Culture and Knowledge Transmission in Nicaragua

Reinforcing the transmission of Mayangna culture, knowledge and language

By Natural Sciences Sector

UNESCO Media Services

January 25, 2012

Citation:

http://tinyurl.com/7zdeqry

Like many other indigenous peoples, the Mayangna people of the BOSAWAS Biosphere Reserve, Nicaragua are concerned about the erosion of their culture, language and knowledge. Around the world, indigenous people are experiencing rapid social, cultural and environmental change. While this change may offer new opportunities, it may also put at risk their rich cultural heritage by disrupting the processes by which indigenous culture, language and knowledge are transmitted.

(Article Clipped, See Link for Full text)

Due to globalization, indigenous groups are frequently faced with changing social and cultural interactions that lead to new and exciting opportunities; however, globalization may threaten their indigenous cultural background. This UNESCO article deals with indigenous knowledge in Nicaragua from a biodiversity standpoint, since indigenous peoples play an integral role in maintaining environmental biodiversity and protecting the environment form exploitation. Therefore, it is essential to ensure that indigenous knowledge is preserved. The article indicates how the Mayangna indigenous group solicited support from UNESCO's LINKS program to aid them in preserving their local indigenous knowledge about biodiversity in today's globalized world. First, the Mayangna recorded knowledge on natural history, habitats, invasive species, their language, and legends into a book, which they hoped would be incorporated into the Mayangna educational system. In fact the Ministry of Education in Nicaragua recognizes the importance of adapting curriculum and education to local contexts, especially for indigenous children. Members of MINED are working in conjunction with Mayangna educators to adapt and develop curriculum materials, such as teachers guides and textbooks. After a pilot phase and final phase complete with monitoring and evaluation, this project proved successful and will attempt to integrate Mayangna knowledge and culture into the new national curriculum.

I thought that this article was interestingly juxtaposed against my post last week about the Mayans in Mexico and their need to modernize. Unlike the Mexican government, which just went in and built new homes in an attempt to allow the Mayans to live a more modernized life (typical), I found that I was very pleased by the actions of the Ministry of Education in Nicaragua in their treatment of the Mayangna indigenous group (despite the fact that I've never heard of the Mayangna people in all my time in Nicaragua...which is curious). What this article says to me is that perhaps globalization does not have to equate to the death of indigenous culture. Especially if we're talking about environmental conservation and preserving biodiversity, we need to think about ways to preserve this local indigenous knowledge. For so many centuries, indigenous tribes have been taking care of our planet and living in harmony with the environment. Because of this, as the article points out, indigenous communities house "80% of Earth's remaining healthy ecosystems." From an environmentally conscious standpoint then, it is imperative to consider local indigenous knowledge if people want to preserve what biodiversity we have left on the planet.

However, beyond being an article about indigenous people's importance in the realm of preserving biodiversity, I thought this article implicated the importance and possibility of integrating local knowledge into education at a national level, allowing for a dialogue between the traditional and the modern in Nicaragua. With UNESCO acting as an intermediary, the Mayangna logged all of their local knowledge and customs in their own language into a book, which needs to be incorporated into the Mayangna curriculum in order to ensure the transmission of Mayangna knowledge. However, more than that, the Ministry of Education in Nicaragua has actively been working alongside the Mayangna people through education in order to support their local knowledge and culture. While there are obviously many challenges ahead that both the Mayangna and MINED have to face in order to fully integrate Mayangna knowledge and language into the national curriculum, the fact that the Ministry does make indigenous knowledge a priority and engages in dialogue with indigenous peoples is an important first step. As someone studying development, I feel like all we talk about sometimes is how difficult it is to establish collaboration with the people in order to ensure equity in education and development, especially given the context of globalization. Really, a lot of the discussing I have as someone trying to navigate the world of development make me want to bash my head against a wall sometimes. Even my idealization of local knowledge construction has been dashed (after all, we have to ask the question of who exactly is constructing local knowledge?). Despite all this, in the context of educational development regarding indigenous people, I think that Nicaragua is on the right track.

The Global South Unites Through Lending

China lends more than $75bn to Latin America
Financial Times
February 15, 2012
By John Paul Rathbone
Citation: http://on.ft.com/yKyIpQ

Chinese state banks have lent more than $75bn to Latin America since 2005, and in 2010 gave more than the World Bank, Inter-American Development Bank and US Ex-Im Bank combined, according to a report which highlights China’s growing financial heft in the region.

