, also on behalf of the State Secretary for Education, Culture and Science.

In the report, the committee of experts issues five recommendations. In respect of a number of other points, the commission requests additional information. Below I will first discuss the recommendations, prior to clarifying a number of other points in response to the request from the committee of experts.

Recommendation 1: According to the committee of experts, the Dutch authorities should adopt a structured policy for the implementation of the Charter in co-operation with the speakers, including for the languages only covered by part II.

The committee of experts refers to the absence of a national policy and a structured dialogue with the speakers of the various recognised regional languages or minority languages. As party to the Charter, the Dutch government bears final responsibility for compliance with the Charter. However, Dutch policy is that responsibility for regional languages and minority languages lies with local governments. After all, the needs in respect of language policy can differ from region to region, and can be better met by local governments. Furthermore, local governments are closer to the practice and speakers of the regional languages than Central government. I am delighted to note that the good cooperation between the local authorities and representatives of speakers of regional languages or minority languages has been noted by the committee of experts.

I recognise the importance of a structured dialogue between central government and the speakers of regional languages or minority languages. The committee points out that speakers were not consulted in drawing up the fifth periodic report on the measures taken by the Netherlands for the implementation of the Charter. In the future monitoring cycle, I will once again take account of this procedure.

Furthermore, in the second half of 2017, I will be organising a one-day ‘Regional language symposium’ to which speakers and representatives of the various recognised regional languages, central government, and the relevant local governments will be invited. At this symposium, they will be able to discuss and exchange knowledge with one another about language policy, its implementation in practice, and their wishes for promoting regional languages. At the end of this symposium, in an evaluation, I will deal with the question whether there is a call for the structural repetition of an event of this kind.

Recommendation 2: The Dutch authorities should take measures to ensure that the ongoing changes in the media system do not hamper the offering of programmes in regional or minority languages.

The concerns of the committee of experts concerning the offering of programmes in regional languages and minority languages are the result of developments in the media sector, namely announced cutbacks to the tune of 17 million euro, by 1 January 2017, and the changes to the Media Act. To make regional broadcasters more effective in this changing media system, and to achieve greater uniformity in implementing the regional public task, preparations were underway for a White Paper for the further modernisation of regional broadcasters. In this way, the austerity measures could be compensated for jointly, and whereby the programming and editorial boards could be kept out of the firing line as far as possible. However, this White Paper failed to achieve sufficient support among the regional broadcasters as a result of which the decision was taken, on 2 September 2016, to not yet submit the White Paper to the Lower Chamber, but to postpone it. One of the consequences of this decision is that each regional broadcaster will have to compensate individually for its proportion of the 17 million euro cutbacks. If the regional broadcasters wish to implement plans for further cooperation on a voluntary basis, they will be able to request reimbursement of the friction costs accrued. Every possible effort will be made, as far as is possible, to keep the programming and the editorial boards out of the firing line when implementing austerity measures.

In its fifth report, the committee of experts urges the promotion of the use of the Frisian language in commercial media institutions. However, it is not a task of central government in the Netherlands, nor of the provincial or municipal authorities, to establish or have established commercial media institutions. It is also not a task of ECRML(2016)4 34

government to be involved in the form and content of the programming of commercial media institutions. On the basis of the 2008 Media Act, a commercial media institution itself determines the programming offered by that institution. The commercial media institutions are entirely free to offer programming in the Frisian language. If this ties in with their business model and offers them commercial advantages, they will certainly take this action.

Recommendation 3: The Dutch authorities should continue to strengthen the teaching of, and in, Frisian at all levels of education in order to improve the level of literacy in the language.

Competition from other languages for both spoken and written Frisian is becoming ever fiercer. The teaching of Frisian reading and writing skills is essential for the continued existence of the Frisian language. The quality of Frisian education is a point for attention for the Cabinet, which year on year is investing more in Frisian education in the framework of Material Support for Frisian (MIF, see Administrative Agreement Frisian Language and Culture 2013-2018).

The current Administrative Agreement on Frisian Language and Culture (BFTC) specifies that the Province of Fryslân will determine the policy for Frisian, and also be responsible for its implementation, within the framework of general educational regulations. Since August 2014, it has also been adopted in law that the core targets for Frisian will be determined by the province, subject to specific conditions. Since this law became effective, the province has been given the authority to grant, not only complete, but also partial exemptions to schools for the teaching of Frisian as a subject. This means in practice that for one or more core targets of Frisian as a subject, a (temporary) exemption can be issued. The differentiation in terms of exemptions that this move has made possible means that education in Frisian now ties in better with the school situation and the school population.

This in turn also improves the formulation and supporting of ambitions in relation to Frisian as a subject. In the framework of the formulation of these ambitions, and under the heading Taalplan Frysk (Frisian Language Plan), all schools in Friesland will be visited over the coming period and assessed by an external party with a focus on what action each school is taking in respect of Frisian, and for which core objectives an exemption may be applied for. In this respect, a partial exemption is viewed as a temporary measure within a growth model. The objective of the province is that schools in the Frisian language area will require fewer exemptions every four years. In 2016, the Schools Inspectorate announced its intention to once again inspect the quality of the teaching of Frisian, in order to gain a greater insight into the level achieved by pupils. This will make it possible to monitor and further improve quality.

The province views improving the position of Frisian in education as a very important policy task for the next few years, and will certainly take account of the recommendations of the committee of experts, in as much as that they have not already done so.

Recommendation 4: The Dutch authorities should upgrade the teaching of Limburgish and Low Saxon to the status of regular school subjects and extend the offer of Education in these languages, including in pre-schools.

In its fifth report, the committee of experts expresses its concerns about the offer of Limburgish and Low Saxon in education, and suggests that a more structured approach is needed.

According to the law, schools are given considerable freedom to plan their teaching as they see fit. This freedom is certainly also offered in respect of regional and minority languages. At this moment Limburgish and Low Saxon can already be taught in primary education, depending on the level of interest attached to such teaching by the individual schools. On the basis of article 9 of the Primary Education Act, primary schools have the freedom to teach in a regional language. This also applies to secondary education where there is space to offer lessons in the regional language in filling the elective subjects in the pupil profile. Including regional languages as compulsory school subjects is not in line with educational policy.

Recommendation 5: The Dutch authorities should take measures, in co-operation with representatives of the speakers, to protect and promote Yiddish and Romanes.

I recognise the importance of structured dialogue with representatives of all the different recognised regional languages and minority languages, including Yiddish and Romanes. I will therefore certainly consult with speakers of these languages in the next monitoring cycle. 35 ECRML(2016)4

The committee of experts calls upon the Dutch authorities to provide additional information on various points. In section 1.3, the committee requested a clarification of the status of Papiamento, Bildts and Low Saxon.

Papiamento Papiamento is a creole language traditionally spoken on Aruba, Bonaire and Curaçao. As a result of changes to the political structure, speakers of Papiamento informed me in a letter at the end of 2014 that they desire protection according to the European Charter. In my response in February 2015, I pointed out that although I consider protection and promotion of Papiamento as being of clear importance, I saw no added value in investigating the possibilities of protecting Papiamento according to part II of the European Charter. Papiamento already has official status and in the Caribbean Netherlands can already be used by the citizens in administrative and legal matters. In this way, the language is already adequately protected and secured.

Bildts The committee also requested clarification about the status of Bildts. This language is spoken in the municipality of Het Bildt, in Friesland. In February 2016, this municipality submitted a request for recognition of Bildts as a regional language according to part II of the European Charter. The background to this request was the planned re-division on 1 January 2018 of the Frisian municipalities Het Bildt, Franekeradeel and Menameradiel, which are due to merge to form the new municipality of Waadhoeke. The municipality of Het Bildt has expressed concern about the position of Bildts within this new municipality, in which speakers of Bildts will be a small minority. In the explanatory notes to the request, the municipality referred to the special linguistic position of Bildts, which demonstrates clear similarities with both Frisian and Dutch, and the value of Bildts for local residents in retaining their own identity and culture.

This request is still under consideration. In accordance with the procedure established for this purpose, I have also submitted the request to the bodies of the Taalunie, for further advice.21 Depending on the consultation procedure within the Taalunie, I expect to be able to take a decision concerning the application for the recognition of Bildts later this year.

Low Saxon I am delighted that the committee of experts has recognised as a positive development the dialogue which has been initiated between central government, the umbrella organisation for the Regional Language Organisation Lower Saxon Language Area (SONT), and local government. Both the speakers and local government consider this dialogue to be positive. The discussions between the parties have continued over the past period and consultations took place in May and September concerning the text of the covenant.

In its report, the committee of experts requests an explanation of the content of this covenant. The covenant involves national recognition of the importance of the continued existence of Low Saxon. By means of the covenant, the affected Low Saxon government, the umbrella organisation SONT, and the Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations underwrite the desirability of the continued full existence of Low Saxon. Recognition of Low Saxon according to part III of the European Charter is however excluded in this covenant. In the agreement, the parties have undertaken to translate the covenant into a multiyear programme that specifically ensures promotion of the use of Low Saxon.

Yours sincerely,

The Minister of the Interior and Kingdom Affairs,

21 See proceedings II, 1999-2000, appendix number 1053. ECRML(2016)4 36

B. Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on the application of the Charter by the Netherlands

Recommendation CM/RecChL(2016)7 of the Committee of Ministers on the application of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages by the Netherlands

(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 14 December 2016 at the 1273bis meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)

The Committee of Ministers,

In accordance with Article 16 of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages;

Having regard to the instrument of acceptance submitted by the Kingdom of the Netherlands on 2 May 1996 and to the supplementary declaration submitted on 19 March 1997;

Having taken note of the evaluation made by the Committee of Experts on the Charter with respect to the application of the Charter by the Netherlands;

[Having taken note of the comments made by the Dutch authorities on the contents of the Committee of Experts' report;]

Bearing in mind that this evaluation is based on information submitted by the Netherlands in their fifth periodical report, supplementary information provided by the Dutch authorities, information submitted by bodies and associations legally established in the Netherlands and information obtained by the Committee of Experts during its on-the-spot visit;

Recommends that the authorities of the Netherlands take account of all the observations and recommendations of the Committee of Experts and, as a matter of priority:

1. adopt a structured policy for the implementation of the Charter also for the languages covered only by Part II, in co-operation with the speakers;

2. take measures to ensure that the ongoing changes in the media system do not hamper the offer of programmes in regional or minority languages;

3. continue to strengthen the teaching of and in Frisian at all levels of education in order to improve the level of literacy in the language;

4. upgrade the teaching of Limburgish and Low Saxon to the status of regular school subjects and extend the offer of education in these languages, including in pre-schools;

5. take measures, in co-operation with representatives of the speakers, to protect and promote Romanes and Yiddish.

Bylage C. Materiaal oer de fakkeloptocht foar better Frysk ûnderwiis dd. 22 desimber 2016

 Sis Tsiis: Oprop ta aksje, 2 novimber 2016, https://sistsiis2016.wordpress.com

Demonstrearje mei op 22 desimber yn Ljouwert Start op it Saailân om 18:30 Mear as tritich jier lyn, in heal minskelibben al, mochten alle Fryske bern foar it earst op de legere skoalle wat oer har eigen taal leare. En mear as tweintich jier lyn, in hiele generaasje lyn al, mochten alle Fryske bern op de middelbere skoalle wat opstekke oer har eigen taal.

