Indigenous Education Policy, Equity, and Intercultural Understanding In

Home , Indigenous education

Indigenous Education Policy, Equity, and Intercultural Understanding in Latin America Indigenous Education Policy, Equity, and Intercultural Understanding in Latin America Regina Cortina Editor Editor Regina Cortina Teachers College Columbia University New York, New York, USA

ISBN 978-1-137-59531-7 ISBN 978-1-137-59532-4 (eBook) DOI 10.1057/978-1-137-59532-4

Library of Congress Control Number: 2016956892

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2017 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made.

Cover image © Keith Dannemiller / Alamy Stock Photo

Printed on acid-free paper

This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by Springer Nature The registered company is Nature America Inc. New York Foreword

The incursion of the conquistadores into the Americas was a disaster for the Indigenous peoples. Incumbent populations were annihilated by war and the introduction of infectious diseases from Europe while the new lands were looted for their treasure. The lives of the survivors and their offspring were twisted forever through coercive assaults by the linguistic hegemony, cultural arrogance, and religious zealotry of the conquerors and the missionaries who followed them. Historical memory, language, and cultural traditions were erased or derogated to marginal status by the political, economic, and military dominance of the colonial invaders and their rulers. Five centuries of domination led to unspeakable destruction for the Indigenous populations in Latin America. But recent movements to restore the citizenship rights of Indigenous peoples, rebuild and dignify their cultures and languages and recognize their historical roles have provided new opportunities to overcome at least some of the oppression of the past. Evidence of these increased rights for Indigenous peoples is dem- onstrated in the amendments that have been added to the constitutions of several Latin American countries over the past two decades; they provide for an education inclusive of all of their languages and cultures and recognize diversity in national cultures. Professor Regina Cortina has provided academic leadership in address- ing the educational changes that support the recognition of Indigenous language and culture and its realization in educational policies and practices. Throughout her career, she has promoted bilingual and bicultural educational policies that build on the cultures of Indigenous populations.

v vi Foreword

Those policies seek to enable Indigenous students to master the national culture and language while taking advantage of unique learning opportunities that reflect their heritage and thereby strengthen the educational process. With the erosion of Indigenous rights, language, and culture over such a long historical period, the quest to provide an inclusive and comprehen- sive education for Indigenous students is a major challenge. As a specialist in educational policy, I can attest to the difficulties of translating hopes and promises into educational institutions and processes that can overcome dominant educational practices. These challenges not only comprise ideas, resources, and political support, but they also require new ways of thinking and their transformation into practices that translate aspirations into accomplishments. Indigenous Education Policy, Equity, and Intercultural Understanding in Latin America attempts to accomplish those goals by setting out six different chapters, each by an expert in the chapter topic, that address a range of dimensions of both the educational status of Indigenous populations in various Latin American countries and major attempts to transform Indigenous education to encompass specific intercultural and bilingual educational policies to promote enrollment, persistence, and achievement. What makes this book particularly pertinent is that it is not just a pre- sentation of ideas, although they are plentiful and valuable. It is also a recognition of the challenges that interfere with putting these exciting ideas into action. Overcoming the inertia of traditional educational approaches and eradicating the residue of a long history of traditions that contra- dict the new initiatives require changes in the attitudes of parents, teachers, and the media, and the alteration of national policies. In particular, such a systemic reorganization of education necessitates an expansion and profound transformation of pre-service teacher education and in-service teacher training, and a substantial increase in the number of teachers with the language skills, cultural understanding, and learning approaches that will succeed with specific Indigenous populations. Realizing these changes will require social movements in support of Indigenous communities and a vast upgrading of school quality in those communities in resources and teacher capabilities. This volume is clear about the challenges, hopes, promise, and pos- sibilities of using education to create more productive, equitable, and Foreword vii democratic societies in Latin America, with full inclusion of Indigenous populations. It is an insightful and informative work that will inspire academics, professional educators, and those preparing for educational roles to develop their own contributions to this important topic.

Henry M. Levin Past-President of Comparative and International Education Society (CIES), William Heard Kilpatrick Professor of Economics and Education, Teachers College, Columbia University and David Jacks Professor of Education and Economics, Emeritus, Stanford University Acknowledgments

Graduate students in the International and Comparative Education Program at Teachers College, Columbia University, participated as research assistants during the development of this book. Special thanks go to Víctor E. Llanque Zonta, who accurately translated the chapters “Role-Play as a Pedagogical Tool for Intercultural Education” and “Indigenous Urban Families and the Oportunidades Program in Mexico” into English and with whom I was in constant dialogue throughout the book project. I also wish to thank Amanda Earl and Karla Ruiz for assisting during the final editing of the book as well as Mirka Martel and Georgia Magni at the early stages of the research. David Post of Pennsylvania State University contrib- uted the tables in the Introduction that compare academic achievement between Indigenous and non-Indigenous students. The final manuscript of the book benefited from the skillful editing ofW endy Schwartz.

ix Contents

Introduction xiii

Part I Policy Changes and Education Quality 1

How to Improve Quality Education for Indigenous Children in Latin America 3 Regina Cortina

Indigenous Student Learning Outcomes and Education Policies in Peru and Ecuador 27 Joseph Levitan and David Post

Part II Intercultural Education in Practice 51

Role-Play as a Pedagogical Tool for Intercultural Education 53 Verónica Vázquez-Zentella, Teresa Verónica Pérez García, and Frida Díaz Barriga Arceo

Inclusion or Interculturalidad: Attaining Equity in Higher Education for Indigenous Peoples in Mexico 73 Amanda Earl

xi xii Contents

Part III Intercultural Dialogue Beyond the Classroom 101

The Contributions of Hip-Hop Artists to Non-Formal Intercultural Education in Bolivia 103 Víctor E. Llanque Zonta and Verónica S. Tejerina Vargas