“On the positive side, it is clear that China is a new and growing source of finance in Latin America,” notes the independent academic report, New Banks in Town: Chinese finance in Latin America.

“That said, and contrary to much commentary on the subject, by and large Latin American nations have to pay a higher premium for loans from China.”

China has overtaken the US to become Brazil and Chile’s largest trade partner. Many US policymakers fear that Beijing is using cheap rate loans to “buy” influence among left-leaning Latin American governments that are hostile to western interests, and that Beijing uses financing to secure long term commodity supplies.

Read more...


Latin America has borrowed more than $75bn from China since 2005. Since then China has transformed into Brazil and Chile’s leading trading partner, beating out the United States. Through financing China has been able to secure long term supplies of commodities. Many U.S. policy makers are voicing concern that the attractive loan rates are a tool to “buy” influence among left-leaning governments in Latin America. Chinese loans to Latin America now account for more than half of Beijing’s international lending. China’s growing presence has not gone unnoticed in the region.

This situation supports Jeannie’s previous post about global interconnectedness: “Venezuelan and Iranian Involvement in Nicaragua: Benevolence or Strategy?” Latin America is now financially tied to China and the implications of such ties are not yet clear.  This article also illustrates the notion within World Systems Theory that international power relations are constantly changing. Even though the money from China is not coming in the form of aid or “assistance”, it still has potential to create a certain level of dependency, especially considering the fact China focus is on commodities in Latin American markets, which critics say, will increase “dependency” exploitation. The article even points out that left-wing development economists denounced this type of dependency four decades ago.  That is not to say the past cannot repeat itself.  Left-leaning governments tired of Western ways may overlook such factors and continue relations with the Chinese in their quest for modernization and development. 

The United States is no longer ranked number one in regard to trade with countries like Brazil and Chile, but that is not their only concern.  Some believe China’s growing presence in the region is driven by an ideological desire to boost South-South ties according to the article. Besides the economic benefits tied to commodities and the influential power of money, it appears China’s strategy may consist of spreading and supporting ideologies of the Global South.  Venezuela and Iran are now supporting Nicaragua and isn’t Iran friends with China? The Global South seems to be uniting in the United State’s backyard. What will that mean for future the future of development and education in Latin America?

A Venezuela Without Chavez?

What Comes After Chavez?

By: Wikistrat

CNN World

February 10, 2012

Citation: http://tinyurl.com/7yx97qo

This Sunday, the historically disorganized Venezuelan opposition movement is holding its first-ever presidential primary to decide upon a single candidate to challenge long-time strongman Hugo Chavez. With regional governor Henrique Capriles expected to prevail, the aging Chavez faces a younger version of himself: namely, a dynamic rising star promising to transform the political landscape. This time, however, the figure is moving it away from the heavy-handed populism initiated by Chavez after he swept into office in 1998.

(Article clipped, see link for full version)

This article attempts to hypothesize what may happen in Venezuela if Chavez is challenged by the opposition movement in it's first presidential primary. The prevailing opponent, Capriles, is a younger version of Chavez, and may pose quite the challenge to the aging and ailing president. Chavez instituted populism in Venezuela, marked by the persecution of political opponents, nepotism in parliament, an emerging oil industry, and close relationships with fellow Chavista leaders in Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua and Cuba. The authors highlight five potential post-Chavez situations in Venezuela. First, the opposition's campaign could create anti-Chavez fallout; or Chavez could be elevated to martyr status like Che in Cuba, allowing for his brother to assume the presidency and continue the Chavez rule of Venezuela. However, given Latin American history, a military junta could assume power behind the scenes, using a figurehead ruler to appease the people; alternatively, Venezuela could be the new Colombia, full of drug violence. The last scenario has the next Venezuela leader as the new "Lula;" Brazil won't allow its neighbor to fall to evils of globalization, and instead could use its regional leadership to lead it into a functioning democracy.