C. Fakkeloptocht foar better Frysk ûnderwiis 1 Dat it fak Frysk ferplichte oanbean wurde moast wie in hoopfolle ûntjouwing, dêr’t de mear as 350.000 Frysksprekkers yn de provinsje Fryslân út opmeitsje mochten dat yn Nederlân it rjocht op ûnderwiis yn it Frysk tenei serieus oppakt wurde soe. Earder hie dat ûnderrjocht ommers mar sa’n spultsje west fan hjir wat, dêr in bytsje, en alles op basis fan frijwillichheid en it entûsjasme fan de inkeling. Mar anno 2016 is der gjin reden mear foar optimisme oer it Frysk ûnderwiis. In deibegjin kin it net mear neamd wurde: wilens is it nacht yn ’e nane. Frysk leare op skoalle, it is by op syn heechst in oerke yn ’e wike bleaun. De measte masters wolle wol, mar kinne te min. It komt foar dat ûnbrûkbere lesmiddels jierrenlang dochs brûkt wurde moatte. It komt foar dat lessen bestean út it sjen nei in fideootsje. It komt hieltyd mear foar dat skoallen gebrûk meitsje fan de mooglikheid ûntheffing te freegjen fan de ferplichting om Frysk ûnderwiis te jaan – en dy samar krije fan de Provinsje. Unheffing of net, yn beide gefallen lit de ûnderwiisynspeksje it Frysk oan ’e kant fan ’e dyk lizze. Jawis, der is in Wet op it basisûnderwiis, der binne folsleine kearndoelen foar it fak Frysk, wat betsjut dat bern it as se it ûnderwiis ferlitte it Frysk sprekke, lêze en skriuwe kinne; der is in hânfêst foar beskerming fan minderheidstalen dêr’t it rjocht op ûnderwiis helder yn ferankere is. Mei de politike mûle sit it meast wol goed, mar it binne konkrete politike dieden dêr’t op wachte wurdt. Wierlik, effektyf Frysk ûnderwiis is foar de Frysksprekkende taalminderheid yn Nederlân ommers in minskerjocht. Wierlik en effektyf Frysk ûnderwiis is ek in bernerjocht. In rjocht dat, op ’t heden en altyd al, âlden en bern allyk ûntkeard wurdt troch de Nederlânske steat en de Provinsje Fryslân. Wa of wat makket risselwaasje om it yndividueel-minsklike én maatskiplike probleem fan it Fryske analfabetisme werklik oan te pakken? Us multykulturele ideaal is omslein yn it omkearde, nammentlik fan taaldiversiteit nei in assimilaasje-ideology: trochinoar 90 oant 95 persint Nederlânsk, wat Ingelsk en sa’n 2 persint Frysk yn it basisûnderwiis. Frysktalige learlingen wurde troch it ûnderwiis ferballe út har eigen taal. It wurdt tiid om sjen en hearre te litten dat der in ein komme moat oan dy beskamsume sitewaasje, in lân ûnweardich dat graach altyd en oeral foaroan stiet om te striden foar minskerjochten. Wy wolle op tongersdei 22 desimber dêrom mei in demonstraasje yn Ljouwert oan de polityk en de befolking fan Fryslân net inkeld sjen litte dat wy ús taal de muoite wurdich fine om noed foar te stean. Wy wolle ek en foaral derop ta dat ús bern lang om let it rjocht krije sille dat wy noait hân hawwe: it rjocht op wierliken en effektyf ûnderwiis yn it Frysk. It giet om mear oeren, middels en minsken; om mear earmslach foar it Frysk op trijetalige skoallen; om it planmjittich en mei oertsjûging tawurkjen nei in dúdlik better plak foar it ûnderwiis fan en yn it Frysk. Op 22 desimber om 18.30 oere sille wy byinoar komme op it Saailân yn Ljouwert, om fan dêr yn optocht troch de stêd te gean. Elkenien is fan herte útnoege om mei te dwaan, wat mear minsken, wat better. Frysk op skoalle – in bernerjocht!

C. Fakkeloptocht foar better Frysk ûnderwiis 2  Sis Tsiis opinystik Friesch Dagblad, 26 novimber 2016

Goed Frysk op skoalle: in bernerjocht As it op it learen fan de eigen taal oankomt, steane der minskerjochten op it spul. Dat jout ferplichtingen – en mooglikheden. Op 22 desimber is de binnenstêd fan Ljouwert it toaniel fan in grutte publyksaksje foar better Frysk ûnderwiis. Eins is it hiel ienfâldich. Underwiis yn de memmetaal is ek foar taalminderheden in minskerjocht. Wichtige dokuminten geane fan de Universele Ferklearring fan Taalrjochten fan de Feriene Naasjes oant it Europeesk Hânfêst foar Regionale of Minderheidstalen. Diel III, kêst 8, lid 1 fan dat lêste ferdrach, meastal koart ‘it hânfêst’ neamd, ferplichtet de Nederlânske steat en fangefolgen ek de legere oerheden, en dêrûnder op it foarste plak de Provinsje Fryslân, ta it lesjaan yn ‘the relevant regional or minority languages as an integral part of the curriculum’, op basisskoallen likegoed as middelbere skoallen. Yn rûne taal betsjut dat ûnder mear dat Frysk ûnderwiis yn de hiele provinsje oanbean wurde moat, as in folweardich fak, mei helder formulearre, dus te hifkjen, minimumeasken oan ûnderwiis en eintermen, op álle skoallen. En sa is it ek fêstlein yn de Wet op it primêr ûnderwiis, kêsten 4 en 6. Lykwols is de praktyk hiel oars. Wat dalik opfalt is dat de kearndoelen foar it Frysk, dus wat in learling oan it ein fan syn skoaltiid fan de taal witte en kinne moat, net troch de Provinsje útwurke binne nei konkrete leardoelen, sa’t dat wol dien is foar it Nederlânsk en foar rekkenjen. Wol is der in saneamd ‘referinsjeramt Frysk’ (rrF) om de taalbehearsking fan learlingen mei te mjitten. Allinnich, dêrby wurdt net útgien fan de Nederlânske referinsjenivo’s foar taal, mar fan it Europeesk Referinsjeramt foar moderne frjemde talen. It Frysk te ûnderwizen as ‘frjemde taal’ makket it mooglik om learlingen te ûnderskieden nei ‘kwaliteit’, nammentlik guon mei foarkennis fan ’e oanbelangjende taal (de fan hûs út Frysktaligen) en guon sûnder (de fan hûs út Hollânsktaligen). Soks jout de mooglikheid fan ferskate, fleksibele of legere eintermen foar elk bern apart. Ien fereaske nivo is der net, by alle oare fakken wol. It fak Frysk diskriminearret yn ’e normearring de learling op arbitrêre grûnen. Bern mei in achterstân wurde wol ‘meinaam’, sa’t soks hjit, mar krije gjin ekstra omtinken, want hoege ommers dochs hast neat te witten en te kinnen. It fak docht der net ta en de learlingen wurde net serieus naam. Dat allegear is sûnder mis yn striid mei de geast fan de wet en it hânfêst. It rjocht fan Frysksprekkers op ûnderwiis yn de eigen taal betsjut neat as dat net ynhâldt it rjocht op goed ûnderwiis. Mar blykber leit it fêststellen fan sintrale, betsjuttingsfolle kearndoelen foar Frysk ûnderwiis yn Provinsjale Steaten noch altyd gefoelich. Der wurdt al jierren om de hite brij hinne draaid. De Nederlânske taal is de iennichste noarm. It komt der op del dat de Provinsje de lykweardigens fan it Frysk oan it Nederlânsk, en de lykweardigens fan de rjochten fan bern mei de Fryske en de Nederlânske memmetaal, net erkent. Polityk útsjoch Krekt dat meie wy net tastean. Sûnder sintrale, betsjuttingsfolle kearndoelen fan de Provinsje komt der gjin betsjuttingsfolle ûnderwiisynspeksje, kin der gjin kwaliteitsbyld ûntstean en is der gjin polityk útsjoch op maatregels: stappen rjochte op it realisearjen fan ferplichte, provinsjebreed, goed ûnderwiis yn de Fryske taal. Wy binne der net as wy allinnich mar útdrage wat al berikt is, en hammerje op wat berikt wurdt. It is like belangryk om de minsken

C. Fakkeloptocht foar better Frysk ûnderwiis 3 bewust te meitsjen fan wat bern en âlden yn Fryslân noch altyd ûntkeard wurdt: it rjocht op goed ûnderwiis yn har memmetaal. Dat de âlden fan de learlingen dêr sels net om roppe soene, is noait ûndersocht – mar it soe gjin wûnder wêze. Nederlânsk ûnderwiis is al sa lang de status quo dat men mar oannimt dat dêr in goede reden foar is. Dat de boarger der net om freegje soe is boppedat gjin reden om gjin ambysjeus taalbelied te fieren. Generaasjes, ieuwen Hollânske en Nederlânske taalpolityk hawwe in protte Friezen berôve fan sels al it idee dat se taalrjochten hawwe soene. En dat dy belangryk foar har binne, om’t se de frije ûntjouwing fan it yndividu befoarderje. It is goed te witten dat der al yn ’e tweintiger jierren fan de foarige ieu pedagogyske ûndersiken wiene dêr’t út bliken die dat bern it bêst en it fluchst leare yn de taal dy’t se prate. Wêrom it der dan no mar by litte dat Frysktalige bern mei in tebeksetter oan it libben begjinne? In tebeksetter dy’t, sa’t ûndersyk sjen lit, wol yn te heljen is as men sjocht nei technyske taalbehearsking, mar faak net mear goed te meitsjen is dêr’t it om it taalbelibjen as identiteitsaspekt giet. Foar in Hollânsktalich bern yn Fryslân is der gjin probleem: dat leart gewoan goed Nederlânsk. Dat leart oer en yn syn eigen taal, dat wurdt bekrêftige yn syn taal: hy sprekt ‘goed’. Foar in Frysktalich bern yn Fryslân leit dat hiel oars. Dat moat ynienen net allinnich Nederlânsk leare, mar ek ýn it Nederlânsk leare. It moat yn dy taal sizze kinne dat it ‘meertalig’ is, mar oer syn memmetaal stekt it mar in lyts bytsje mear as neat op. Dat is it twadde punt dat striidt mei ynternasjonale ferdraggen. Frysk wurdt op syn bêst ien oerke yn ’e wike jûn, wylst út in stúdzje fan taalûnderwiisynstitút Mercator yn 2009 al bliken die dat der fjouwer oant seis oeren yn ’e wike noadich binne om te foldwaan oan de easken fan it hânfêst. Net genôch Bern ynternalisearje de sosjale minderweardigens fan har taal as part fan har identiteit. It tastean fan in ûnderskode posysje fan it Frysk yn it ûnderwiis, sûnder dat learlingen of âlden dêr ynfloed op hawwe, is dêrom in foarm fan diskriminaasje dy’t in permaninte ûngelikens opsmite kin. Fryske taalstriid is noch altyd emansipaasjestriid. It trijetalich ûnderwiis is mooglik in antwurd – lykwols, om’t der fierstente min fan sokke skoallen binne (sa’n fyftich, hast allegear basisskoallen), sadat lang net alle bern yn Fryslân dêr gebrûk fan meitsje kinne, en om’t it Frysk ek dêryn noch mar in benaud lyts plak ynnimt, is it in ûnderwiisfoarm dy’t it probleem net fûneminteel oplost. Om’t troch de oerheid skoepen ferskillen yn útgongssitewaasje yn it libben tusken minsken as ûnwinsklik, ûnearlik en ûnetysk beskôge wurde, binne ynternasjonale beliedsrjochtlinen fêsteld. Dy wize regearingen en provinsjale oerheden derop dat hjir in rjocht op it spul stiet en dat sy ferplichtingen hawwe. Wy fan de boargeraksjegroep Sis Tsiis – Foar Frysk Underwiis dogge datselde. Tajûn, op in wat beskiedener skaal. Us boadskip oan de polityk yn Fryslân is ienfâldich: wat der al dien wurdt is belangryk, mar net genôch. De sitewaasje sa’t dy hjoed is, is yn striid mei de minskerjochten, wylst ynternasjonale ramten en ferdraggen hanfetten biede om de rjochten fan elk bern yndie te respektearjen – dêr moatte wy nei ta. Us boadskip oan de befolking is: hjir is in kâns op feroaring. Op ferbettering. Wy wolle de minsken útnoegje om op 22 desimber nei it Saailân yn Ljouwert te kommen, de jûns om 19.00 oere. Dan geane wy yn optocht troch de stêd, mei fakkels, rattels en byneed mei

C. Fakkeloptocht foar better Frysk ûnderwiis 4 jiskefetdeksels of in hiel korps, yn de alderearste positive publyksaksje foar mear en better Frysk ûnderwiis, mei it biedwurd: Frysk op skoalle – in bernerjocht! Boargeraksjegroep Sis Tsiis 26 novimber 2016

 Fideo Fakkeloptocht, 17 desimber 2016

 Frysk op skoalle – De praktyk, 5 desimber 2016, sistsiis2016.wordpress.com

It Frysk op skoalle – De praktyk As it om de praktyk fan it Frysk op basisskoallen giet, is de trystens mei gjin pinne te beskriuwen. Ik fetsje gear wat ik hear út it fjild. Earst wie der Studio F, in metoade Frysk op fjouwer nivo’s. Om’t wy yn Fryslân in protte lytse skoallen hawwe, wurkje de measte learkrêften yn kombinaasjegroepen. Dat betsjutte foar in kombinaasjegroep dus lesjaan mei Studio F op acht nivo’s. Net te dwaan, sizze sels dy ûnderwiisminsken dy’t hert foar it Frysk hawwe. En wat moatte sokke learkrêften dan? Sels mar wat oanrommelje, mei de bêste bedoelingen. Sels wat lesboekjes byinoar skarrelje. De bern yn godsnamme dan mar wat wurdrychjes oanleare: dagen, moannen, kleuren, bisten. Nei njoggen jier mei in net-funksjonearjend Studio F hawwe de Afûk en Cedin lêstlyn in nije metoade yntrodusearre: Spoar 8. Fan fjouwer nivo’s giet it no nei twa nivo’s. Dus foar in kombinaasjegroep betsjut dat noch altyd lesjaan op fjouwer nivo’s. Likegoed: net te dwaan.