Indigenous Urban Families and the Oportunidades Program in Mexico 121 Guillermo de la Peña

Index 145 Introduction

Indigenous Education Policy, Equity, and Intercultural Understanding in Latin America explores developments that are taking place in Latin American countries at the national and local levels to implement policies that affirm the citizenship and the distinctive cultures and languages of Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples. This region is one of the most culturally and linguistically diverse areas of the world, but its educational systems have historically sought to assimilate Indigenous populations into a homogenized national culture. The 35 million Indigenous people who inhabit Latin American countries represent approximately 7% of the region’s total population, speak 557 different languages, and comprise 661 distinct ethnic groups (López 2014). Close to 85% of them live in Bolivia, Ecuador, and Peru in the Andes of South America, and in Guatemala and Mexico in Mesoamerica. In each of these countries, Indigenous peoples represent almost one fifth of the total national population. Nevertheless, historically, the government leaders of Latin American states have regarded Indigenous peoples and their cultural and linguistic diversity as obstacles to the con- solidation of state power, which they believed required a singular national identity. Schools either denied access to Indigenous children or excluded Indigenous languages and cultures from the curricula. Only in the last two decades have governments throughout the region added significant amendments to their countries’ constitutions to recognize the right of

xiii xiv Introduction

Table 1 The five Latin America countries with the largest Indigenous populations

Country Total national Indigenous Indigenous Share of total Year population population percentage of Indigenous of total population data national (%) population

Boliviaa 10,027,254 6,916,732 68.98 19.53 2012 Ecuadorb 14,483,499 1,018,176 7.02 2.87 2010 Perúc 27,053,394 6,489,109 23.99 18.32 2007 Méxicod 112,336,538 11,132,562 9.91 31.43 2010 Guatemalae 11,237,196 4,487,026 39.9 12.67 2002 Total top five 175,137,881 30,043,605 17.15 84.82 countries Other 319,410,963 5,376,201 1.68 15.18 2009 countriesf Total 494,548,844 35,419,806 7.16 100.00 a Instituto Nacional de Estadística (INE) de Bolivia (2012, 31) b Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Censos (INEC 2010) c Ford (2011, 17, 23) d Comisión Nacional para el Desarrollo de los Pueblos Indígenas (CDI 2010, 25) e Verdugo (2009) f López (2014)

Indigenous peoples to an education inclusive of their languages and cultures and to work toward the development of a national culture and form of citizenship that embraces diversity (see Table 1). A central goal of this volume, whose chapters were written by schol- ars in both Latin America and the USA, is to provide a careful examina- tion of the educational and social changes that have resulted in response to constitutional mandates aimed at providing full citizenship rights to Indigenous people and official recognition of their cultures and languages. The chapter authors, building on previous research (Cortina 2014) that examined intercultural bilingual education in Latin America, describe the ongoing challenges that governments and education institutions face in delivering an equitable and culturally responsive education to all students. Further, moving beyond schools and universities, the book also highlights the significance of policy reform in promoting intercultural dialogue in Latin American societies. Introduction xv

The Current State of Education in Latin America Latin American education systems are characterized by persistent inequities in educational outcomes among groups from different ethnic backgrounds. The Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC 2014) recently reported significant differences in school enrollment, years of schooling, literacy rates, primary school completion rates, and higher educational attainment between Indigenous and non-Indigenous students in various countries. In Mexico, Ecuador, and Peru—countries with a combined Indigenous population of over 18 million—literacy rates and primary school completion rates were lower for Indigenous students than for their non-Indigenous counterparts (see Table 2). Indigenous youth aged 20–29 completed an average of two fewer years of schooling than their non-Indigenous counterparts. Moreover, Indigenous students were more likely to drop out of school than their non-Indigenous peers; indeed, net school enrollments in these three countries were virtually the same for Indigenous and non- Indigenous students at the primary level (96 %), but a smaller share of Indigenous students enrolled in secondary and tertiary education than non-Indigenous students (ECLAC 2014). In Ecuador only 13 % of 20- to 29-year-old Indigenous youth living in cities completed 13 or more years of schooling; by contrast, over a third of their non-Indigenous counterparts reached that education level. In Mexico, only a quarter of Indigenous students from 18- to 22-years-old were enrolled in school in 2010, compared with over a third of their non-Indigenous counterparts. Thus, in spite of the strides the region has made in expanding access to education, Latin American governments still face significant challenges in providing equitable educational opportunity. xvi Introduction

Table 2 Differences in educational outcomes between Indigenous and non- Indigenous students in Ecuador, Mexico, and Peru

Education status Age group Indigenous Non- Difference Indigenous

Ecuador (2010) School enrollment 6–11 years 96.10 % 96.60 % 0.50 % 12–17 years 76.80 % 83.40 % 6.60 % 18–22 years 34.50 % 42.10 % 7.60 % Years of schooling 15–19 years 7.69 8.96 1.27 20–29 years 7.37 10.19 2.82 Literacy rate 15–24 years 97.20 % 98.50 % 1.30 % Primary school 15–19 years 87.65 % 92.55 % 4.90 % completion (urban) 15–19 years 86.80 % 89.95 % 3.15 % (rural) Higher education 20–29 years 12.50 % 34.50 % 22.00 % attainmenta (urban) 20–29 years 6.50 % 14.25 % 7.75 % (rural) Mexico (2010) School enrollment 6–11 years 95.70 % 96.90 % 1.20 % 12–17 years 74.70 % 79.90 % 5.20 % 18–22 years 24.00 % 35.40 % 11.40 % Years of schooling 15–19 years 8.53 9.29 0.76 20–29 years 9.12 10.77 1.65 Literacy rate 15–24 years 96.10 % 98.80 % 2.70 % Primary school 15–19 years 93.15 % 96.75 % 3.60 % completion (urban) 15–19 years 88.75 % 93.00 % 4.25 % (rural) Higher education 20–29 years 17.00 % 31.00 % 14.00 % attainmenta (urban) 20–29 years 6.00 % 9.00 % 3.00 % (rural) Peru (2007) School enrollment 6–11 years 93.40 % 95.40 % 2.00 % 12–17 years 85.70 % 84.00 % −1.70 % 18–22 years 36.80 % 40.70 % 3.90 % Years of schooling 15–19 years 8.86 9.37 0.51 20–29 years 9.55 10.76 1.21 Literacy rate 15–24 years 92.00 % 93.50 % 1.50 % (urban) (continued) Introduction xvii