To begin, I found this analysis interesting because what happens in Venezuela could indicate a shift in power in Latin America. For example, if Chavez is on the out, a power vacuum could emerge, either shifting Venezuela to a nepotistic "all in the family" government like Cuba, or to a potentially more violent state, like Mexico, propelled by drug violence. I think the comparisons that this article makes between Venezuela and situations in other Latin American countries are really interesting. The fact that Chavez and his government are facing real opposition for the first time in a long time is highly significant. However, Latin American history does indicate that this situation may not turn out well. What would happen to security and stability in Latin America if Venezuela went the way of Mexico? How would that situation impact its relations with other countries in the region? Or, could a military junta government or a case of Chavez nepotism lead the way to another long and brutal Latin America civil war, marked by violence and "disappearances"? As the current situation in Honduras indicates, when it comes to politics in Latin America, everything hangs on a very thin thread. I think though that the last situation, involving Brazil and its regional power, is the most interesting given the current situations in globalization and development. In International Human Rights Law, we talk about the power of regional organizations over more Western influences (think of the Arab league in Syria before the situation escalated to its current predicament). Brazil, due to rapid development and globalization has become a relatively potent 'democratic' force in Latin America. I'd like to think that perhaps this will count for something if the future of Venezuela's politics seems uncertain.

Tradition vs. Modernity in Mexico

Mayan Descendents Struggling to Cope in Modern World

By Alastair Leithead

BBC

15 February 2012

Citation: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-17051131

The Mayan civilisation may have died out centuries ago, but people descended from them still live in Central America and southern Mexico.

They are among the poorest in the region, and attempts to alleviate their poverty have relied on modernisation and development - but the results are far from ideal.

Alastair Leithead reports from the Mexican state of Chiapas.

(Article clipped, see link for video)

This video illustrates how indigenous Mayans in Mexico are being impacted by globalization. The segment begins with a Mayan Curandero (healer) performing a ceremony to cure a disease that he believes doctors, with all their modern gadgets cannot cure: fear. He believes that "doctors cannot cure the sickness of the soul." However, despite the prevalence of these medicinal traditions and others, like the Saint's Day festival, globalization is insidiously altering these people's traditional ways. Mayans are among the poorest indigenous people in Mexico, and constantly face pressures from the Mexican government to modernize. The video illustrated the government's latest attempt to bring the Mayans to terms of modernity: a rural city, complete with a hospital to combat infant mortality, to help lessen poverty among Mayans. However, the city is a ghost town; few Mayans have moved in, and those who did had to deal with shoddy construction of houses and buildings that failed to meet Mayan traditional cooking needs. The video ends with a segment from the Mexican government official who helped design the city, who expressed his confidence that more Mayans would move in. In ending the segment, the reporter closed with the cryptic phrase: "there is no escaping the modern world."

The theme of this video is clear: Mayans need to modernize. Globalization does make this a fact, and I agree that to some degree there is no escaping modernity. However, I feel strongly that this perhaps was an unwise approach to development in this Mexican community. For example, the rural city that was built did not serve the needs of the community. One of the Mayan women who lived in the complex remarked that the house had already started falling apart, that there was no water, and that she actually had to construct a separate kitchen to cook in because Mayans cook over wood fires, and the floor of these houses was also wood! Seems to me that these houses are just a waste of time. It was clear that the Mexican government had a mission: to reduce poverty, infant mortality, and bring this isolated community "closer to social services." These are all noble goals, but their approach was way off. Where are the Mayan voices in all of this? What do they think they need in order to combat these challenges in their community? This reminds me greatly of the work of Amayrta Sen (if you haven't read Development as Freedom then you definitely should!), particularly his belief in a "capabilities approach" to development (ie: what are people capable of?). Like the belief that by educating women, they will all make similar choices (to have children later etc), this rural town was built on the belief that if you build modern buildings and hospitals, people will use them. However, both of these approaches deny people their own agency in the matter, and group people together assuming that they will all make the same decision. The Mexican government official who constructed the city remarked that "it was difficult to deal with the culture and customs of the indigenous Mayans." This phrase in itself indicates a certain devaluation of the Mayan people in my opinion. It is clear that the Mexican government officials were not looking to create a partnership with Mayans; rather, they simply wanted to supplant a modern way of life on these very traditional people. In cases like this, agency is extremely vital, and should be encouraged. Development in this sense should be about creating collaborative partnerships between locals and national officials to better the community as the community sees fit.

Peace Corp Pulls Volunteers out of Honduras: 1 Week Later

Honduras Peace Corp Withdrawal: Volunteer Pullout Comes as Blow

The Huffington Post

By Freedy Cuevas and Adriana Gomez Licon

January 18, 2012
Citation: http://huff.to/GJuvSp

 

TEGUCIGALPA, Honduras — The U.S. government's decision to pull out all its Peace Corps volunteers from Honduras for safety reasons is yet another blow to a nation still battered by a coup and recently labeled the world's most deadly country.