C. Fakkeloptocht foar better Frysk ûnderwiis 5 Fierder binne de staveringslessen no ferwurke yn in, jawol, game: de Meunstertún fan in kommersjele saneamde serious gaming-fabrikant yn de Blokhúspoarte. Bern moatte harsels mei it spultsje de Fryske stavering oanleare, dus sûnder útlis, ynstruksje, foardwaan-neidwaan fan juf of master. Yn it begjin fûnen de bern, neffens sizzen, soks wol aardich en spannend, mar no’t it nije derôf is, bliuwe inkeld de echte gamers yn ‘e besnijing – de oaren binne al lang ôfheakke. De lessen fan Spoar 8 bestean út twa digitale lessen mei de learkrêft en dêrnei moatte de bern de learstof selsstannich ferwurkje yn in ‘tram’ of ‘trein’ opdracht. Leuk betocht, mar sûnder te rekkenjen mei it hiele lesprogramma op skoalle. ‘Organisearje in moadesjo’, ‘meitsje in presintaasje foar de groep’, ‘hâld in ynterview’. Opdrachten dy’t samar mear as twa oeren yn ’e wike nimme. Tiid dy’t der net is. Want wat wurdt der allegear wol net op it buordsje fan de learkrêft skood? Skoallen moatte mear tiid besteegje oan de kreative fakken, mear dramatise en musise foarming jaan, bern seksuele foarljochting jaan, bern programmearjen leare en feilich ynternetten, klearstome foar de hieltyd feroarjende maatskippij (21st Century Skills), bern ‘weerbaar’ meitsje (anty- pestprogramma’s folgje), bern ‘kanjertraining’ jaan om se sosjaal sterker te meitsjen, bern fan groep 1 ôf de Ingelske taal leare, en folle net genôch, en gjin ein. Dat moat dan ek noch allegear yn en mei itselde oantal oeren dien wurde, wylst dy ûnderwiistiid al foar it grutste part folle wurdt mei de fakken rekkenjen, lêzen en Nederlânsk. Fan de tiid dy’t dêr foar stiet mei fan de ynspeksje neat ôfhelle wurde. It slachtoffer is it Frysk. It fak Frysk moat der ‘noch eefkes’ by. En faak komt it fak yn ’e knoei. ‘Dan slaan we dat deze week maar een keer over.’ Us learkrêften rinne tsjin harren grinzen oan, tinke jo net? Mar de bûtenwrâld en ek de Fryske lesûntwikkelders hawwe gjin idee hoe’t it der op de wurkflier oan ta giet en ûnder watfoar druk learkrêften wurkje moatte. Der wurdt in skynwrâld skoepen fan leardoelen en mjitmominten dy’t neat mei de praktyk te krijen hat – of dy’t de praktyk oan it each ûntlûke moat? Guon skoallen soene graach alle wiken in Fryske middei hawwe wolle. Gewoan alle lessen yn it Frysk jaan op dy middei. En dan ek lesjaan yn ’e Fryske taal. Op ien nivo, mei-inoar en leafst klassikaal. Mar dat meie jo al hielendal net mear sizze: klassikaal is hjoeddedei not done. Koartsein: Fryslân hat opnij in metoade, stipe mei in soad jild fan de Provinsje, dêr’t it Frysk ûnderwiis en dus de Fryske bern fierstente min mei opsjitte. Is it bêste medisyn no it ferlienen fan ûntheffingen foar guon leardoelen, sa’t de provinsje docht yn syn ‘Taalplan Frysk’? Of is der stipe noadich foar de Frysk-swakke skoallen, mear tiid, mear jild, mear learkrêften mei foech, en fansels hearre dêr ek goede, yn de praktyk woartele en bewiisde lesmetoaden by? Twa Fryske learkrêften, 27 novimber 2016

C. Fakkeloptocht foar better Frysk ûnderwiis 6  Foarside Trouw, 23 desimber 2016

 Artikel Trouw, 23 desimber 2016

Fries kunnen verstaan gaat veel scholen al ver genoeg ONDERWIJS Taalliefhebbers demonstreren in Leeuwarden tegen scholen en provincie die te weinig zouden doen voor de Friese taal. 'We moeten nu van ons laten horen.' Laura van Baars - Redactie Onderwijs & Opvoeding ‘Sis Tsiis’ heet de actiegroep die gisteravond een fakkeloptocht hield op het Zaailand in Leeuwarden. Weet iemand nog wat dat betekent? Het gemiddelde Friese kind zou de woorden uitgesproken wel verstaan, kunnen vertalen naar ‘zeg kaas’ of zelfs ‘say cheese’, maar lezend of schrijvend wordt het al een stuk lastiger. En dat is precies waarom zo’n vijftig taalminnende demonstranten de straat opgingen: het schoolvak Fries was al jaren zwak, mar de aanpak van de provincie om het eindelijk te verbeteren, faalt. Schrijfster Friduwih Riemersma krijgt er een brok van in de keel. “Jammer dat veel scholen ons niet kunnen zien omdat ze vanavond kerstdiner vieren, maar we voelden dat we dit jaar nog van ons moesten laten horen.” De tijd dringt volgens Sis Tsiis omdat de provincie momenteel gesprekken voert met alle 420 basisscholen en 80 middelbare scholen in Friesland over de stand van hun Friese taalonderwijs. Van de 110 scholen die de provincie al bezocht heeft, geeft 57 procent aan dat ze de komende tijd liever niets doen aan Friese schrijf- of leesvaardigheid. Ze willen niet

C. Fakkeloptocht foar better Frysk ûnderwiis 7 verder gaan dan het leren verstaan van het Fries en de leerlingen een positievere houding jegens de taal bijbrengen. Deze scholen kregen van de provincie een ontheffing voor de duur van vier jaar. Sietske Poepjes, de gedeputeerde die verantwoordelijk is voor het verbetertraject Taalplan Frysk, begrijpt de zorgen van de Friezen – ‘onze taal raakt ons allemaal in hart en ziel’ –, maar beweert dat de scholen over vier jaar echt verbetering moeten laten zien. "Dan moeten deze scholen Fries taalonderwijs ontwikkeld hebben. Ik begrijp dat in de Nederlandstalige Stellingwerven nooit 100 procent Fries onderwijs gegeven zal worden, maar in de ‘diep- Friese’ gebieden als Makkum of Dokkum, waar ik zelf vandaan kom, spreken veel kinderen tot hun vierde niets anders dan Fries. Daar moet meer mogelijk zijn op school.” Wisselende kwaliteit In 2014 kreeg de provincie Friesland van het rijk de bevoegdheid overgedragen om het Friese onderwijs te verbeteren. Al jaren uitte de Onderwijsinspectie kritiek op de wisselende kwaliteit van het schoolvak. “Scholen moeten wel Friese les geven, maar stuitten op het probleem dat het ene kind van huis uit goed Fries heeft geleerd en het andere kind helemaal niet”, zegt een woordvoerder. “Het was dus lastig om een goed onderwijsprogramma te ontwikkelen en ieder kind te geven wat het nodig heeft.” Gevolg was dat veel scholen het vak er een beetje bijrommelden, en ‘het Fries het eerste vak was dat sneuvelde als er een musical ingestudeerd moest worden of er een sportdag was’, aldus Riemersma. ‘Ik hoop dat deze fakkeloptocht laat zien dat Fries taalonderwijs thuis begint’ ‘De lessen vroeger op school waren erg saai. Maar nu hebben we leuk digitaal lesmateriaal.’ Met het Taalplan Frysk probeert de provincie nu weer normen te stellen voor het schoolvak Fries. Ook op de kinderdagverblijven moeten juffen komen die het Fries beheersen. De ‘schoolbezoekers’ moeten tot het einde van volgend jaar bij alle scholen vaststellen wat het niveau is. Hoeveel tijd wordt er in de week aan het Fries besteed? Wat is de lesmethode en de voertaal op school? Hoe meer je aan het Fries doet, hoe meer geld je krijgt. Volgens Poepjes ligt een probleem ook bij de ouders, die weinig belang hebben aan het Fries. Vooral in de Friese steden wordt op alle schoolpleinen gewoon Nederlands gesproken. “Ik hoop dat de fakkeloptocht ook ouders laat zien dat het Friese taalonderwijs thuis begint.” Nu was het Friese taalonderwijs vroeger ook niet leuk op school. “De lessen waren erg saai, dat herinner ik me ook”, zegt Poepjes. “Maar we hebben u heel leuk digitaal lesmateriaal ontwikkeld waar ieder kind op zijn eigen niveau kan leren. De kinderen zijn er gek op. Ook de asielzoekerskinderen eten het op!” Sis Tsiis is er nog niet gerust op. Riemersma: “We vinden het allemaal erg vaag of die scholen die een ontheffing krijgen later echt meer werk maken van Fries onderwijs. We vragen ons af of de inspectie wel kan toetsen op kwaliteit.” Volgens Poepjes zijn de kerndoelen nu, samen met de inspectie, juist heel helder gesteld. De Onderwijsinspectie vindt het nog te vroeg om te oordelen over de kwaliteitsverbeteringen uit het Taalplan Frysk. “Als er grote veranderingen worden doorgevoerd, gaan we niet meteen inspecteren.”

C. Fakkeloptocht foar better Frysk ûnderwiis 8  Artikel NRC Handelsblad, 23 desimber 2016

Taal - Vuur voor het Fries Leewarden. Het Friese onderwijs moet verbeteren, en het moet méér gegeven worden. Om voor dat doel aandacht te vragen organiseerde het burgerinitiatief Sis Tsiis (‘Zeg kaas’) donderdagochtend een fakkeloptocht door het centrum van Leeuwarden, waaraan volgens de Leeuwarder Courant ruim 300 mensen deelnamen, het dubbele van het verwachte aantal. Zij worden in hun mening gesteund door de Raad van Europa, die vorige week in een rapport uithaalde naar de Nederlandse bescherming van minderheidstalen. De Raad gaf de aanbeveling dat het onderwijs in het Fries “versterkt” moet worden. Ook signaleerde de Raad dat de Friese taal op de meeste middelbare scholen in Friesland slechts één uur in de week onderwezen wordt, en dat slechts een jaar. Dat is “niet voldoende voor een aanvaardbaar niveau van geletterdheid”. Foto Catrinus van der Veen

C. Fakkeloptocht foar better Frysk ûnderwiis 9  Artikel Leeuwarder Courant, 23 desimber 2016

C. Fakkeloptocht foar better Frysk ûnderwiis 10 Bylage D. Stúdzjes nei it effekt fan taalpluralisme yn it ûnderwiis op ’e yndividu en stúdzjes nei it effekt fan sosjaal taalpluralisme en plurikulturaliteit op ’e maatskippij

 The best medium for teaching a child is his mother tongue

It is axiomatic that the best medium for teaching a child is his mother tongue. Psychologically, it is the system of meaningful signs that in his mind works automatically for expression and understanding. Sociologically, it is a means of identification among the members of the community to which he belongs. Educationally, he learns more quickly through it than through an unfamiliar linguistic medium.

Unesco, The use of vernacular languages in education (Paris: Unesco, 1953) 11.