Table 2 (continued)

Education status Age group Indigenous Non- Difference Indigenous

Primary school 15–19 years 94.70 % 94.75 % 0.05 % completion (urban) 15–19 years 81.15 % 80.15 % −1.00 % (rural) Higher education 20–29 years 29.00 % 36.00 % 7.00 % attainmenta (urban) 20–29 years 5.00 % 6.00 % 1.00 % (rural)

Source: Centro Latinoamericano y Caribeño de Demografía (CELADE)—División de Población de la Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL) as cited in ECLAC (2014) a Percentage of people in age group who attained 13 years of schooling or more

Not only do too many students from Indigenous backgrounds fail to complete their schooling, but their academic proficiency lags from an early age as well. In 2013, many Latin American countries participated in UNESCO’s Third Regional Comparative and Explanatory Study (TERCE), which administered common reading and mathematics examinations to third- and sixth-grade students. At the outset of the exam, sixth-grade students were asked whether they belonged to an Indigenous ethnic group or used an Indigenous language at home. Table 3 presents a summary of the results in TERCE countries where at least 5 % of sixth graders self-identified as belonging to an Indigenous group. Guatemala had the largest percentage of sixth graders who were Indigenous, while Paraguay had the largest percentage of students who spoke an Indigenous language in their homes. The chapter “Indigenous Student Learning Outcomes and Education Policies in Peru and Ecuador” in this volume analyzes these data for Ecuador and Peru, underscoring the large differences in reading and mathematics proficiency between Indigenous and non-Indigenous students. On average, Indigenous students scored about 20 points lower in mathematics than non-Indigenous students, even after controlling for urban or rural location, socioeconomic status, and gender. The average difference in reading proficiency was not significant for all the countries, but Indigenous students were furthest behind in Paraguay, Peru, Mexico, and Argentina. These findings are one of the clearest signs that greater policy and research attention must continue to be given to the region’s Indigenous populations. While Ecuador and Honduras show signs of greater educational equality, significant differences remain in the academic performance of Indigenous and non-Indigenous students in Peru and Mexico, where millions of Indigenous children live. xviii Introduction 5 70 49 36 35 17 24 19 17 19 12 Difference 678 725 740 699 754 721 701 705 707 718 703 Non-Ind. 608 676 705 663 749 704 677 686 689 699 691 Indigenous Reading proficiency 9 6 47 43 30 28 20 19 16 12 10 Difference 671 749 779 722 785 721 683 691 708 714 716 Non-Ind. 624 706 749 694 764 702 667 679 697 705 710 Mathematics proficiency Indigenous 6.2 1.5 0.2 0.4 0.1 7.2 1.6 2.4 1.6 64.5 17.2 Indigenous language at home (%) 6.3 8.0 7.0 5.3 8.9 13.1 10.5 16.8 43.0 16.9 11.6 Indigenous students (%) Conditional means of mathematics and reading proficiency for Indigenous and non-Indigenous sixth-grade

: The conditional means for mathematics and readingand mathematics for means conditional The : proficiency scores are from data using calculated administered (2013) TERCE the the by Table 3 Table students, TERCE 2013 Country Paraguay Notes Laboratorio Latinoamericano de Evaluación la Calidad Educación (LLECE) (Latin American Laboratory for the Evaluation of Quality Education). The scores are estimated with an OLS linear model that controls for student background characteristics including location (urban vs. rural), Participating TERCE countries are included if at least 5 % of the tested sixth-grade students stated they were “Indigenous.” socioeconomic status, and gender. The explained variance of the model for mathematics (the R-square) was 0.33, with a sample size of 39,745 students. For reading there was a sample size of 40,724 students, and the explained variance (R-square) was 0.32. Peru Mexico Argentina Chile Brazil Panama Nicaragua Guatemala Honduras Ecuador Introduction xix