Neither U.S. nor Honduran officials have said what specifically prompted them to withdraw the 158 Peace Corps volunteers, which the U.S. State Department said was one of the largest missions in the world last year.

It is the first time Peace Corps missions have been withdrawn from Central America since civil wars swept the region in the 1970s and 1980s. The Corps closed operations in Nicaragua from 1979 to 1991 and in El Salvador from 1980 to 1993 for safety and security reasons, but has since returned to both countries

It is no secret that for all of Central America's beauty and mystique, it is tainted by violence. Equally, it is well-known that many US groups have developed organizations aimed to combat this issue through different, dynamic educational programs. However, a week ago the US Peace Corp made the decision to withdraw volunteers from Honduras, which as the author explains, has come as a "blow". While similar withdraws have occurred in the past, most notably in Nicaragua and El Salvador, for safety and security reasons, for now projects in water sanitation, working with youth and HIV prevention are on hold in Honduras as drug-related crime has recently spiraled seemingly out-of-control. The move comes after a 27-year-old volunteer was shot in the leg Dec. 3rd during an armed robbery, and after a robbery and rape that occurred in late January of another volunteer. It is noted that this is a difficult time for Honduran NGO's (clearly) and that additionally, aid from Spain was "drying up" due to that country's own debt issues. A 2011 UN report states that Honduras has more violence than any other country in the world! It is unclear what effect these various changes will have on the Corp agency, and no other groups have pulled out as of yet (for more info. on this topic in Central America, see this article: El Salvador/Crime/Education)

I understand that the number one priority is the safety of the volunteers, and also, in turn, the reputation of the Peace Corps however violence is crippling education efforts leading to reports of rape, robbery, and other random acts of violence that operations no longer continue on a normal basis with Honduras in its' the current state. This is a United States government organization -- it would be incredibly irresponsible, and reprehensible, to maintain operations at the current level. However, the organizations departure from the Central American nation signals a message to the government of Honduras to take action.

As history reveals, the Peace Corp has reacted similarly in other countries, for example, in Nicaragua when the government was going through sharp changes in regime in the early 1990's, and it was simply too a dangerous place to live and work for expats and international volunteers. Bluntly put, this current situation is tragic from any perspective. People wanting to help in a place that so direly needs assistance, but halted, because the situation is actually so bad, that it is dangerous: this is the Peace Corp worker reality in Honduras at the present state. The authors report from Mexico and Guatemala, which is ironic that they too are outside of the country.

We need to consider this case in context of the value of human life. For the last 2 years I have worked as a teacher and most recently, as the Director of Adult Programs for a non-profit in the Nicaragua called the Barrio Planta Project. All humans experience violence but the amount of expose can certainly increase as expats living and working in Nicaragua. For a former co-worker her experience was enough to encourage her to quit her position and leave the country. She took a job in Guatemala and is now working in Antigua, which is relatively safer than other areas of that country but certainly not immune to the same problems found throughout Central America in terms of drug-related violence. I am lucky that nothing has ever happened to me, and I continue to make what I consider to be "smart choices". However, this organization has large implications beyond the individual level and their efforts in development, as United States citizens acting as educational ambassadors with countries around the world. What is the impact of cutting services and which services are specifically affected? 

Hidden Strife within Chile's Education System

Photograph: Juan Carlos Cardenas/EPA/Landov

Chile student protests point to deep discontent

BBC News, Santiago

August 11, 2011

By Gideon Long

Citation: http://tinyurl.com/3udmf46

Chile is usually regarded as one of the most orderly and stable countries in South America, so the images that have come out of the capital, Santiago, in recent days have been especially shocking.

Thousands of high school and university students have marched through the capital's streets, as well as those of other major cities, demanding a radical overhaul of the education system.

Invariably the demonstrations have ended in violent clashes between masked youths and police officers armed with tear gas and water cannon.

The scenes have been reminiscent of the pro-democracy protests of the 1980s, when Chileans clashed with the forces of General Augusto Pinochet.

Article clipped; see link for full version.