 Unquestioned assumptions concerning the desirability of a single dominant language

Despite the fact that most countries and indeed their societies are multilingual, their educational systems tend to function in only one or two languages, due in part to the long- standing fallacy that national unity is built around a single language. Against this fallacy we would argue that using one language and excluding many others actually creates divisions, inequalities and inequities, because it means that hundreds of millions of people worldwide are forced to learn - or teach - through a language in which they are not proficient. Lack of proficiency in the language of instruction, when viewed from a dominant and monolingual perspective, is generally seen as a deficiency, and leamers from non-dominant groups are thus perceived as deficient even before they begin their school careers. lt is common to hear that there is a “language barrier.” Learners are not seen for what they already know and can do, which would be consistent with constructivist theory and learner-centered approaches (eg. Vygotsky, l978); instead they are identified by what they are missing. Ruiz ( l984) would call this a “language as problem” orientation. Gogolin (2002; see also Bourdieu, 1991) gets to the root of this orientation by showing how a monolingual habitus, or set of unquestioned assumptions concerning the desirability of a single dominant language, governs a great deal of decision-making in education worldwide. As a result, bi- or multilingualism is often rendered either invisible or undesirable.

Kimmo Kosonen en Carol Benson, ‘Introduction’, yn: Carol Benson en Kimmo Kosonen (red.), Language issues in comparative education: Inclusive teaching and learning through the use of non-dominant languages and cultures (Rotterdam: Sense Publishers, 2013) 2.

 Bi/multilingualism represents an advantage for the individual, for families, and for societies

We have increasing evidence that bi/multilingualism represents an advantage for the individual, for families, and for societies, and yet we systematically ignore this potential in the kind of instruction we implement.

D. Stúdzjes nei it effekt fan taalpluralisme yn it ûnderwiis 1 Jim Cummins, Presintaasje ‘Multilingualism and equity. Beyond the effectiveness paradigm: Exploring inspirational pedagogy for bilingual students’, Second International Conference on Multilingualism “Making Multilingualism Meaningful”, London Metropolitan University, 19-20 juny 2009, slide 3.

 The amount of instruction in the majority language is unrelated to student outcomes

Typically, opposition to the implementation of bilingual programs for lingistic minority groups is rationalized in psycholinguistic terms. It is frequently argued that linguistic minority students need to become fluent an dlitterate in the majority or dominant language in order to succeed academically; in order to achieve this goal, maximum exposure to the dominant language is claimed to be necessary. Bilingual education involving instruction partly through children’s mother tongue is dismissed as ‘illogical’ on the grounds that it dilutes children’s exposure to the majority language. Often parents of minority children also support this argument – they view the dominant language as the language of power and advancement in society and want to ensure that their children master this language. This line of argument no longer has any credibility among researchers who have examined the empirical data on bilingual education in international contexts. ... A finding common to all forms of bilingual education is that spending instructional time through two languages entails no long-term adverse effects on student’s academic development in majority language. ... [T]he research on bilingual education demonstrates unequivocally that the amount of instruction in the majority language at school is unrelated to student outcomes. ... [Psychological principles:] The language abilities required for academic success are very different from those operating in everyday conversational contexts. ... Among biligual children, transfer of academic language profinciency occurs accross languages when development of literacy in both languages is promoted in the school context. ... Development of ‘additive bilingualism’ where both languages continue to develop during school years is associated with positive intellectual and metalinguistic consequences. ... The fact that there is little relationship between the amount of instructional time through the majority language and academic achievement strongly suggests that first and second language academic skills are interdependent, i.e. manifestations of a common underlying proficiency. ... One important implication of the interdependence hypothesis is that instruction should explicitely encourage students to transfer knowledge and skills across languages.

Jim Cummins, ‘Fundamental psycholinguistic and sociological principles underlying educational success for linguistic minority students’, yn: Tove Skutnabb-Kangas, Robert Philipson, Ajit K. Mohanty en Minati Panda (red.), Social justice through multilingual education (Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, 2009) 19-35.

D. Stúdzjes nei it effekt fan taalpluralisme yn it ûnderwiis 2  Positive effects of bilingualism: only when progressing in both languages

As Cummins (1976) pointed out, studies that have shown the positive effect of bilingualism invariably are conducted in situations of additive bilingualism. This led Cummins to hypothize that there is a critical threshold level* of L1 [first language] and L2 [second language] ability that must be attained before the positive effects of bilingualism can be observed. ... an additive bilingual situation; that is, they [the children] were progressing in both L1 and L2, rather than L2 graduates.

Kenji Hakuta en Rafael M. Diaz, ‘The relationship between degree of bilingualism and cognitive ability’, yn: Keith E. Nelson, Children’s language, Vol. 5 (New York / London: Psychology Press, 1985) 319-344, 341. * ‘Threshold level’ wurdt brûkt troch de Ried fan Europa om in nivo fan taalbehearsking oan te jaan om yn in taal funksjonearje te kinnen.

 It is difficult to see the value of any tasks that are cognitively undemanding and context-reduced.* ... It is sometimes called busy work.

If teachers have an awareness of the likely difficulty of a task ... they can judge its appropriateness for the non-native speakers in their classes and in this way avoid much frustration. This does NOT mean, however, that ... students should be fed a diet of cognitively-undemanding tasks. It may be beneficial to use such activities in the student’s early days at school, in order to build confidence, or as a lead in to a more challenging activity. However, teachers should switch soon to tasks that engage the students’ brains.

Paul Shoebottom, ‘Second language acquisition - essential information’, Frankfurt International School, http://esl.fis.edu . *A context-reduced task is one that has little relevance to the academic program and in which students do not receive the necessary (strategic) guidance and support (Coelho, 2004).

 The lack of a wide range of domains of use is probably what discourages minority learners from trying to acquire greater competence in their language.

Most minority learners seem to learn their language at home and use it mostly at home. About half the respondents never learnt how to write their minority language. Whether that is the case for all minority groups deserves more investigation. Although most minority learners do not seem very pleased with their abilities in their minority language, except in conversation and pronunciation, they do not seem too worried about it, perhaps because many of them do not have to use the minority language in education or their working life in future. The lack of a wide range of domains of use is probably what discourages minority learners from trying to acquire greater competence in their language. ... If the languages have only a few functions to perform, learners will not be motivated to acquire a wide range of abilities in them; nor will they have the opportunity to do so.

Agnes S.L. Lam, Language education in China: Policy and experience from 1949 (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2005) 153.

D. Stúdzjes nei it effekt fan taalpluralisme yn it ûnderwiis 3  Assimilation is not freely chosen

What do parents want? Parents “want” English-medium education and assimilation for their children, hoping this leads to better jobs, it is claimed – and often this is true. But mother tongue learning and identification are often prevented by external forces and by presenting English (or any other dominant language) and the mother tongue ... as either/or, as if one cannot get both. The United Nation’s 2004 Human Development Report linked cultural liberty to language rights and human development and argued that there is no more powerful means of ‘encouraging’ individuals to assimilate to a dominant culture than having the economic, social and political returns stacked against their mother tongue. Such assimilation is not freely chosen if the choice is between one’s mother tongue and one’s future. ... Even when children have a year or two of mother-tongue-medium education (early-exit transitional models) before being transitioned to education through the medium of dominant language, the results are disastrous educationally, even if the child may psychologically feel a bit better initially. ... Both subtractive education completely through the medium of a dominant language and early-exit transition can and often do have harmful consequences socially, psychologically, economically, and politically. ... Subtractive and early-exit transitional programmes belong to non-models or weak models of bilingual education. In contrast to them, all strong successful [mother-tongue-based multilingual education] models (for both [minority] and dominant group children) use mainly a minority language as the main teaching language during the first many years. The most important educational Linguistic Human Right in education for [minority] children is an unconditional right to mother tongue medium education in a non-fee state school, at least during the whole primary education (minimally 6 but preferably 8 years).

Tove Skutnabb-Kangas, ‘The stakes: Linguistic diversity, linguistic human rights and mother- tongue-based multilingual education’, Keynote presentation at Bamako International Forum on Multilingualism, Bamako, Mali, 19-21 jannewaris 2009.

 Common misperceptions on the part of parents and teachers

There are also a few common misperceptions on the part of parents and teachers. This is understandable since their own experience with formal schooling has usually been in L2 [i.e. second language] submersion-type systems, where students have to “sink or swim” through repetition and memorization. If this is the only system they know, they may believe that only the ex-colonial language is worthy of classroom use. The idea of becoming biliterate is also an anomaly in countries where the home language has long been portrayed as inferior and incapable of expressing complex academic thought. While it is true that many indigenous languages have come into written form relatively recently, this should be seen as a political/ historical choice rather than as some problem inherent in the languages themselves.

D. Stúdzjes nei it effekt fan taalpluralisme yn it ûnderwiis 4 Carol Benson, ‘Bilingual schooling as educational development: From experimentation to implementation’, yn: James Cohen, Kara T. McAlister, Kellie Rolstad en Jeff MacSwan (red.), ISB4: Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Bilingualism (Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, 2005) 249-258, 253.

 Use of the first language for reasons of culture and identity

Anthropologists as well as linguists have long recognized the relationship between language and culture. The meaning of this connection was expressed very well by Sapir and Whorf in the 1950’s. They say that the world of the individual is organized by his or her linguistic system: We cut nature up, organize it into concepts, and ascribe significances as we do, largely because we are parties to an agreement to organize it in this way an agreement that holds through our speech community and is codified in the patterns of our language (Whorf, 1956:212).

Carol Benson, Final report on bilingual education: Results of the external evaluation of the Experiment in Bilingual Schooling in Mozambique (PEBIMO) and some results from bilingual adult literacy experimentation, Education Division Documents No. 8 (Stockholm: Sida, 2001) 23.

 Mother tongue and foreign language can be mutually beneficial

Development in language learning theory has brought about new perspectives on the mutual relationship between mother tongue and foreign language learning. Traditionally the way of regarding this relationship has been based on psycholinguistic theories, mainly concerned with developing perspedives as analogies of language acquisition in mother tongue and foreign language, interlanguage theory is closely linked with psychlinguistic theories and error analysis. Research in this field has concentrated on Chomsky’s communicative performance. As a result of such theories, teachers have focused on errors and mistakes the learner makes, which can be traced back to his or her native language. It has enabled us to interpret and understand the reason for some mistakes made, but it has not necessarily made a positive impact on the way teachers regard and assist the individual’s learning process. Research in contrastive analysis has mainly been concerned with the linguistic aspects of communicative cornpetence, not the learner’s text as a structure of meaning and discourse. Rather than using interlanguage theory to assist the individual’s learning, most research has focused on the shortcomings of the student. Because interlanguage focuses on errors in words and sentences in the learner’s text, it is not very useful as a tool if we want to analyse the learner’s text as a whole. Today, however, a renewed interest in the relationship is no longer restricted to either a purely psychlinguistic concern or to investigations about how mother tongue influences foreign language learning. The assumption is rather that mutual influence takes place, consciously or unconsciously. In mother tongue learning and teaching as well as in foreign language classrooms, there is an increased interest in what kind of relationship we are dealing with and how learning, in respectively mother tongue and foreign language, can be mutually beneficial.

D. Stúdzjes nei it effekt fan taalpluralisme yn it ûnderwiis 5 Anne Brit Fenner, Turid Trebbi en Laila Aase, ‘Mother tongue and foreign language teaching and learning - A joint project’, Bells: Barcelona English language and literature studies 10 (1999) 133-143.

 Frisians are insecure in Dutch but also in their first language

A further factor having a negative influence upon Frisian language maintenance is the phenomenon ... termed “schizoglossia.” In the Frisian case the situation is such that many Frisians are insecure not only in their second language, Dutch, but also in the full range of possible uses of their first language. Instrumental in the development of this situation has been the long period of diglossia in Friesland (Dutch being the dominant language of prestige, power and upward mobility), and Dutch interference on Frisian. The effect of this linguistic interference has been to widen the linguistic gap between standard and colloquial Frisian, while diglossia has rendered many Frisians incapable of using Frisian in some domains. The status of colloquial Frisian is depricated in the eyes of Frisian speakers because in comparison to the standard language it is by no means pure Frisian. However, Standard Frisian is also seen in a ambivalent light since in its traditional form it is viewed as more literary and restricted in use and practical value.

James Floyd Smith, Language and language attitudes in a bilingual community: Terherne (Friesland) (Grins / Ljouwert: Frysk Ynstitút & Fryske Akademy, 1980) 5.

 Plurilingual competence

While a social group tends to impose as legitimate perceptions based on adherence to and recognition of its own values, the plurilingual individual manages to impose his own competence, in relations with other cultural communities, as a legitimate or superior perception. ... As an expert in intuitive understanding of the social, political and economic variations of the markets into which he finds himself successively ushered, the plurilingual individual thus constructs for himself a competence in the carriage of economic and cultural goods, and the crossing of cultural frontiers. Through this continually reassessed and redistributed capital of experience, the relationship with otherness gradually comes to be seen as a specific skill, which presents a social interest and may be converted into an asset.