One way that a number of Latin American governments have sought to address educational inequities over the last 20 years has been to adopt intercultural and bilingual education policies (known as EIB, using the acronym in Spanish for educación intercultural bilingüe). “Interculturality”—or interculturalidad—refers to the mutual respect that two cultures need to foster in order to promote dialogue and understanding within a frame- work of equality. “Bilingual” refers to the learning opportunities provided to Indigenous peoples through education that is delivered in their mother tongue as well as in the dominant national language. EIB policies in Latin America aim to increase the educational access and completion of Indigenous peoples, who have been excluded from the education system or have faced discrimination within it. The policies also seek to provide Indigenous peoples with an education that is respectful of, and includes, their languages, cultures, and knowledge. Given the commitment of many Latin American governments to EIB, the following chapters seek to deepen current understanding of how this policy and a pedagogical model based on it is influencing the quality of education that Indigenous children and youth receive. The chapters prog- ress from describing the legal recognition by most countries of Indigenous people’s right to education to delving more deeply into the question of how governments have implemented EIB. Specifically, the authors present research on the impact of these policies on the academic performance and educational experiences of Indigenous students. This book presents evidence that EIB policies in Ecuador are succeeding in closing the achievement gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous students. The chapter authors describe specific programs aimed at increasing educational access for Indigenous students and explore ways that governments are preparing and supporting teachers who work in Indigenous settings or in intercultural and bilingual contexts. They discuss in detail the need for interculturalidad to be reflected in government education policies. For example, the chapter “Indigenous Urban Families and the Oportunidades Program in Mexico” shows that the norms established to run a cash-transfer program to assist Indigenous families do not result in effective service delivery because they do not include a cultural understanding of the Indigenous ways of organizing family and community lives. Lastly, the book draws attention to efforts by Indigenous youths themselves to take their education into their own hands by creating alternative spaces for intercultural dialogue in multiple languages. Taken together, the chapters of this volume demonstrate how countries are moving towards xx Introduction greater equity and intercultural understanding by reviewing examples of educational and institutional innovations across the region. At the same time, they point to challenges and areas that require additional investment and research.

The Contents of Indigenous Education Policy, Equity, and Intercultural Understanding in Latin America

Part 1: Policy Changes and Education Quality The first section of this volume reviews the education policy changes in support of education quality for Indigenous children that swept through governments in the region over the last couple of decades. The aim of these policies is to promote multilingualism and appreciation of the socio- cultural diversity of schools and communities. The first chapter focuses on the way that educators are being taught to implement reforms to enhance the education of Indigenous students in Bolivia, Guatemala, Mexico, and Peru. Using comparable national databases that have been developed to assess the academic achievement of students in most Latin American countries, the second chapter presents a detailed study of the effects of education policies on Indigenous learning outcomes in two countries, Peru and Ecuador. The first chapter, “How to Improve Quality Education for Indigenous Children in Latin America,” by Regina Cortina, begins with a regional overview of constitutional and political changes in Latin American countries to provide Indigenous children and youth with an equitable and quality education, to advance linguistically and culturally inclusive education for all children, and to legitimize social and cultural diversity nationally. The data provided are based on a 2013 survey of the region’s ministries of education facilitated by the Organization of American States. Since the 1990s, nine countries in Latin America have amended their national constitutions to make intercultural bilingual education (EIB) an educational right of Indigenous peoples. In five additional countries, entitlement to EIB is supported through education legislation. In all countries included in the chapter’s overview, legislation has updated policies and formed new governmental and higher education institutions to focus on providing a quality education that is culturally and linguistically relevant to Indigenous children and youth. Introduction xxi

To show how public policies are supporting education quality for Indigenous children in Latin American countries, and to understand the impacts of constitutional and legislative amendments, Professor Cortina investigates three areas of implementation in the recent reforms: pre- service teacher education, in-service teacher education, and the teaching and learning of Indigenous languages. Her analysis focuses on the four countries—Bolivia, Guatemala, Mexico, and Peru—that established EIB as a right of Indigenous children and have one million or more students in their EIB schools. In all of these countries the greatest challenge faced was the professional preparation needed for Indigenous teachers to become EIB teachers, since the number of teachers with knowledge and literacy of their own Indigenous languages was not enough to expand EIB to schools where Indigenous students were concentrated, both in urban and rural areas. Throughout this comparative policy study, Professor Cortina highlights the importance of expanding Indigenous language education among teachers, leaders of Indigenous communities, and those in charge of implementing state policies in Indigenous areas. The second chapter, “Indigenous Students’ Learning Outcomes and Education Policies in Peru and Ecuador,” by Joseph Levitan and David Post, discusses the start-and-stop patterns of national education policies that have opened up opportunities to improve educational quality in schools for Indigenous students. Specifically, the authors examined two countries, Peru and Ecuador, which are neighbors in the Andean region and have significant populations of monolingual and bilingual Indigenous children. Using data from the Second and Third Regional Comparative and Explicative Studies (SERCE and TERCE) on the academic performance of sixth-grade students in 2006 and 2013, they documented differences between the reading and mathematical proficiencies of Indigenous children and their non-Indigenous counterparts. Their analysis shows that students in both countries who reported speaking an Indigenous language at home scored below their non-Indigenous peers. While the researchers describe an overall trend of improvement in the quality of schools in both countries, a question emerged about why the academic performance gap between the two groups of students was largest in Peru, and why the reading achievement gap even increased in that country between 2006 and 2013. Using responses to student and teacher background question- naires, the authors identified several factors contributing to an explanation of these differences in academic performance. xxii Introduction

The authors suggest that for Peru, one of the most salient differences can be found in the low quality of schools attended by Indigenous students, compared with the schools attended by non-Indigenous students. Their study also shows that the disparity in Internet access in schools was much larger in Peru than in Ecuador. While 50 % of the schools for monolingual students had Internet access in Ecuador, in Peru access reached only 30 %. The chapter moves on to compare and contrast the policy contexts of the two countries in order to account for the differences in academic outcomes and education quality. In Ecuador, the closing of the achievement gap in reading and math is explained by strong pressure from Indigenous social movements and their leaders to improve the schools for Indigenous students. In Peru, conversely, the great migration of Indigenous families to urban areas and the lack of investment in rural schools appear to be decisive factors, since there are larger differences in the school characteristics and resources for Indigenous and non-Indigenous students.