On several occasions in August of 2011, thousands of Chilean students and citizens took to the streets to protest the nation's current education system. For such a "stable" Latin America country, the protests turned quickly violent as Chileans and police clashed ultimately ending in hundreds of arrests and injuries to citizens, policemen, and property. The backlash that the Chilean education system finally received has been masked by its relatively high educational standards in comparison to its Latin American neighbors. However, citizens believe that there are deeper inequalities being perpetuated by the education system. A large blame for these inequalities is placed on the structure of schools. The majority of schools in Chile are privately run, either tuition or voucher based, a much smaller percent are state-run institutions. The unavailability of financial resources amongst Chile's poor and lack of public education has, in the eyes of Chileans, given an unfair advantage to those wealthier citizens. Their call for an end to for profit education has been met by the Chilean government with skepticism and insistence that this demand cannot be met. With the government’s current plan to re-organize and their approval rate rapidly declining, they will have to confront this issue of “educational apartheid.”

Taking a closer look at this issue in Chile, one can see how the social oppressions occurring throughout society have transcended into a contentious problem. From a Neo-Marxist perspective, despite the economic growth that Chile has experienced in the last 10 years, Chilean citizens feel that that the education system has either stagnated or deteriorated during that same time span. When one considers that the increase in revenue could have been put to use to further improve the nation and address the social concerns of its public. Some analysts figure that Chile's embrace of a radical free market has caused this led to a general sense of unease despite the revitalizing affect that it has had on the economy. This makes one questions whether economic success and wealth can in reality lead to development in the face of such social oppressions.

Another point to be learned from this case study is the government's tactic to resolve this issue. Ministry leaders claim that the education system is indeed flawed, but insists that it is not a failure. They look to reorganize the system after successful European models that do have a fair distribution of private and publicly funded schools. However, the nations that they are looking towards as examples, the Netherlands and Belgium, do not have the underlying socio-economic inequalities that are present in Chilean society. My question to the Chilean government would be how do you plan on addressing the central issue, the socio-economic gap, if the model you are recreating does not have and did not address such an issue? Especially since your attempt to model other country's economies has not helped your overall nation's situation. Clearly this social unrest is speaking to larger volumes of underlying issues present in society and something is going to eventually give.

Taiwan offering student loans to Central Americans

China's wage hikes could benefit Americas

University World News

By Chrissie Long

February 5, 2012
Citation: http://bit.ly/GK03sI

Taiwan is offering students in five Central American countries more than US$20 million in low-cost student loans. Analysts see the move to court the region, which has low higher education enrollment rates, as part of the ongoing battle between Taiwan and China over political allies in the West.

The programme, which is administered by the Central American Integration Bank (BCIE), provides loans to prospective students in Honduras, El Salvador, Costa Rica, Nicaragua and Guatemala.

In a region with university enrollment rates of only 18%, compared to 28% in all of Latin America, and limited availability of student credit, the programme is bound to have an impact, said officials from the BCIE.

“We are conscious of the fact that many people can’t access education because they don’t have the financial means to do so,” said Ruben Mora, Costa Rica director for BCIE.

“The idea is to create opportunities for more people to form part of the higher education system, which will lead to better jobs, improved economic conditions and better economic development.”

(clipped; see above link for the rest of the article)

In this article, the author presents a program introduced by the Taiwanese government intended to provide low-interest and long repayment loans to Central American students in Nicaragua, Guatemala, Costa Rica, Honduras and El Salvador, through a program known as the BCIE loan programme (Central American Bank For Economic Integration). The author writes with the assumption that Taiwan acts in competition with China and that it has an invested interest in this offer to Central American university students. As the article explains, the program allows students the opportunity to pursue higher education in these countries through a loan program started in 2011. So far, 50 students have taken advantage of the offer, from Nicaragua and Honduras, and 8 universities are participating. The goal is the program seems to be to promote relations between Taiwan and the Western hemisphere, and to invest in human capital in order to promote economic development through educational advancement and opportunity. 

My initial reaction involves the word investment. What exactly is Taiwan investing in? Is this a form of neo-colonialism in which Central American students are only enslaved to another foreign government? Or, is this a real opportunity for young people to advance and in turn help their countries to advance?

The 5 countries that are offered this loan program are of course known as "third-world countries", and Nicaragua in particular is the second poorest country in the Western Hemisphere. In terms of a "first-world" model, it would seem to be a great opportunity. However, unlike the United States, where students take out loans from their own government, hence supporting their home country, these students are borrowing from a country on the other side of the world!!