Daniel Coste, Danièle Moore en Geneviève Zarate, ‘Plurilingual and pluricultural competence: Studies towards a Common European Framework of Reference for language learning and teaching’ [French version originally published in 1997] (Strasbourg: Council of Europe - Language policy divison, 2009) 23.

 Eentaligheid en waardensysteem

Met betrekking tot de bovenstaande sociaal-psychologische theorie kan men zich de vraag stellen of het negatiever staan ten aanzien van de Friese beweging, de Friese taal enz. impliceert, dat men dan ook meer de informatie hierover uit de weg zal gaan. Waarden die

D. Stúdzjes nei it effekt fan taalpluralisme yn it ûnderwiis 6 niet in overeenstemming zijn met het eigen waardensysteem zal men veelal willen buitensluiten. Zij die negatief tegenover de „Friese zaak” staan, zullen minder of geen Fries leren, minder of niet naar de RONO luisteren, zich minder of niet in het Fries verdiepen enz. Het antwuurd op onze vraag is in hoofdstuk B 1 reeds gegeven ... : Een negatieve houding houdt in dat er minder of geen Fries wordt gelexen (1/73), dat er geen of zeer weinig Friese boeken in huis zijn (3/16) of worden gekocht (3/15), dat er minder naar een Fries toneelstuk wordt gegaan (3/60), dat het Friese programma van de RONO nooit of zelden wordt beluisterd (3/65), dat het nieuws in de dagbladen over de Friese taal of beweging niet of zelden wordt gelezen (4/34), dat het liefst met Hollands- en niet met Friessprekenden wordt omgegaan (4/64), dat het liefst buiten Friesland wordt gewoond (1/36), dat minder of nooit van de Fryske Boekewike is gehoord (5/67) en dat men minder of niet is te vinden voor regionale t.v. met uitzendingen over Friesland (4/54). Dus negatiever tegenover de „Friese zaak” staan houdt in dat men slecht over deze „zaak” is geïnformeerd. Men gaat de informatie hierover (actief?) uit de weg. ... We herhalen wat Linschoten zei over het verband tussen informatie-zoeken over een zaak en de instelling of de opvatting over deze zaak: „Wanneer bepaalde gegevens ons niet uitkomen, verwerpen wij ze als onwaarschijnlijk, gefingeerd, overdreven, absurd, onmogelijk, kontradiktorisch.”

Lieuwe Pietersen, De Friezen en hun taal (Drachten: Laverman, 1969) 152.

 Il y a dix ans de cela ... l’attitude envers la langue maternelle a changé.

Le bilingue est, dans une certaine mesure, maître de ses paroles. En principe, il dispose d’un grand choix; en pratique, il est souvent lié par l’une ou l’autre nécessité sociale. D’une façon générale, il n’est pas besoin de discuter des avantages et des inconvénients du bilinguisme. Certains grandissent dans des conditions qui en font des bilingues. Et pourtant, on a écrit de nombreux ouvrages sur les dangers éventuels du bilinguisme. Il retarderait l’enfant dans d’autres domaines de la connaissance théorique et pratique, il risquerait de le faire bégayer, de provoquer des dédoublements de personnalité. En réalité, la situation n’est pas aussi sombre. De nos jours, lorsque l’on constate un retard chez des enfants bilingues par rapport à des enfants unilingues, on prend soin d’examiner le contexte social respectif avant de condamner le bilinguisme. Le bilinguisme en soi ne doit pas être un inconvénient; tout dépend de la façon dont le bilingue est encadré à l’école et en dehors de l’école. Ce qui compte, c’est la façon dont le bilingue a acquis sa seconde langue et s’il se sent à l’aise lorsqu’il l’utilise. L’acquisition de la langue et les difficultés rencontrées au cours de ce processus jouent un grand rôle dans la psycholinguistique actuelle. ... En Scandinavie, les Lapons, ou Sames comme ils se nomment eux-mêmes, ont obtenu des écoles bilingues; leurs enfants y apprennent à lire, à écrire et à compter dans leur propre langue, avant d’apprendre les langues officielles. Au début, beaucoup de parents sames n’étaient pas très enthousiastes, car ils préféraient que leurs enfants apprennent directement la langue officielle. Il y a dix ans de cela. Aujourd’hui, les jeunes parents sames protestent contre le même système, mais pour on autre motif: ils trouvent que ces écoles cherchent à assimiler, à exterminer leur langue au lieu d’en favoriser le développement. Ils se plaignent de ce que les pouvoirs publics n’utilisent leur langue que comme un tremplin pour l’enseignement de la langue officielle. Les mêmes mesures suscitent donc des reactions

D. Stúdzjes nei it effekt fan taalpluralisme yn it ûnderwiis 7 totalements différentes car l’ideologie linguistique, l’attitude envers la langue maternelle ont changé.

Kr. Boelens, Ecoles primaires de Frise: Un enseignement bilingue aux Pays-Bas (La Haye: Ministère de l‘Enseignement et des Sciences, 1976) 13-22.

 The overall attitudes seem moderately positive, more among the public at large and parents than among teachers and school directors

The Frisian language has obtained a presence on all levels of education, although marginal in most cases. Language policy by the government has emphasised the teaching of Frisian in primary schools. The developments over the last decades have not been as remarkable as in other regions. The overall attitudes seem moderately positive, more among the public at large and parents than among teachers and school directors. Research has shown repeatedly that school achievement in Dutch is not affected by bilingual programs and the outcomes for Frisian are more positive. The experiment with trilingual education was received positively, although the outcomes for Frisian and English were not as persuasive as expected. It is concluded that the position of Frisian is rather weak compared to the other cases in this volume, although the point of departure is relatively favourable in terms of the proportion of speakers in society.

Durk Gorter en Cor van der Meer, ‘Developments in bilingual Frisian-Dutch education in Friesland’, AILA Review 21:1 (2008) 87-103.

 It involves not only foreign languages but languages in proximity

[F]rom the point of view of teaching methodology, plurilingual and intercultural education is not to be thought of as a new methodology for the teaching of languages. It is rather a change in perspective, characterised by the fact that it involves not only foreign languages but that languages in proximity, the languages of the repertoires of learners, the language(s) of schooling and of all subjects, are integral to it. In fact plurilingual and intercultural education is above all distinctive with respect to its purposes, which are the fundamental rights of each learner, based on values which guarantee his/her education as an individual and as a citizen. These values are constituted as a consequence of the activities of the Council of Europe: social cohesion and solidarity, participatory democracy, reciprocal understanding, and the respect for and valorisation of linguistic and cultural diversity (Coste (ed.), 2009).

Marisa Cavalli, Daniel Coste, Alexandru Crişan en Piet-Hein van de Ven, ‘Plurilingual and intercultural education as a project’, Studies prepared for the intergovernmental Conference “Languages of schooling and the right to plurilingual and intercultural education”, Strasbourg 8-10 juny 2009 (Strasbourg: Council of Europe - Language Policy Division, 2009) 7-8.

D. Stúdzjes nei it effekt fan taalpluralisme yn it ûnderwiis 8  Bern fiele har frijer

Bern fiele har frijer Leeuwarder Courant, 12 juny 1950, s. 1. De Friese proefscholen

Kinderen voelen zich vrijer

Met enthousiasme sprak de heer A.L.J. Wytzes op de vergadering van het Paedagogysk Wurkforbân van de Fryske Akademy over de resultaten van de negen proefscholen in Friesland. Het was de commissie, bestaande uit de heren P. Post, R.J. Sipkens en A.L.J. Wytzes, vooral opgevallen, dat de kinderen zich vrijer voelden en zich gemakkelijk en vlot uiten, nu zij van het Fries gebruik maakten.

De negen scholen, waar in het nieuwe jaar geheel in het Fries begonnen is, zijn Menaldum (leerlingen 22), Wommels (5), Oldeboorn (11), Opeinde (11), Sexbierum (14), Eestrum (17), Oudega-W. (9), Rottevalle (25) en Gersloot (12). Twee andere scholen zullen nog ingeschakeld worden. Bij de bespreking werd nog medegedeeld dat het de bedoeling is, dat deze scholen gewoon zullen doorgaan, zodat volgend jaar de tweede klas Fries is en de eerste ook. In welk jaar men het best met het Hollands kan aanvangen, weet men nog niet. Wel denkt men, dat er een geheel nieuwe methode gebruikt moeten worden om niet in de fouten van het verleden te vervallen. Ook gaat men uit van het standpunt dat volgens het onderzoek van taalpsychologen een tweede taal niet voor de ouderdom van negen jaar gebruikt mag worden, omdat daar onoverkomelijke bezwaren tegen bestaan, zoals in een van de rapporten staat, die het werkverband de Akademy heeft aangeboden. Het rapport van de kleuterscholen wijst er dan ook op, dat op de Friese kleuterscholen het Fries de voertaal moet zijn. De andere rapporten geven werkwijzen aan voor de verschillende schoolsoorten. Tot besluit van de vergadering werd een definitief bestuur gekozen, dat bestaat uit de heren A.L.J. Wytzes, H. Twerda, M.J. de Haan, A. Roosma en W. Wieling.

D. Stúdzjes nei it effekt fan taalpluralisme yn it ûnderwiis 9 Bylage E. List mei wetlike ynstruminten dy’t ta ûnderwiis yn it Frysk ferplichtsje

Wetlik binende ynternasjonale oerienkomsten

• Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) Article 2 Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty. Article 19 Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. Article 26 1. Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit. 2. Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace. 3. Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.

• Convention against Discrimination in Education (1960) Article 5 1.The States Parties to this Convention agree that: (c) It is essential to recognize the right of members of national minorities to carry on their own educational activities, including the maintenance of schools and, depending on the educational policy of each State, the use or the teaching of their own language, provided however: (i) That this right is not exercised in a manner which prevents the members of these minorities from understanding the culture and language of the community as a whole and from participating in its activities, or which prejudices national sovereignty; (ii) That the standard of education is not lower than the general standard laid down or approved by the competent authorities; and (iii) That attendance at such schools is optional. 2.The States Parties to this Convention undertake to take all necessary measures to ensure the application of the principles enunciated in paragraph 1 of this Article.

E. List mei wetlike ynstruminten 1 • Ynternasjonaal ferdrach oangeande boargerrjochten en politike rjochten (ICCPR, 1966) Article 19 2. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice. 3. The exercise of the rights provided for in paragraph 2 of this article carries with it special duties and responsibilities. It may therefore be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary: (a) For respect of the rights or reputations of others; (b) For the protection of national security or of public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals. Article 26 All persons are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to the equal protection of the law. In this respect, the law shall prohibit any discrimination and guarantee to all persons equal and effective protection against discrimination on any ground such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Article 27 In those States in which ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities exist, persons belonging to such minorities shall not be denied the right, in community with the other members of their group, to enjoy their own culture, to profess and practise their own religion, or to use their own language.

• Bernerjochteferdrach (CRC, 1989) Article 2 1. States Parties shall respect and ensure the rights set forth in the present Convention to each child within their jurisdiction without discrimination of any kind, irrespective of the child's or his or her parent's or legal guardian's race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national, ethnic or social origin, property, disability, birth or other status. 2. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that the child is protected against all forms of discrimination or punishment on the basis of the status, activities, expressed opinions, or beliefs of the child's parents, legal guardians, or family members. Article 29 1. States Parties agree that the education of the child shall be directed to: (a) The development of the child’s personality, talents and mental and physical abilities to their fullest potential; (c) The development of respect for the child’s parents, his or her own cultural identity, language and values, for the national values of the country in which the child is living, the country from which he or she may originate, and for civilizations different from his or her own; Article 30 In those States in which ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities or persons of indigenous origin exist, a child belonging to such a minority or who is indigenous shall not be denied the right, in community with other members of his or her group, to enjoy his or her own culture, to profess and practise his or her own religion, or to use his or her own language.

E. List mei wetlike ynstruminten 2 • Implementation of the International covenant on economic, social and cultural rights, 1999. General Comment No. 13: The right to education (article 13 of the Covenant) 50. In relation to article 13 (2), States have obligations to respect, protect and fulfil each of the “essential features” (availability, accessibility, acceptability, adaptability) of the right to education. By way of illustration, a State must respect the availability of education by not closing private schools; protect the accessibility of education by ensuring that third parties, including parents and employers, do not stop girls from going to school; fulfil (facilitate) the acceptability of education by taking positive measures to ensure that education is culturally appropriate for minorities and indigenous peoples, and of good quality for all; fulfil (provide) the adaptability of education by designing and providing resources for curricula which reflect the contemporary needs of students in a changing world; and fulfil (provide) the availability of education by actively developing a system of schools, including building classrooms, delivering programmes, providing teaching materials, training teachers and paying them domestically competitive salaries.