Part 2: Intercultural Education in Practice Given the challenges described in the two previous chapters on the quality of education for Indigenous students, this section of the book addresses the pre-service and in-service education received by teachers, their own literacy in Indigenous languages, and educators’ abilities and efforts to recognize diversity fully within the classroom and foster intercultural learning environments. EIB as a pedagogical model focuses on the recognition of cultural differences to eliminate racial prejudice to advance diversity and promote inclusive education. Both chapters in this section examine educational innovations to promote greater intercultural understanding and improve institutional practices to foster intercultural dialogue. They describe case studies from Mexico, but their findings are applicable to most Latin American countries. The third chapter focuses on in-service teacher professional development in urban areas, an increasing concern because of the migration of Indigenous people from rural to urban areas. Teachers in urban schools in most cases do not have knowledge to recognize and value different cultures and languages within the classroom and to leverage them in the teaching and learning process. The fourth chapter describes efforts aimed at increasing the interculturalidad of higher education for students in Mexico. For example, in states and rural areas with high concentra- tions of Indigenous peoples, Universidades Interculturales (Intercultural Universities) have been established to develop teachers and leaders who Introduction xxiii speak Indigenous languages and are culturally knowledgeable about the communities where they work. The chapter emphasizes how higher education access programs and university curricula can contribute to developing interculturalidad among Indigenous and non-Indigenous students alike. The third chapter, “Role-Play as a Pedagogical Tool for Intercultural Education,” by Verónica Vázquez-Zentella, Teresa Verónica Pérez García, and Frida Díaz Barriga Arceo, reports on an innovative online curricular tool for pre-service teachers in intercultural education. Its development was inspired by the authors’ ethnographic study of a preschool where an educator faced the challenge of teaching in an environment of prejudice, racism, and discrimination against Indigenous children. The tool is centered on the story of an Indigenous migrant child who was the victim of racial prejudice in his preschool in Mexico City. The preschool is located close to one of the largest urban markets in downtown Mexico City, the Mercado de la Merced, where Indigenous people from the State of Oaxaca work selling fruits and vegetables. They often bring their families with them, and their children attend local schools. Use of the curricular tool in role-play brings to light how the attitudes and values of pre-service teachers towards the inclusion of Indigenous children in the classroom have an impact on learning. Its use is an effective pedagogical strategy to help pre-service teachers both identify expressions of prejudice or exclusion in intercultural relations and develop skills, specifically decision-making and problem-solving skills, that help them identify and understand specific classroom situations where the presence of Indigenous children provokes conflict. Effective models of educational intervention are critically important in teachers’ professional development for EIB since they can help to promote appreciation of the cultures and knowledges valued by Indigenous peoples. This educational intervention, particularly, represents a creative way for teachers to foster intercultural dialogue in the classroom. The recommendations from the data analyzed by the three authors emphasize that teachers’ professional development needs to take into consideration the historical, economic, political, and cultural factors that give rise to discrimination. The fourth chapter, “Inclusion or Interculturalidad: Attaining Equity in Higher Education for Indigenous Peoples in Mexico,” by Amanda Earl, inquires how to effectively increase the presence of Indigenous youth in higher education by reviewing two different programs in Mexico which aim to facilitate and expand their access to tertiary education. Her comparative analysis examines the Ford Foundation’s International xxiv Introduction

Fellowships Program, an affirmative action program geared towards main- stream higher education institutions; and the Universidad Intercultural Veracruzana, an intercultural university that is part of the state-run system of Universidades Interculturales in Mexico. The chapter assesses whether these programs provide equitable and intercultural teaching and learning opportunities for Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations. While each program’s strategy is to achieve greater inclusion of Indigenous students and enhance respect for diversity in the classroom, the author argues that higher education institutions still face pressures to conform to traditional Western and exclusive educational and development models. Using the concept of interculturalidad as a critical lens, Ms. Earl debates the possibility of developing intercultural models of higher education that can prepare Indigenous graduates to navigate both Western and intercultural institutions to overcome the colonial power dynamics by which Indigenous people have historically been marginalized. The Intercultural University model developed in Mexico provides the opportunity to train teachers and other professional speakers of Indigenous native languages as well as leaders of Indigenous communities, while at the same time creating the opportunity for intercultural dialogue among individuals from different cultural and linguistic backgrounds. The Ford Foundation initiative, in contrast, is mainly focused on the inclusion of Indigenous peoples through affirmative action programs in well-known higher education institutions both domestically and internationally. The expansion and refinement of these types of programs would be of great value since most universities in Latin America do not recognize and promote the cultural and linguistic diversity of their countries.