This is a tough debate. On the one hand you have a low-percentage rate of college enrollment (18%) due to economic setbacks in this area. Thus, one might assume this is a good solution to that problem and that Taiwan should even be given a pat on the back, per se. However, on the other hand, is this not neo-colonialism at its best? Economic dependence on rich, industrialized country. Check. Aimed at maintaining global inequality. Check. So, it leaves us with quite a dilemma. As a teacher based in Nicaragua, I want my students to attend college. I really do. I know however that without money, that is quite difficult. So, I'd love to see more scholarship and grant programs. While this Taiwanese program appears like an "opportunity" to be taken advantage of, it may just well be in reality another debt trap, and moreover, a power move by Taiwan to attempt to step ahead in Central American relations in front of China. 

We return to the word investment. We might think about students investing in their own education, companies investing in students and countries investing in other countries through development programs like the BCIE. However, which students are affected? In all of the articles that I located on the program I could not locate any specific demographics on the students who are taking out loans through this program, particularly looking for economic demographics based on social class. Furthermore this is run through a bank! The purpose of banks are to make money. They supply no other purpose than that really. I think Central American countries need to find a way to support their own students' search for higher education. I wonder if any heads of these governments are receiving kickbacks. I wouldn't be surprised. 

Brazil - U.S. International Education Initiatives

Education Cooperation Partnership Between the United States and the State of Pernambuco, Brazil



Map by Raphael Lorenzeto de Abreu

U.S. Department of State Press Release

Fact Sheet

Office of the Spokesperson

Washington, DC

February 3, 2012    
Citation: http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2012/02/183132.htm
_______________________________________

Presidents Obama and Rousseff share a commitment to promoting an innovative U.S.-Brazil education partnership to meet the needs of a 21st-century workforce. Last year, both Presidents set complementary goals for international education. President Obama announced the "100,000 Strong for the Americas" goal to see the number of students from Latin America and the Caribbean studying in the United States increase to 100,000 and 100,000 students from the United States studying throughout the region by the end of the decade. Likewise, President Rousseff’s “Science without Borders” initiative to support as many as 100,000 students for international study over the next four years, with at least half coming to the United States, is a visionary approach to building and expanding Brazil’s role as a global leader. The two countries will reinforce their commitments to international education with the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on educational cooperation between U.S. Ambassador to Brazil Thomas Shannon and Pernambuco State Secretary of Education Anderson Gomes, witnessed by Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Wendy Sherman, on February 3, 2012. The following programs, including the MOU, demonstrate the broad educational partnership between the United States and Brazil.

Memorandum of Understanding on Educational Cooperation: The MOU covers a broad range of areas in education that the United States and Pernambuco support, including: “To enhance training (vocational and technical) and access to the labor market by using the English language as a tool for access to information and communication, enabling new forms of social interaction and cultural immersion; To promote the academic, cultural and technological exchange of students, teachers and other education professionals; To develop youth leadership; To exchange leadership management experiences in schools; To develop the teaching of the English language in the educational system of Pernambuco; and to promote social inclusion and diversity in education.”

“Win the World” program: On November 3, 2011, Pernambuco Governor Eduardo Campos unveiled an ambitious educational program for state high schools called “Win the World.” This program has three pillars: providing English language instruction to 24,000 public high school students; sending 1,000 outstanding English students overseas for six-month exchanges to the United States, the United Kingdom, New Zealand, and Canada; and providing enhanced teacher training to approximately 450 English teachers statewide through the Department of State’s English Language Fellows Program. The U.S. Mission in Brazil, through its Public Affairs Offices and Regional English Language Office, has collaborated on and supports all three pillars.

Pernambuco English Language Fellows Program: The State of Pernambuco, in partnership with the U.S. Mission in Brazil, will host six Senior English Language Fellows to Pernambuco for the 2012 academic year to conduct teacher training courses that reach 450 public school teachers. The State of Pernambuco will provide approximately $250,000 in direct funding for the project as well as in-kind support totaling about $150,000. The U.S. government will fully fund one of the six fellows and will pay for international transportation as well as course materials, with a total investment of approximately $150,000.

English Access Microscholarship Program: Fifty students from Santos Dumont Public High School in Recife have received full scholarships for two years of English language instruction at the binational center Associação Brasil-América. Access students gain an appreciation for U.S. culture and democratic values through cultural enhancement activities and participate in leadership and volunteer activities outside the classroom. The program will continue this year, incorporating students from other schools.