• The UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions (2005) Preamble Recital 14 Recalling that linguistic diversity is a fundamental element of cultural diversity, and reaffirming the fundamental role that education plays in the protection of cultural expressions,

Wetlik binende regionale ynstruminten

Kutureel erfskip

• Framework Convention on the value of cultural heritage for society (Council of Europe 2005) Article 13 Cultural heritage and knowledge a. facilitate the inclusion of the cultural heritage dimension at all levels of education, not necessarily as a subject of study in its own right, but as a fertile source for studies in other subjects;

Minderheden

• Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (1998) Article 4 1. The Parties undertake to guarantee to persons belonging to national minorities the right of equality before the law and of equal protection of the law. In this respect, any discrimination based on belonging to a national minority shall be prohibited.

E. List mei wetlike ynstruminten 3 2. The Parties undertake to adopt, where necessary, adequate measures in order to promote, in all areas of economic, social, political and cultural life, full and effective equality between persons belonging to a national minority and those belonging to the majority. In this respect, they shall take due account of the specific conditions of the persons belonging to national minorities. 3. The measures adopted in accordance with paragraph 2 shall not be considered to be an act of discrimination. Article 5 1. The Parties undertake to promote the conditions necessary for persons belonging to national minorities to maintain and develop their culture, and to preserve the essential elements of their identity, namely their religion, language, traditions and cultural heritage. 2. Without prejudice to measures taken in pursuance of their general integration policy, the Parties shall refrain from policies or practices aimed at assimilation of persons belonging to national minorities against their will and shall protect these persons from any action aimed at such assimilation. Article 6 1. The Parties shall encourage a spirit of tolerance and intercultural dialogue and take effective measures to promote mutual respect and understanding and co-operation among all persons living on their territory, irrespective of those persons’ ethnic, cultural, linguistic or religious identity, in particular in the fields of education, culture and the media. 2. The Parties undertake to take appropriate measures to protect persons who may be subject to threats or acts of discrimination, hostility or violence as a result of their ethnic, cultural, linguistic or religious identity. Article 10 1. The Parties undertake to recognise that every person belonging to a national minority has the right to use freely and without interference his or her minority language, in private and in public, orally and in writing. 2. In areas inhabited by persons belonging to national minorities traditionally or in substantial numbers, if those persons so request and where such a request corresponds to a real need, the Parties shall endeavour to ensure, as far as possible, the conditions which would make it possible to use the minority language in relations between those persons and the administrative authorities. 3. The Parties undertake to guarantee the right of every person belonging to a national minority to be informed promptly, in a language which he or she understands, of the reasons for his or her arrest, and of the nature and cause of any accusation against him or her, and to defend himself or herself in this language, if necessary with the free assistance of an interpreter. Article 11 1. The Parties undertake to recognise that every person belonging to a national minority has the right to use his or her surname (patronym) and first names in the minority language and the right to official recognition of them, according to modalities provided for in their legal system. 2. The Parties undertake to recognise that every person belonging to a national minority has the right to display in his or her minority language signs, inscriptions and other information of a private nature visible to the public. 3. In areas traditionally inhabited by substantial numbers of persons belonging to a national minority, the Parties shall endeavour, in the framework of their legal system, including, where appropriate, agreements with other States, and taking into account their specific conditions, to

E. List mei wetlike ynstruminten 4 display traditional local names, street names and other topographical indications intended for the public also in the minority language when there is a sufficient demand for such indications. Article 12 1. The Parties shall, where appropriate, take measures in the fields of education and research to foster knowledge of the culture, history, language and religion of their national minorities and of the majority. 2. In this context the Parties shall inter alia provide adequate opportunities for teacher training and access to textbooks, and facilitate contacts among students and teachers of different communities. 3. The Parties undertake to promote equal opportunities for access to education at all levels for persons belonging to national minorities. Article 13 1. Within the framework of their education systems, the Parties shall recognise that persons belonging to a national minority have the right to set up and to manage their own private educational and training establishments. 2. The exercise of this right shall not entail any financial obligation for the Parties. Article 14 1. The Parties undertake to recognise that every person belonging to a national minority has the right to learn his or her minority language. 2. In areas inhabited by persons belonging to national minorities traditionally or in substantial numbers, if there is sufficient demand, the Parties shall endeavour to ensure, as far as possible and within the framework of their education systems, that persons belonging to those minorities have adequate opportunities for being taught the minority language or for receiving instruction in this language. 3. Paragraph 2 of this article shall be implemented without prejudice to the learning of the official language or the teaching in this language.

Fûnemintele of minskerjochten

• Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (2009) Article 21 Non-discrimination 1. Any discrimination based on any ground such as sex, race, colour, ethnic or social origin, genetic features, language, religion or belief, political or any other opinion, membership of a national minority, property, birth, disability, age or sexual orientation shall be prohibited. 2. Within the scope of application of the Treaties and without prejudice to any of their specific provisions, any discrimination on grounds of nationality shall be prohibited. Article 22 Cultural, religious and linguistic diversity The Union shall respect cultural, religious and linguistic diversity.

E. List mei wetlike ynstruminten 5 Wetlik binende nasjonale ynstruminten

• Wet op het primair onderwijs (1981; 2014) Artikel 9. Inhoud onderwijs 4. Op de scholen in de provincie Fryslân wordt tevens onderwijs gegeven in de Friese taal. Gedeputeerde staten kunnen op verzoek van het bevoegd gezag gedeeltelijke of volledige ontheffing van deze verplichting verlenen. Gedeputeerde staten stellen in een beleidsregel criteria vast voor die gedeeltelijke en volledige ontheffing. De vaststelling geschiedt niet eerder dan nadat gedeputeerde staten overleg hebben gevoerd met het Friese primair onderwijs. 6. Ten aanzien van de onderwijsactiviteit, bedoeld in het vierde lid, stellen provinciale staten van Fryslân bij verordening kerndoelen Friese taal vast. De vaststelling geschiedt niet eerder dan nadat gedeputeerde staten overleg hebben gevoerd met het Friese primair onderwijs. De verordening behoeft de goedkeuring van Onze minister. Indien Onze minister voornemens is goedkeuring te onthouden, verzoekt hij de Onderwijsraad een advies uit te brengen. Het verzoek bevat een omschrijving van de onderwerpen waarover advies wordt verwacht. Het advies wordt binnen zes weken uitgebracht aan Onze minister en wordt bekend gemaakt. Onze minister informeert beide Kamers der Staten-Generaal over zijn voornemen om al dan niet goed te keuren. Paragraaf 4.1.3.3 van de Algemene wet bestuursrecht is niet van overeenkomstige toepassing. 7. Onze minister kan goedkeuring als bedoeld in het zesde lid in ieder geval onthouden indien aan de volgende voorwaarden, waarvoor gedeputeerde staten gegevens aandragen, niet wordt voldaan: a. het bestaan van voldoende draagvlak in het Friese primair onderwijs voor de voorgelegde kerndoelen Friese taal; b. dat de kerndoelen Friese taal niet meer inspanningen van het Friese primair onderwijs vergen dan het aandeel van het onderwijs in de Friese taal binnen het totaal aan onderwijsactiviteiten rechtvaardigt. 8. Onze minister kan goedkeuring als bedoeld in het zesde lid in ieder geval onthouden indien de kerndoelen Friese taal geen aandacht schenken aan: a. het zich mondeling uitdrukken in het Fries en het verstaan van de Fries gesproken taal, b. het zich schriftelijk uitdrukken in het Fries en het verwerven van informatie uit in het Fries gestelde teksten, c. bevordering van het begrip van de Friese taal, en d. het ontwikkelen van een positieve houding ten aanzien van het gebruik van het Fries.

• Wet op het voortgezet onderwijs (1963; 2014) Artikel 11e. Fries 1. Op de scholen in de provincie Fryslân wordt met inachtneming van de daarvoor vastgestelde kerndoelen tevens onderwijs gegeven in de Friese taal en cultuur, tenzij gedeputeerde staten op verzoek van het bevoegd gezag gedeeltelijke of volledige ontheffing van deze verplichting hebben verleend. Gedeputeerde staten stellen in een beleidsregel criteria vast voor die gedeeltelijke en volledige ontheffing. De vaststelling van deze criteria geschiedt niet eerder dan nadat gedeputeerde staten overleg hebben gevoerd met het Friese voortgezet onderwijs.

E. List mei wetlike ynstruminten 6 2. Provinciale staten van Fryslân stellen de kerndoelen Friese taal en cultuur, bedoeld in het eerste lid, bij verordening vast. De vaststelling geschiedt niet eerder dan nadat gedeputeerde staten overleg hebben gevoerd met het Friese voortgezet onderwijs. De verordening behoeft de goedkeuring van Onze Minister. Indien Onze Minister voornemens is goedkeuring te onthouden, verzoekt hij de Onderwijsraad een advies uit te brengen. Het verzoek bevat een omschrijving van de onderwerpen waarover advies wordt verwacht. Het advies wordt binnen zes weken uitgebracht aan Onze Minister en wordt bekend gemaakt. Onze Minister informeert beide Kamers der Staten-Generaal over zijn voornemen om al dan niet goed te keuren. Paragraaf 4.1.3.3 van de Algemene wet bestuursrecht is niet van overeenkomstige toepassing. 3. Onze Minister kan goedkeuring in ieder geval onthouden indien aan de volgende voorwaarden, waarvoor gedeputeerde staten gegevens aandragen, niet wordt voldaan: 9a. het bestaan van voldoende draagvlak in het Friese voortgezet onderwijs voor de voorgelegde kerndoelen Friese taal en cultuur; b. dat de kerndoelen Friese taal en cultuur niet meer inspanningen vergen van het Friese voortgezet onderwijs dan het aandeel van het onderwijs in de Friese taal en cultuur binnen het onderwijsprogramma, bedoeld in artikel 11c, eerste lid, rechtvaardigt. 4. Onze Minister kan goedkeuring in ieder geval onthouden indien de kerndoelen Friese taal en cultuur geen aandacht schenken aan: a. het zich mondeling uitdrukken in het Fries en het verstaan van de Fries gesproken taal, b. het zich schriftelijk uitdrukken in het Fries en het verwerven van informatie uit in het Fries gestelde teksten, c. bevordering van het begrip van de Friese taal en cultuur, en d. het ontwikkelen van een positieve houding ten aanzien van het gebruik van het Fries.

Wetlik net-binende ynternasjonale oerienomsten

• UN Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities (1992) Article 2 1. Persons belonging to national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities (hereinafter referred to as persons belonging to minorities) have the right to enjoy their own culture, to profess and practise their own religion, and to use their own language, in private and in public, freely and without interference or any form of discrimination. 4. Persons belonging to minorities have the right to establish and maintain their own associations. Article 4 1. States shall take measures where required to ensure that persons belonging to minorities may exercise fully and effectively all their human rights and fundamental freedoms without any discrimination and in full equality before the law. 2. States shall take measures to create favourable conditions to enable persons belonging to minorities to express their characteristics and to develop their culture, language, religion, traditions and customs, except where specific practices are in violation of national law and contrary to international standards.

E. List mei wetlike ynstruminten 7 3. States should take appropriate measures so that, wherever possible, persons belonging to minorities may have adequate opportunities to learn their mother tongue or to have instruction in their mother tongue. 4. States should, where appropriate, take measures in the field of education, in order to encourage knowledge of the history, traditions, language and culture of the minorities existing within their territory. Persons belonging to minorities should have adequate opportunities to gain knowledge of the society as a whole. 5. States should consider appropriate measures so that persons belonging to minorities may participate fully in the economic progress and development in their country.

• The 1995 Declaration and Integrated Framework of Action on Education for Peace, Human Rights and Democracy Article 29 Furthermore, in order to create understanding between different groups in society, there must be respect for the educational rights of persons belonging to national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities, as well as indigenous people, and this must also have implications in the curricula and methods as well as in the way education is organized.