Part 3: Intercultural Dialogue Beyond the Classroom In the third and last section of the book, the chapter authors go beyond the issue of intercultural dialogue in the context of schooling to highlight its broader significance as a transformative force in society. Both chapters emphasize the need for intercultural dialogue, and each describes a case study: one from Bolivia and one from Mexico. The chapter on non-formal education in Bolivia explores how Indigenous youth, through the use of their Indigenous languages and their own artistic expression, increase their sense of belonging as citizens. The last chapter discusses the need for cash-transfer programs sponsored by the Mexican government to include Indigenous ways of thinking in their protocols for providing services to Introduction xxv marginalized populations so that the services effectively reach Indigenous families and communities. The fifth chapter, “The Contributions of Hip-Hop Artists to Non- Formal Intercultural Education in Bolivia,” by Víctor E. Llanque Zonta and Verónica S. Tejerina Vargas, asks how hip-hop as artistic expression can inform the debate about the theory and practice of intercultural and bilingual education. The authors’ study is situated in El Alto, Bolivia, an Indigenous city of approximately one million people close to La Paz, the capital. Since 2010 educators and policymakers in Bolivia have been making significant efforts towards implementing intercultural and bilingual education as a pedagogical model by generating new curricular materials in Indigenous languages. They have been teaching Indigenous languages to children and adults and promoting their use in public spaces. The authors draw attention to the contribution of Indigenous hip-hop artists to non-formal intercultural and bilingual education. Through their music, videos, and concerts, these artists not only have raised the status of Indigenous languages as a means of expression for Indigenous youth, but have also created spaces for intercultural dialogue. Mr. Llanque Zonta and Ms. Tejerina Vargas worked together to analyze how art can be used to challenge the postcolonial social order of racial identities. Decolonization implies a rupture with the European way of structuring racial identity categories with the white European at the top and the Indigenous people at the bottom of the social structure. The hip- hop artists are also contributing to the promotion of Indigenous languages as an accepted way of Indigenous expression and forms of knowledge. The authors argue that the decolonial aspects of hip-hop as a cultural practice can inspire educators to find ways to empower Indigenous youth to develop their critical voices and to become active citizens. The last chapter, “Indigenous Urban Families and the Oportunidades Program in Mexico,” by Guillermo de la Peña, analyzes the impact of a conditional cash-transfer program, Oportunidades, on Indigenous children’s access to education in seven Mexican cities. The chapter is based on an extensive ethnographic field study, conducted in 2010 and 2011 and led by the author with a team of graduate students. The study included observa- tions and interviews with members of Indigenous households, individuals associated with Oportunidades, health care providers, and educators. Dr. de la Peña describes the interactions among program employees, beneficiary Indigenous families, and school service providers, arguing that the lack of social and cultural mediation among these actors limits the implementation xxvi Introduction of the program’s mission. The result is that a project that was established to deliver needed support to Indigenous families in Mexico did not offi- cially recognize Indigenous peoples’ cultural differences. In many cases the requirements that the program imposed on Indigenous families were incom- patible with their migration patterns, which were tied to family and community obligations. Moreover, without the full implementation of EIB mandates by the Mexican Constitution and additional forms of support needed within schools, Indigenous children with poor knowledge of Spanish dropped out despite the conditional cash-transfers. The study demonstrates that without an explicit effort from policymakers and government officials to recognize the cultural and linguistic differences of Indigenous people and to reflect them in their efforts to reach out to Indigenous families in need, the program was not able to accomplish its goals. The author makes several recommendations that can be incorporated to support Indigenous populations, such as writing program promotional materials in the Indigenous languages of the region, employing—as much as possible—young people with knowledge of the Indigenous languages, and providing them with education courses on human rights as well as on the different cultures of the Indigenous populations with whom they will be working. Finally, the chapter proposes the employment of additional institutional resources from other government agencies with knowledge of Indigenous languages and cultures to help teachers develop teaching and learning strategies to work with Indigenous students in the classroom.

Conclusions and Recommendations Neoliberal policies and the shrinkage of the welfare state have resulted in growing economic and political inequality within Latin American societies. These increasing inequities constitute one of the greatest challenges for Indigenous children and youth to realize their rights to a quality education promised to them by constitutional amendments. Economic and political factors play an important role in the effective exercise of their legal rights. The extreme poverty and harsh daily life conditions of many Indigenous families prevent them from fostering the education of their children. Without greater public investment in the rural and urban public schools that Indigenous children attend, and additional support from the schools themselves, Indigenous youth will not be able to complete their education, despite their resilience and their firm belief that education is a way out of poverty and marginalization. Introduction xxvii

One of the themes that unifies the research presented inIndigenous Education Policy, Equity, and Intercultural Understanding in Latin America is the migration of Indigenous people from rural to urban areas in great numbers. Sao Paulo, Mexico City, Lima, and La Paz are all great metropolitan areas with large Indigenous populations. In spite of this significant migration, most countries’ policies still focus on Indigenous students who live in rural areas and attend school there. In many cases their presence in the urban capitals is not welcome but, most importantly, the cities have not made the necessary public investment to incorporate these cultures and languages within their schools and universities. Intercultural universities are a good example of an educational innovation that is needed. They have provided access to a tertiary education in rural areas to many more Indigenous students than other higher education institutions. Further, a central contribution in places where intercultural universities are having an impact is in the professional development of teachers, providing them with knowledge of the communities where they teach, of their culture, and literacy in the Indigenous languages of those communities. Moreover, the fact that intercultural universities are close to the communities where Indigenous people live can help to stop their migration either to the urban centers or to the USA, where they become marginalized. The expansion and refinement of these universities are crucial to the goal of increasing the number of institutions where intercultural dialogue is part of the curriculum, as a way to welcome and foster Indigenous youth leadership and literacy in their own Indigenous languages. The chapters in this volume attest to the myriad efforts being under- taken to improve educational quality and equity for Indigenous children all over the Americas. In most cases these efforts are not enough, but educational innovation is taking place and new resources have been deployed at the national and regional levels to help improve learning outcomes and school completion for Indigenous children and youth.

An Agenda for Future Research The comparative study of educational policy presented here represents an initial step in building a research agenda for policy creation and implementation that will help Indigenous children and youth achieve their educational rights. Some additional relevant areas where further research is needed are the following: xxviii Introduction