The U.S. and Brazil solidified their joint commitment to expanding bilateral international educational initiatives on February 3, 2012 by signing a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on educational cooperation between U.S. Ambassador to Brazil Thomas Shannon and Pernambuco State Secretary of Education Anderson Gomes.  This comes one year after Presidents Obama and Rousseff set complementary objectives for global education, which included the "100,000 Strong for the Americas" goal of seeing 100,000 students from Latin America study in the U.S. and 100,000 students from the U.S. study throughout the region.  President Rousseff has a supplementary initiative, “Science without Borders,” to support Brazilian students for international study over the next four years with at least half slated to study in the United States.  The press release concludes by listing the specific programs to take place within the state of Pernambuco all of which include an emphasis on English language education. 

In many ways these international education initiatives are mutually beneficial for Brazil and the United States; however, after reading through the specific educational programs to be instituted in Pernambuco, Brazil, I question the equity of the partnership. Who is benefiting the most from this educational collaboration? For example, the English Access Microscholarship Program gives select high school students scholarships for two years worth of English language instruction.  While learning English does have benefits in our increasing interconnected, globalized world, my concern lies in the secondary part of the English Access Microscholarship Program. According to the press release, through the curriculum students will “gain an appreciation for U.S. culture and democratic values through cultural enhancement activities and participate in leadership and volunteer activities outside the classroom.”  Exporting the model of U.S. democracy and fostering “appreciation” does seem to be more advantageous for one country in particular. Another key part of the educational collaboration is the teacher trainings for English teachers, which World System theorists might argue influences global homogenization of educational policy and practice.  World System theorists might also ask if this program is mediating and ultimately advancing the neoliberal agenda through encouraging an appreciation of U.S. culture and democratic values?

One final commentary to critique how President Rousseff’s “Science without Borders” initiative is quoted in the press release as “a visionary approach to building and expanding Brazil’s role as a global leader.” This quote highlights an assumption that for development to occur “knowledge” must be sought externally specifically, in the North. 

UNIALBA Higher Education System: Socialism or Functionalism?

Logo ALBA: Argentina Indymedia

LATINAMERICA: Higher education integration for bloc

University World News

August 14, 2011

Citation: http://tinyurl.com/82w8knd

Member states of Latin America's left-leaning political bloc known as Alba are organising to create an integrated higher education system. The eight participating nations aim to pool resources with a view to strengthening their universities. But the initiative, which has a strong socialist and anti-US agenda, has come in for widespread criticism.

The Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America, or Alba - which includes among others the governments of Venezuela, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Bolivia and Cuba - was founded by Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez in December 2004.

The alliance's higher education integration initiative was announced in Nicaragua in June and emphasises strengthening universities and sharing advances made with each of the member countries.

But while pooling resources in higher education is a positive step, according to Kevin Casas Zamora (pictured), a former Costa Rican vice-president and political analyst with the Brookings Institution, it is dangerous when linked to a political agenda.

Article clipped; see link above for full version

Members of the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America, as known as ALBA, are proposing a collaborative higher education system. It is their hope that by pooling all of their resources together that these eight nations will be able to form a network of universities that will support the demand for more venues of higher education in their respective countries. However, this proposal has gained a significant amount of criticism because of the political agenda that is often associated with such projects accomplished through this alliance. In this case, how can education and free thought be fostered in an environment laden with stringent socialist and anti-U.S. ideologies. Not only does the underlying "education" seem to be problematic, but also the coordination of a cohesive curriculum and grading structure. While ministry officials from the two main countries, Cuba and Venezuela, assure that the a unified, integrated system is possible, critics remain skeptical of the accomplishment of such a large venture.