• Universal Declaration of Linguistic Rights (1996) Article 23 1. Education must help to foster the capacity for linguistic and cultural self-expression of the language community of the territory where it is provided. 2. Education must help to maintain and develop the language spoken by the language community of the territory where it is provided. 3. Education must always be at the service of linguistic and cultural diversity and of harmonious relations between different language communities throughout the world. 4. Within the context of the foregoing principles, everyone has the right to learn any language. Article 24 All language communities have the right to decide to what extent their language is to be present, as a vehicular language and as an object of study, at all levels of education within their territory: preschool, primary, secondary, technical and vocational, university, and adult education. Article 25 All language communities are entitled to have at their disposal all the human and material resources necessary to ensure that their language is present to the extent they desire at all levels of education within their territory: properly trained teachers, appropriate teaching methods, textbooks, finance, buildings and equipment, traditional and innovative technology. Article 26 All language communities are entitled to an education which will enable their members to acquire a full command of their own language, including the different abilities relating to all the usual spheres of use, as well as the most extensive possible command of any other language they may wish to know. Article 27

E. List mei wetlike ynstruminten 8 All language communities are entitled to an education which will enable their members to acquire knowledge of any languages related to their own cultural tradition, such as literary or sacred languages which were formerly habitual languages of the community. Article 28 All language communities are entitled to an education which will enable their members to acquire a thorough knowledge of their cultural heritage (history, geography, literature, and other manifestations of their own culture), as well as the most extensive possible knowledge of any other culture they may wish to know. Article 29 1. Everyone is entitled to receive an education in the language proper to the territory where he/she resides. 2. This right does not exclude the right to acquire oral and written knowledge of any language which may be of use to him/her as an instrument of communication with other language communities. Article 30 The language and culture of all language communities must be the subject of study and research at university level.

• UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity (2001) Article 5 – Cultural rights as an enabling environment for cultural diversity Cultural rights are an integral part of human rights, which are universal, indivisible and interdependent. The flourishing of creative diversity requires the full implementation of cultural rights as defined in Article 27 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in Articles 13 and 15 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. All persons have therefore the right to express themselves and to create and disseminate their work in the language of their choice, and particularly in their mother tongue; all persons are entitled to quality education and training that fully respect their cultural identity; and all persons have the right to participate in the cultural life of their choice and conduct their own cultural practices, subject to respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.

• United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007) Article 13 1. Indigenous peoples have the right to revitalize, use, develop and transmit to future generations their histories, languages, oral traditions, philosophies, writing systems and literatures, and to designate and retain their own names for communities, places and persons. 2. States shall take effective measures to ensure that this right is protected and also to ensure that indigenous peoples can understand and be understood in political, legal and administrative proceedings, where necessary through the provision of interpretation or by other appropriate means. Article 14

E. List mei wetlike ynstruminten 9 1. Indigenous peoples have the right to establish and control their educational systems and institutions providing education in their own languages, in a manner appropriate to their cultural methods of teaching and learning. 2. Indigenous individuals, particularly children, have the right to all levels and forms of education of the State without discrimination. 3. States shall, in conjunction with indigenous peoples, take effective measures, in order for indigenous individuals, particularly children, including those living outside their communities, to have access, when possible, to an education in their own culture and provided in their own language. Article 16 1. Indigenous peoples have the right to establish their own media in their own languages and to have access to all forms of non-indigenous media without discrimination 2. States shall take effective measures to ensure that State-owned media duly reflect indigenous cultural diversity. States, without prejudice to ensuring full freedom of expression, should encourage privately owned media to adequately reflect indigenous cultural diversity.

Wetlik net-binende regionale oerienkomsten

• It Europeesk Hânfêst foar Regionale of Minderheidstalen (1992) Artikel 8. 1.a ii. een aanmerkelijk deel van het aan het onderwijs op school voorafgaand onderricht te bieden in de desbetreffende regionale talen of talen van minderheden b iii. binnen het primair onderwijs te voorzien in het onderwijzen van de desbetreffende regionale talen of talen van minderheden als integrerend deel van het leerplan; c iii. binnen het voortgezet onderwijs te voorzien in het onderwijzen van de desbetreffende regionale talen of talen van minderheden als integrerend deel van het leerplan; e ii. voorzieningen te verschaffen voor de bestudering van deze talen als vak in het universitair en hoger onderwijs; f i. in het kader van volwassenenonderwijs en permanente educatie cursussen te bieden, die voornamelijk of geheel in de regionale talen of talen van minderheden worden gegeven 2. Met betrekking tot het onderwijs en ten aanzien van andere gebieden dan die waar de regionale talen of talen van minderheden traditioneel worden gebruikt, verplichten de Partijen zich ertoe, indien het aantal gebruikers van een regionale taal of taal van een minderheid dit rechtvaardigt, het onderwijzen in of van de regionale taal of taal van een minderheid op alle passende onderwijsniveaus toe te staan, aan te moedigen of daarin te voorzien.

E. List mei wetlike ynstruminten 10 Bylage F. List mei flankearjende rapporten, en dêrûnder monitoring, evaluaasje- en ynplemintaasje- rapporten oangeande it ûnderwiis yn it Frysk

 De Feriene Naasjes stelle sintraal de persoanlikheidsûntjouwing fan it bern

Bernerjochteferdrach (Convention on the Rights of the Child), Preambule al. 7: Recognizing that the child, for the full and harmonious development of his or her personality, should grow up in a family environment, in an atmosphere of happiness, love and understanding.

 Unesco leit de klam op de frije kar foar de taal en spesjaal de memmetaal

Unesco Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity, 2002, Article 5: Cultural rights are an integral part of human rights, which are universal, indivisible and interdependent. The flourishing of creative diversity requires the full implementation of cultural rights as defined in Article 27 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in Articles 13 and 15 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. All persons have therefore the right to express themselves and to create and disseminate their work in the language of their choice, and particularly in their mother tongue; all persons are entitled to quality education and training that fully respect their cultural identity; and all persons have the right to participate in the cultural life of their choice and conduct their own cultural practices, subject to respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.

 Flensburg Recommendations, 2000: ‘There is a gap between goals and achievements in Frisian education, but a clear definition of goals is still missing’

Durk Gorter from the Fryske Akademy talked about the Dutch experience in implementing educational measures under the Charter. ... Although public opinion in the Netherlands is generally in favour of language rights (as they are seen as useful in increasing interethnic harmony), there is a continued informal dislike or reluctance towards Frisian in the government. In the general discussion, Christian Brandt emphasised the Frisian case to highlight the problems arising from the non-implementation of the goals stated in national constitutions or in the Charter; these problems are mainly due to political unwillingness to state any goals. Stefan Oeter asked about the reason why there is such a half-hearted implementation of rights in a province where the speakers of the minority language are actually in the majority. Durk Gorter suggested that it might be due to the fact that among the Frisian population, there is almost no perception that their language is endangered. ... Dónall Ó Riagáin and Durk Gorter went on to develop another problem: as governments generally have to take public opinion into consideration, the most important step is to convince the majority of the necessity and value of supporting minority languages. François Grin recalled that only a precise definition of aims could allow for the definition of policies with increased effectiveness, either in terms of individual language capacity (bilingual Frisians) or in terms of instruments (bilingual schools).

F. List mei flankearjende rapporten 1 François Grin, with the assistance of Börries Kuzmany, ‘Evaluating policy measures for minority languages in Europe: Towards effective, cost-effective and democratic implementation’, European Centre for Minority Issues, Flensburg, 23-24 June 2000, 28-29.

 Ried fan Europa, 2004: skoallen kieze litte wol of gjin Frysk te jaan, is in stap tebek

86. The Education Inspectorate’s report also indicates that the average time dedicated to the teaching of the Frisian language in primary schools is 25 minutes per week, which is insufficient for achieving the attainment targets (see second periodical report of the Netherlands, Volume I, §6.62 and §6.70). The authorities explain this low amount of time by the lack of qualified teachers in the Frisian language. Moreover, the Education Inspectorate’s report concludes that the quality of the teaching was insufficient in 71% of the Frisian lessons evaluated and that only 26% of primary schools possessed teaching materials that complied with the attainment targets (see second periodical report of the Netherlands, Volume I, §6.63). 87. The authorities informed the Committee of Experts that a new policy on attainment targets was currently being discussed by the Ministry of Education and the Province of Fryslân with a view to lowering these attainment targets for some schools in order to enhance long-term progress in the teaching of the Frisian language. In January 2002, the Committee on Attainment Targets in Primary Education issued an advisory report which distinguishes a core component, consisting of compulsory subjects, from a differentiated component, which enables each school to make an individual selection from the national curriculum. This Committee recommended placing Frisian in the differentiated component, but with the proviso that it does not tamper with the established requirements regarding the teaching of Frisian in Fryslân (see second periodical report of the Netherlands, Volume I, §6.4). The implementation of this recommendation will constitute a step backwards compared to the existing objective of equality between the Dutch and Frisian languages. As reported by the Frisian speakers, there are still many elementary schools where the Frisian language as a school subject is not taken seriously and the recommendations of the Committee on Attainment Targets in Primary Education could further weaken the position of Frisian in individual schools. 88. The Committee of Experts has not been informed of any positive development with regard to the teaching of Frisian in primary education. On the contrary, the implementation of the proposals contained in the abovementioned report of the Committee on Attainment Targets in Primary Education would have negative effects on the teaching of Frisian. The Committee of Experts therefore maintains its previous conclusion that the undertaking is not fulfilled. ... 94. The Ministry of Education is evaluating basic secondary education and plans to place the teaching of the Frisian language in the optional part of the curriculum. The Frisian speakers met by the Committee of Experts during its “on-the-spot” visit expressed their grave concern for this project The Committee of Experts considers that placing the teaching of Frisian as an optional subject in basic secondary education, as is already the case for the second stage of secondary education, is not compatible with the commitment undertaken by the Netherlands under the Charter to provide the teaching of Frisian as an integral part of the curriculum.

Ried fan Europa, Rapport ‘Application of the Charter in the Netherlands, 2nd monitoring cycle, Strasbourg, 16 December 2004, ECRML (2004) 8, 16-17, 18.

F. List mei flankearjende rapporten 2  Ried fan Europa, 2012: lit sjen hoe’t trijetalige skoallen oan ’e eask fan Frysk yn it ûnderwiis foldwaan sille

102. In the third evaluation report, the Committee of Experts considered this undertaking not fulfilled. It “strongly urge[d] the Dutch authorities to make available a substantial part of primary education in Frisian”. 103. According to the fourth periodical report, the number of trilingual (Frisian-Dutch- English) primary schools increased to 42 by 2011, which corresponds to about 10% of all primary schools and an annual increase of up to ten schools. The Committee of Experts has been informed by representatives of the Province of Fryslân that only this educational model implies teaching in Frisian. As the demand for such an educational model is larger than the present offer, the full implementation of this undertaking still remains to be achieved. Furthermore, the trilingual schools do not receive special financial support to implement this education model, but only the subsidy granted to schools that teach Frisian as a subject. 104. During the on the-spot-visit, representatives of the Frisian speakers underlined the need to have exams at the end of primary school in order to show the quality of the teaching in Frisian. The central authorities confirmed that this matter will be addressed by the new Covenant on the Frisian Language and Culture. 105. The Committee of Experts acknowledges the positive developments which have occurred during the reporting period. It asks the Dutch authorities to submit more detailed information about the concrete set-up of the trilingual educational model in primary education and also information on the strategy to meet the demand for Frisian-language education in the future. 106. In the third evaluation report, the Committee of Experts considered this undertaking not fulfilled and “strongly urge[d] the Dutch authorities to improve the situation of the teaching of Frisian in secondary education”. The Committee of Experts also noted that Frisian was a mandatory subject at secondary schools in Fryslân only in the first year and did not constitute an integral part of the curriculum in subsequent school years, causing problems of continuity for the teaching of Frisian. 107. In the fourth periodical report, the Dutch authorities state that the Province of Fryslân is experimentally introducing a trilingual programme in secondary education at three secondary schools (in Burgum, Koudum and Wommels). In the framework of this trilingual programme, Frisian will be used as the language of instruction for the subjects of Frisian and history (30% of the time), English for the subjects of English and mathematics (30%), and Dutch for the other subjects (40%). By 2015, this model will be introduced at ten secondary schools in the province. The Committee of Experts considers that the aforementioned educational model constitutes a good basis for the implementation of this undertaking. However, the Committee of Experts has not received sufficient information about how Frisian is taught as an integral part of the curriculum at other schools and what share of the secondary school students in the province benefit from such teaching. 108. In light of the available information, the Committee of Experts considers this undertaking partly fulfilled. It strongly urges the Dutch authorities to improve the situation of the teaching of Frisian in secondary education. The Committee of Experts strongly urges the Dutch authorities to continue strengthening the teaching of and in Frisian at all levels of education.