Inquiry is needed to create strategies to foster intercultural dialogue. It is through this kind of dialogue and understanding within each nation that the cultures of Indigenous groups will be appreciated and able to represent themselves in education, government, and society—coexisting on an equal basis with other cultures’ self-representation. In addition, it is important to strengthen research on the presence of Indigenous children and youth in urban areas in order to develop curricula and provide their teachers with effective programs of educational intervention and professional development that is inclusive of Indigenous cultures and knowledge. Action plans must be created to ensure the elimi- nation of the racial and ethnic exclusion of Indigenous children and youth in urban schools where they have a growing presence. Further research is also needed on the access of Indigenous students to tertiary education, including the necessary investment to develop a data- base of relevant knowledge and information to inform the creation of programs to facilitate Indigenous youth’s higher education enrollment, attendance, and completion. In fact, for most countries we do not now have enough information on the number of students who enter tertiary education and graduate, nor on the roadblocks impeding their academic trajectories. Finally, research is needed to develop initiatives to build program protocols and practices for the government institutions charged with implementing state policies in Indigenous areas, with the goal of making such governmental initiatives reflective of the cultures and languages of the people they aim to serve. The editor and chapter authors of Indigenous Education Policy, Equity, and Intercultural Understanding in Latin America expect that the book will have an impact on policy implementation in at least two ways. First, even though national governments have put a greater emphasis on supporting Indigenous people’s right to education by improving educational access and quality in recent decades, the knowledge that exists to inform policymaking is still limited. This book offers an analysis of the current status of research. Dissemination of knowledge to policymakers in the region can inform their decisions on education matters in the coming years. Second, the book contributes to the ongoing dialogue on the appli- cation of research to policymaking and implementation in the field. Our hope is that it promotes more research that can influence the direction and form of policies around education of Indigenous peoples and the fostering of intercultural dialogue in the region. Introduction xxix

References Comisión Nacional para el Desarrollo de los Pueblos Indígenas (CDI) del Gobierno de la República de México. 2010. Cédulas de información básica de los pueblos indígenas de México. http://www.cdi.gob.mx/index.php?option =com_content&view=article&id=1327:cedulas-de-informacion -basica-de-los-pueblos-indigenas-de-mexico-&catid=38&Itemid=54 Cortina, Regina, ed. 2014. The Education of Indigenous Citizens in Latin America. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC). 2014. Los Pueblos Indígenas de América Latina: Avances en el último decenio y retos pendi- entes para la garantía de sus derechos. Santiago, Región Metropolitana Chile: ECLAC. Ford Foundation. 2011. Atlas sociodemográfico de los pueblos indígenas del Perú: Procesamientos especiales de microdatos censales. http://www.cepal.org/es/ publicaciones/1262-atlas-sociodemografico-de-los-pueblos-indigenas-del- peru Instituto Nacional de Estadíca (INE) del Estado Plurinacional de Bolivia. 2012. Características de Población y Vivienda. La Paz, Bolivia: Censo Nacional de Población y Vivienda. http://www.ine.gob.bo:8081/censo2012/PDF/resul- tadosCPV2012.pdf Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Censos (INEC) del Gobierno Nacional de la República del Ecuador. 2010. Población que se autoidentificó indígena, según provincia de empadronamiento, nacionalidad o pueblo indígena al que pertenece y sexo. Quito, Ecuador: Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Censos. http:// www.ecuadorencifras.gob.ec/informacion-censal-cantonal/ López, Luis Enrique. 2014. Indigenous Intercultural Bilingual Education in Latin America: Widening Gaps Between Policy and Practice. In The Education of Indigenous Citizens in Latin America, ed. Regina Cortina. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. Verdugo, Lucía. 2009. Guatemala. In Atlas sociolingüístico de pueblos indígenas en América Latina, ed. Inge Sichra. Cochabamba, Bolivia: FUNPROEIB Andes. http://www.unicef.org/honduras/tomo_2_atlas.pdf Contributors

Regina Cortina is Professor of Education in the Department of International and Transcultural Studies at Teachers College, Columbia University. She has been coordinating the department’s Program in International and Comparative Education since 2009. Her latest book, The Education of Indigenous Citizens in Latin America (2014), describes unprecedented changes in education across Latin America that resulted from the endorsement of Indigenous people’s rights through the development of intercultural and bilingual education. Cortina has recently edited “Educación Intercultural Bilingüe en Latinoamérica: El Papel de la Ayuda Internacional” (“Intercultural Bilingual Education in Latin America: The Role of Foreign Aid”), an issue of the Revista Mexicana de Investigación Educativa (Mexican Journal of Educational Research, 2014). She was elected Vice-President of the Comparative and International Education Society (CIES) in 2016 and will become President-Elect in March 2017, then President in March 2018. Guillermo de la Peña is a Mexican anthropologist and a member of the National System of Research and the Mexican Academy of Science. He was the founding director of two leading academic institutions in Mexico: the Center for Anthropological Studies of El Colegio de Michoacán (1979–1983) and the Centro de Investigaciones y Estudios Superiores en Antropología Social (Center for Research and Higher Studies in Social Anthropology, CIESAS) in Guadalajara (1987–1997), where he remains as a research professor. He has been a visiting professor at several universities in Mexico, the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Ecuador, Spain, and France. In 1990 he received the National Award in Urban and Regional Research; in 1993, the Jalisco Prize for Scientific Achievement; and in 1994–1995, the Guggenheim Fellowship. Among his recent articles are: “Ciudadanía étnica: un concepto pertinente para América Latina” (“Ethnic Citizenship: A Relevant Concept for Latin America”), in Dinámicas de inclusión y