With this type of politically driven university system it is important to consider the role that education will play outside of the institution of learning. Now from a functionalist perspective one could see how this system would easily be able to satisfy the needs within both local and national contexts. However, the implications of this UNIALBA system could have more complex and global implications. It is hard to ignore that these ALBA nations would use this system to propagate the standard set of norms supported by a socialist society. This system has been presented by ALBA ministry officials as a way to not only open up more opportunities for their citizens to learn and grow, but also as a way to preserve what they believe to be their values and beliefs. Within UNIALBA, their way of life could be culturally and socially reproduced. (see

http://tinyurl.com/c87jnx5)

While this may be a very rational response preserve the common identity of these nations, their socialist and anti-U.S. views might support a narrow minded world view. Not only could this type of curriculum be designed to eliminate all opposing ideas, but it could also present a space to openly challenge relations with other non-socialist countries within and outside of Latin America. These are the types of questions that need to be raised in order to solicit the true nature of this education system. What consequences will this type of education system have on these Latin American citizens? Will their underlying political agenda pose a threat to other Latin American countries? One might even go further to see if the support for these ideologies on such an immense scale does pose a threat to U.S. national security?

Venezuelan and Iranian Involvement in Nicaragua: Benevolence or Strategy?

Ortega, Chavez, and Ahmadinejad share smiles and a handshake.

Nicaraguan's Worry About Ortega's Foreign Friends

By Dave Graham

Reuters

January 17, 2012

Citation: http://tinyurl.com/893sp2v

MANAGUA (Reuters) - Nicaragua's left-wing President Daniel Ortega has won over many critics at home with a successful drive to cut poverty and spur business-friendly policies in Central America's poorest country. But his choice of friends abroad makes many Nicaraguans worry that the former guerrilla and Cold War icon is dragging down the country's reputation and unnecessarily antagonizing the United States and other Western countries.

Article clipped, see link for details

Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega recently won his second straight term thanks to his efforts to ameliorate poverty in Nicaragua, with the help of Venezuelan oil money. Both Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad were present at Ortega’s inauguration. However, Nicaraguans fear that these relationships are negatively impacting the country and affecting global opinion about Nicaragua. Many Nicaraguans indicated that Ortega fails to think for himself; rather, he is merely Chavez’s puppet. Others voiced concerns over the motives for increased Venezuelan influence in Nicaragua. As of recently, Chavez has contributed money to provide water, electricity, and housing for this impoverished country. The question is, to what end? Regarding increased Iranian involvement in Nicaragua, many Nicaraguans fail to see what benefits Nicaragua will accrue in engaging in such close relations with Iran, a nation that has recently added fire to the global flames with its nuclear program, and one who has also yet to provide any monetary aid to Nicaragua.

First off, there are many ways to define global interconnectedness. The past few years, Iran has strategically cultivated friendships with several Latin America countries, namely Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua. The recent launch of an Iranian Spanish television channel (see: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-16809053) and the visit of Iranian President Ahmadinejad to four Latin American countries in early 2012 definitely indicate strategic Iranian involvement in Latin America. While this involvement does not scream of the stereotypical neo-imperialistic efforts of the West in Africa, I cannot help but see the similarities. I mean, Iran’s involvement in Latin America is definitely for its own self-interest. Given Western frustrations with Iran’s nuclear program, Ahmadinejad may be using his Latin American ties to win favor and garner more support for his country who, in the midst of the potential conflict in the Straight of Hormuz, is not quite in global favor. Iran needs some friends right now, and Ahmadinejad is shopping in Latin America.

As the article indicated, the U.S. has issued its perception of the situation, namely that Iran is creating strategic friendships with allies in America’s backyard (big surprise there). But even more significant are the Nicaraguan voices protesting the relationship between Nicaragua and Iran. Obviously, any ‘development’ aid that Iran would provide to Nicaragua would just be a ruse to buy Nicaraguan support. It is strategic because Iran could subversively provide money, which impoverished Nicaragua definitely needs and wouldn’t turn down, and later cash in on that. After all, nothing comes without a price. In my opinion, Iran is using ally partnerships and the promise of future funds to take advantage of Nicaragua. Whatever Iran’s motives are in Latin America, they obviously do not have the best interest of Nicaraguans in mind, which reminds me in a bizarre way of neo-colonialism.

What I also found interesting was the connection between Venezuela and Nicaragua, and the point raised by Nicaraguans about what Chavez’s interests truly are in Nicaragua. It is hard to determine why Venezuela is so deeply imbedded in Nicaraguan affairs, but again, I liken it to a subversive strategic way to ensure that Nicaragua, a country riddled with poverty, is always indebted to Venezuela. In potentially another stretch, this relationship between Nicaragua and Venezuela reminds me of Dependency Theory in the way that Venezuela is perpetuating Nicaraguan dependency by providing Chavez’s petrodollars to help battle Nicaraguan poverty.