Ried fan Europa, Rapport ‘Application of the Charter in the Netherlands, 4th monitoring cycle, Strasbourg, 24 October 2012, ECRML (2012) 6, 17-18.

F. List mei flankearjende rapporten 3  Vienna Concluding Document, 1989, para. 68: lêsmem en -heitstrategy

Co-operation and exchanges in the field of education: They (the participating States) will ensure that persons belonging to national minorities or religious cultures on their territories can give and receive instruction on their own culture, including instruction through parental transmission of language, religion and cultural identity to their children.

OSCE, Concluding Document of the Third Follow-up Meeting, Vienna, 4 November 1986 to 19 January 1989, www.osce.org

 Copenhagen Document, 1990: ûnderwiis yn en fan de memmetaal en en it brûken fan ’e memmetaal yn ’e iepenbiere romte

34. The participating States will endeavour to ensure that persons belonging to national minorities, notwithstanding the need to learn the official language or languages of the State concerned, have adequate opportunities for instruction of their mother tongue or in their mother tongue, as well as, wherever possible and necessary, for its use before public authorities, in conformity with applicable national legislation. In the context of the teaching of history and culture in educational establishments, they will also take account of the history and culture of national minorities.

OSCE/CSCE, The Document of the Copenhagen Meeting of the Conference on the Human Dimension of the CSCE (5-29 June 1990), www.osce.org

 Hague Recommendations: it belang fan de eigen taal as ûnderwiisfiertaal

The spirit of international instruments 1. The right of persons belonging to national minorities to maintain their identity can only be fully realised if they acquire a proper knowledge of their mother tongue during the educational process. At the same time, persons belonging to national minorities have a responsibility to integrate into the wider national society through the acquisition of a proper knowledge of the State language.

Measures and resources 4. States should approach minority education rights in a proactive manner. Where required, special measures should be adopted by States to actively implement minority language education rights to the maximum of their available resources, individually and through international assistance and cooperation, especially economic and technical.

Minority education at primary and secondary levels 12. Research also indicates that in primary school, the curriculum should ideally be taught in the minority language. The minority language should be taught as a subject on a regular basis. The official State language should also be taught as a subject on a regular basis preferably by bilingual teachers who have a good understanding of the children’s cultural and linguistic background. Towards the end of this period, a few practical or non-theoretical subjects should

F. List mei flankearjende rapporten 4 be taught through the medium of the State language. Wherever possible, States should create conditions enabling parents to avail themselves of this option. 13. In secondary school, a substantial part of the curriculum should be taught through the medium of the minority language. The minority language should be taught as a subject on a regular basis. The State language should also be taught as a subject on a regular basis, preferably by bilingual teachers who have a good understanding of the children’s cultural and linguistic background. Throughout this period, the number of subjects taught in the State language, should gradually be increased. Research findings suggest that the more gradual the increase, the better for the child.

OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities, ‘The Hague recommendations regarding the education rights of national minorities & Explanatory note, October 1996’ (The Hague: OSCE, 1996).

 Olso Recommendations: taal is persoanlik en sosjaal – identiteit en kommunikaasje

OSCE Oslo Recommendations regarding the linguistic rights of national minorities, 1998: The linguistic rights of national minorities, i.e. the right of persons belonging to national minorities to use their language in the private and public spheres, is such an issue. International human rights instruments refer to this right in a number of different contexts. On the one hand, language is a personal matter closely connected with identity. On the other hand, language is an essential tool of social organisation which in many situations becomes a matter of public interest. Certainly, the use of language bears on numerous aspects of a State’s functioning. In a democratic State committed to human rights, the accommodation of existing diversity thus becomes an important matter of policy and law. ... It was also presumed that the ultimate object of all human rights is the full and free development of the individual human personality in conditions of equality. Consequently, it was presumed that civil society should be open and fluid and, therefore, integrate all persons, including those belonging to national minorities. Insofar as the use of language is also a fundamentally communicative matter, the essential social dimension of the human experience was also fully presumed.

OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities, ‘The Oslo recommendations regarding the education rights of national minorities & Explanatory note, February 1998’ (The Hague: OSCE, 1998) 2, 3.

 OSCE, Report on the Linguistic Rights, 1999: útgean fan it ferlet fan bern en âlden

Finally, some states did not distinguish between languages of national minorities and foreign languages, i.e. languages not traditionally spoken within the country, instead grouping them together as all languages different from the majority language. ... Conclusions - Recommendations 3. States should give closer attention to the teaching of and in minority languages. It is often unclear how much minority languages are taught outside the regions where minority populations are most concentrated. States should create a flexible policy that responds to the different needs of persons belonging to national minorities and local conditions. Moreover,

F. List mei flankearjende rapporten 5 states need to ensure that minorities are closely involved in the decisions to set up classes taught in those languages, so that the needs of the pupils and their parents are reflected in the curricula.

OSCE High Commisioner of National Minorities, ‘Report on the linguistic rights of persons belonging to national minorities in the OSCE area’, (HCNM Report on Linguistic Rights (1 March 1999)) The Hague, www.osce.org, 18, 29.

 ECRI, 1998: jo kinne net ferwachtsje dat minsken har erfskip opjouwe

21. Following a policy review in 1993, minority policy in the Netherlands has retained a commitment to a multicultural society while placing much more explicit onus on the minority groups themselves to make an effort to integrate. ... The emphasis on an integration approach may, however, be interpreted by some groups of society as a tacit criticism of minorities who have failed to integrate and may thus even reinforce prejudices. It is important that policy does not lead to a lack of respect, institutionally or publicly, for a group’s cultural background; it is equally important that policy should not obscure the possibility that differences of culture may have contributed to the social disadvantages peculiar to these groups and to which social policies need to be sensitive. It is necessary to improve understanding among the public at large about the content and underlying philosophy of policy towards minority groups and to avoid misunderstandings and misconceptions on the part of both the majority and minority populations. All sectors of society should be encouraged to support and (where appropriate) be actively involved in the implementation of government policies in this field. Developments in specific policy areas should take full account of these wider aims.

European Commission against Racism and Intolerance, Report on the Netherlands, CRI (98)49, 15 June 1998, 12.

 ECRI, Recommendations, 2008: learkrêften mei gelykweardichheidspedagogyk

39. ECRI reiterates its recommendation that the Dutch authorities equip all teachers with the skills to teach in a multicultural society ... . 40. ECRI recommends that the Dutch authorities monitor the extent to which the statutory provision introduced into the Primary Education Act in February 2006 is applied in practice. It strongly recommends that, in so doing, the Dutch authorities ensure that the obligation for schools to provide students with knowledge of the backgrounds and cultures of their peers is respected.

European Commission against Racism and Intolerance, Third report on the Netherlands, CRI (2008)3, 12 Feb. 2008, 15-16.

 Unesco 1999: optelbeneiering fan meartaligens = lykweardige talen fan ynstruksje

The language of instruction in school is the medium of communication for the transmission of knowledge. This is different from language teaching itself where the grammar, vocabulary,

F. List mei flankearjende rapporten 6 and the written and the oral forms of a language constitute a specific curriculum for the acquisition of a second language other than L1 [the mother tongue]. ... Bilingual and multilingual education refers to the use of two or more languages as mediums of instruction. ... However, UNESCO adopted the term ‘multilingual education’ in 1999 in the General Conference Resolution 12 to refer to the use of at least three languages, L1 [the mother tongue], a regional or national language and an international language in education.* The resolution supported the view that the requirements of global and national participation and the specific needs of particular, culturally and linguistically distinct communities can only be addressed by multilingual education. In regions where the language of the learner is not the official or national language of the country, bilingual and multilingual education can make mother tongue instruction possible while providing at the same time the acquisition of languages used in larger areas of the country and the world. This additive approach to bilingualism is different from the so called subtractive bilingualism which aims to move children on to a second language as a language of instruction.

Jessica Ball, ‘Enhancing learning of children from diverse language backgrounds: Mother tongue-based bilingual or multilingual education in the early years’, Paper comissioned for Unesco, Unesco, 2010. * Unesco, 12. ‘Implementation of a language policy for the world based on multilingualism’, Records of the General Conference 30th Session Paris, 26 October to 17 November 1999, Volume 1 Resolutions, unesdoc.unesco.org .

 It Nederlânske regear, 2013: ‘The core objectives for Frisian be laid down by the province ... is intended to improve the quality of Frisian-language education’

Frisian-language education The quality of education in general and that of education in Frisian in particular is naturally a matter of concern for the Cabinet. All the more so given that the command of language is a precondition for being able to participate and function fully in society. For that reason, the Cabinet is making additional annual investments in Frisian-language education. For the continued existence of the Frisian language it is essential that Frisian children learn the language properly. Frisian-speaking parents feel this to be very important. Frisian is a mandatory subject in most primary schools in Fryslân. With that in mind, the Netherlands Cabinet of Ministers finds it hard to juxtapose this with the findings of the Advisory Committee that Frisian is a mandatory subject only in a limited number of schools. The Cabinet understands the concerns present among the Frisian community regarding the lack of qualified teachers. The Education Inspectorate has observed that some 40% of teachers in primary and secondary education do not possess an appropriate qualification or competence in relation to teaching the subject of Frisian language and culture. Therefore, the efforts of central government and the province are focussing on multiplying the number of qualified teachers within the course of the Administrative Agreement for Frisian Language and Culture 2013-2018. To that end, the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science has agreed with the province that Fryslân will be making efforts in the immediate future to reinforce the support base for Frisian among schools and teachers. The government has laid down the core objectives for the subject of Frisian in a general administrative order (AMvB). The province of Fryslân

F. List mei flankearjende rapporten 7 wishes to have that power for itself. The province stands for the quality of Frisian uniquely among all other provinces. Strengthening the province’s position may thus contribute towards the quality of the subject of Frisian. For that reason, the Cabinet has submitted a bill before parliament providing that the core objectives for Frisian be laid down by the province subject to certain conditions. This is intended to improve the quality of Frisian-language education. On the one hand this is because its management will be placed with experts who have an overview of the field from close at hand and, on the other, because this will make possible a more customised approach at individual schools (for example, following the bill’s entry into force, a partial exemption will be possible instead of solely a universal exemption). Central government, the province and the educational sector will continue to work in close alliance to improve Frisian education. Education is a pre-eminent example of a subject on which the new Frisian Language Body can report and provide recommendations.

Comments of the Government of the Netherlands on the second opinion of the Advisory Committee on the implementation of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities) 2013, 5.

 Conference “Indigenous and migrant minority languages in changing multilingual environments”, 2013: ûnderwiis yn eigen taal kin ék as mar in pear learlingen/âlden derom freegje

[T]he increasing internationalization of pupil populations in European schools requires that a language policy be introduced for all school children in which the traditional dichotomy between foreign language instruction for indigenous majority pupils and home language instruction for [immigrant minority] pupils is put aside. Given the experiences abroad (e.g., the Victorian School of Languages in Australia*), language schools can become centers of expertise where a variety of languages are taught, if the students’ demand is low and/or spread over many schools. In line with the proposed principles for primary schooling, similar ideas could be worked out for secondary schools where learning more than one language across European nation-states is already an established curricular practice. The abovementioned principles would recognize plurilingualism in an increasingly multicultural environment as an asset for all youngsters and for society at large. The EU, the Council of Europe, and UNESCO could function as leading transnational agencies in promoting such concepts. The UNESCO Universal Declaration of Cultural Diversity (updated in 2002) is very much in line with the views expressed here, in particular in its plea to encourage linguistic diversity, to respect the mother tongue at all levels of education, and to foster the learning of more than one language from a very early age.

Guus Extra, ‘The constellation of languages in Europe: Comparative perspectives on regional minority and immigrant minority languages’, Tilburg University, September 2013, Updated version of keynote at the conference “Indigenous and migrant minority languages in changing multilingual environments”, University of Luxembourg, 17-19 july 2013, 24. * By dizze (steats)taalskoalle is it taaloanbod yn prinsipe fraachstjoerd en oanbean yn sintra oan bern fan 1 oant 12 dy’t de taal net op har gewoane skoalle krije kinne.

F. List mei flankearjende rapporten 8