xxxi xxxii Contributors exclusión en América Latina. Conceptos y prácticas de etnicidad, ciudadanía y perte- nencia (Dynamics of Inclusion and Exclusion in Latin America. Concepts and Practices of Ethnicity, Citizenship and Belonging), edited by Barbara Pothast et al. (2015); and “The End of ‘Revolutionary Anthropology’? Notes on Indigenism,” in Dictablanda. Politics, Work and Culture in Mexico 1938–1968, edited by Paul Gillingham and Benjamin Smith (2014). He has also edited Miradas concurrentes. La antropología en el diálogo interdisciplinario (Concurrent Looks: Anthropology in Interdisciplinary Dialogue) (2013), and La antropología y el patrimonio cultural de México (Anthropology and the Cultural Heritage of Mexico) (2011). Frida Díaz Barriga Arceo is a professor of psychology at the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. Her research and teaching areas are curriculum development and assessment, instructional psychology, teacher assessment and training, constructivism, and higher education teaching. She has belonged to the National Researchers System (Conacyt) since 1999. She is the author or co-author of Teaching Assessment (2001), Teaching Strategies for Meaningful Learning: A Constructivist Approach (2010), Situated Teaching (2006), ICT in 1:1 Model in Mexico (2013), and Instructional Experiences with ICT (2015). Amanda Earl is a doctoral student in the International Educational Development Program of the International and Transcultural Studies Department at Teachers College. She has worked as an educator for over seven years, both as a teacher in Philadelphia and Argentina; and as a college counselor for recent immigrant high school students in New York City. She currently works for an educational non- profit organization based in New York City that seeks to increase the college access and success of low-income and first-generation college students through mentor- ing. She holds a bachelor of arts degree in Classics from Brown University and a master of arts degree in International Education Development from Teachers College, Columbia University. Henry M. Levin is the William Heard Kilpatrick Professor of Economics and Education and the director of the Center for Benefit-Cost Studies in Education at Teachers College, Columbia University. He is also the David Jacks Professor of Higher Education and Economics, Emeritus, at Stanford University. From 1986 to 2000, he served as the director of the Accelerated Schools Project, a national school reform initiative for accelerating the education of at-risk youngsters. A specialist in the economics of education and human resources, he has published 22 books and about 300 articles on these and related subjects. He served as a fellow of both the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences and the Russell Sage Foundation, and was the president of the American Evaluation Association. He has been a member and president of the Palo Alto (CA) School Board and was president of the Comparative and International Education Society. He served on the Board of Trustees of Educational Testing Service and is presently a board member of the African Diaspora Consortium. He has held Fulbright professorships Contributors xxxiii in Barcelona and Mexico and is a member of the Guest Faculty at Peking University and Beijing Normal University. He has been awarded honorary doctorates by Maastricht University in Holland and San Marcos University of Peru. Joseph Levitan is a doctoral candidate in Educational Leadership and Comparative and International Education and a Foreign Language and Area Studies (FLAS) Graduate Fellow at Penn State University. His research examines school policy and practice with marginalized populations in the Americas and how these policies and practices link to outcomes. His current work looks at how self-conceptions, attitudes, and aspirations influence student learning and how schools can become spaces for responsive, high quality teaching to facilitate better learning and student success. He is also the director and a founding board member of the Sacred Valley Project, a non-profit organization that provides Indigenous girls of Peru with educational opportunities. He holds a master of arts degree in International Education Development from Teachers College, Columbia University, and bachelor of arts degree in Philosophy from Brandeis University. Víctor E. Llanque Zonta is a doctoral candidate in International and Comparative Education, with a concentration in Economics and Education, at Teachers College, Columbia University. He is the director of the World Perspectives Program and the Global Studies Department Chair at Greens Farms Academy, a K-12 independent school in Westport, CT. He holds a master of arts degree in Social Studies Education from Teachers College, Columbia University, and a bachelor of arts degree in Economics and Anthropology from Macalester College. His research interests include the intersections between intercultural relations, equity, and education in urban spaces in Latin America. Teresa Verónica Pérez García is a doctoral student in the pedagogy program in the Facultad de Filosofía y Letras at Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. She works as a Pedagogue in Secretaría de Educación Pública and collaborates in national projects related to educational evaluation in Mexico. Her MA thesis was based on the case of “Juan, el niño triqui,” which is the subject of her chapter in this book. She is a co-author of the article, “El caso de Juan, el niño triqui. Una experiencia de formación docente en educación intercultural” (“The case of Juan, the Triqui Boy: An Experience of Teacher Training in Intercultural Education”) in the Revista Mexicana de Investigación Educativa (Mexican Journal of Educational Research, 2014). She is also a co-author of the unit on diversity in the National Teaching Education Curricula. David Post is Professor of Education, Educational Theory and Policy, and Comparative and International Education in the Department of Education Policy Studies at Penn State’s College of Education. He previously worked at FLASCO- Quito, El Colegio de Mexico and wrote his dissertation in the 1980s while affili- ated with Peru’s Ministry of Education. He also edited the Comparative Education xxxiv Contributors

Review for ten years. His research interests include family economy, child labor, and social mobility. Verónica S. Tejerina Vargas is a linguist who works at the Programa de Formación en Educación Intercultural Bilingüe para los Países Andinos, Universidad Mayor de San Simón in Cochabamba, Bolivia. Her publications include: “Estado plurinacional: Saberes y aprendizajes del Pueblo Tsimane” (“The Plurinational State: Knowledges and Learning of the Tsimane Peoples” (2010); Estado Plurinacional y herencia colonial (The Plurinational State and Colonial Heritage) (2010); “Las construcciones identitarias juveniles: entre la simultanei- dad y la contradicción” (“The Identity Constructions of Youth: Between Simultaneity and Contradiction”) (2012); and “El aymara en el mundo del hip- hop” (“The Aymara in the World of Hip-Hop”) (2013). Verónica Vázquez-Zentella is a doctoral student in the pedagogy program at the Facultad de Filosofía y Letras at the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. She has worked as a teacher on all educational levels and has taught courses and workshops for university professors. She is co-author of the website “El Caso de Juan, el Niño Triqui,” which is the subject of her chapter in this book and author or co-author of articles on intercultural education. She also wrote the textbook Mi Mundo en Otra Lengua (My World in Another Language) (2012), and is co-author of the book, Adaptación y Mitigación Urbana del Cambio Climático en México (Urban Adaptation and Mitigation of Climate Change in Mexico) (2015).