Fokus ROMI.HR

Podaci prikupljeni 2013. godine od strane Fundación Secretariado Gitano svjedoče o ogromnim nejednakostima u obrazovnoj integraciji Roma. Stopa nepismenosti među španjolskim Romima je 13% i znatno viša od ostalog stanovništva (2%). Stopa Roma koji nemaju formalno obrazovanje u Španjolskoj je trostruko viša od prosjeka. Dok je stopa napuštanja školovanja na nacionalnoj razini (19,4%) nekoliko postataka viša nego na razini EU (14,9%), stopa napuštanja školovanja od strane romske djece doseže nevjerojatnih 64%. Prosječno trajanje ukupnog obrazovanje za mlade u Španjolskoj je 21 godina. Ova brojka se kod mladih Roma smanjuje na 17 godina, a kod mladih Romkinja na 15 godina. Suočavajući se s takvim brojevima, koji jasno ukazuju na sustavni neuspjeh obrazovnog sustava, mnogi upiru prstom u romsku zajednicu kao u izvor svih problema.

Izjava ‘’Romi se ne žele integrirati’’ se koristi kako bi se pokazala “prirodna“ sklonost Roma stvarati probleme u razredu. Takav pristup omogućava lokalnim vlastima i vladama izbjegavanje odgovornosti za integraciju Roma. Institucionalno neprijateljstvo izgrađeno na osnovi optuživanja “onog drugog“ može se objasniti činjenicom da je puno lakše zadovoljavati se s već postojećim predrasudama u društvu i optuživati ​​romsku kulturu. Još gore, takav stav nikako ne pomaže približavanju romskim zajednicama i onemogućava izgradnju mostova prema kulturološkim razlikama.

Istraživači Crespo i drugi (2014) priznaju ograničenja ''Ford-ovskog'' modela obrazovanja uspostavljenog u Španjolskoj, žrtva ''industrijskog koncepta nastave i učenja, koji podrazumijeva planiranu ravnopravnost za sve, ne obazirući se na ogromnu individualnu, društvenu i kulturnu raznolikost koja se danas može naći u učionicama''. Davanje prednosti učenju putem gotovo jednostranog prijenosa znanja ispred smislenog sudjelovanja i suradnje s učenicima. Ovaj pogrešan pedagoški pristup, koji ima ozbiljne mane u mnogim pogledima, dodatno zaoštrava probleme s kojima se suočavaju neke zajednice poput romske, pokušavajući pronaći pravi smisao u formalnom obrazovanju.

Ključan aspekt uspješne integracije romske djece u školama leži u institucionalnom uređenju, koje podržava postizanje zajedničkih ciljeva i motiva. Prema Padrósu i drugima (2014), ''napredak u obrazovanju [...] ne može postojati bez motivacije djeteta ili aktivnosti usmjerenih na postizanje ciljeva i značenja koje se tim aktivnostima daje.'' Nije uloženo dosta institucionalnih napora u stvaranje školskih sredina koje razvijaju motivaciju i potiču osjećaj svrhe romskoj djeci. Odsustvo takvih školskih sredina dovodi do situacije da je školsko obrazovanje sporedna aktivnost u oblikovanju romskog identiteta. Ako romska djeca ne uspijevaju učiniti školsku aktivnost sastavnim dijelom svog osobnog razvoja, ona u sebi aktiviraju konstrukciju svog identiteta u kojoj se škole smatraju beskorisnim, prisilnim i besmislenim prostorom.

Nedostatak zajedničkih narativa o prednostima školskog obrazovanja je također važan faktor koji produbljuje udaljenost u kulturološkoj percepciji formalnog obrazovanja između dominantne i manjinskih skupina. Lalueza i drugi (2001) skreću našu pažnju na različito usmjerenje kulturološke preferencije. Na primjer, očito individualistički pristup u odnosu na proces prenošenja, ocjenjivanja, kontrole i nagrađivanja znanja u školama je suprotan načelima romske tradicije, koja stavlja veći naglasak na kolektivne vrijednosti. Izazovi koji proizlaze ne samo iz ove dihotomije (autonomija vs komunitarizam) već i iz drugih, ako se ne rješavaju na konstruktivan način, rezultiraju sukobima koji štetno utječu na romske učenike.

Navedeni autori smatraju da glavni problem nije u kultorološkim razlikama, već u odnosima moći (tj. podređivanju jedne skupine drugoj) koji proizlaze iz ovih razlika. Ti odnosi stavljaju određene kulturološke prakse ispred drugih. Sustavno ignoriranje ovih asimetrija moći u području obrazovanja ''se može objasniti samo potpunim podcjenjivanjem ili čak prezirom prema romskoj kulturi, koja se smatra manjkavom''.

Jedan od načina da se romska djeca nose s tim neuspjehom integracije zajedničkih narativa i tendencijom nametanja kulturne asimilacije u obrazovanju je otpor. Beremenyi citira Ericksona (1987) koji ističe sljedeće:

''Odbijanje učenja u školi može se smatrati oblikom otpora stigmatiziranom etničkom ili društveno-klasnom identitetu koji nameće škola. Studenti mogu odbiti prihvatiti taj negativni identitet odbijanjem učenja.''

Da bi se razumio razlog zašto je ovaj citat izuzetno važan treba se vratiti esencijalističkoj koncepciji romske buntovnosti spomenutoj na početku ovog teksta. Izraz „Romi se ne žele integrirati“ uglavnom ignorira činjenicu da je otpor učenju od strane romskih učenika često odgovor na već postojeću stigmu koju dominantno društvo pripisuje romskoj kulturi. Buntovnost je u velikoj mjeri očajnički pokušaj rješavanja kulturološkog konflikta i smanjivanja razlika koje postoje između romskih i neromskih entiteta. Sukob koji tvorci politika u području obrazovanja u Španjolskoj i dalje previđaju i koji bi mogao biti ublažen povećanjem pažnje. Uzimajući u obzir neugodan obrazovni jaz između Roma i ostalog stanovništva, ovo je očito pitanje kojim se odavno trebalo baviti.

Kulturološke barijere nisu jedina vrsta prepreka s kojima se suočavaju romski studenti u svom pokušaju integrirati se, ipak one su značajne i zaslužuju ozbiljnu pozornost.

Stories of poor integration among Roma students are common in Spain. Descriptions of Roma school kids as conflictive, detached and uninterested guide policies of educational intervention designed to correct ‘’inadequate’’ behaviors. Commonly held notions of rebelliousness among Roma students remain deeply imbricated within public discourse on education. Essentializing Roma behavior does little to address a huge educational gap which sees 64% of Roma students in Spain dropping out of school early.

Data collected by Fundación Secretariado Gitano in 2013 reveals enormous deficiencies in the educational integration of Roma. Illiteracy rates among the Spanish Roma are significantly higher (13%) than those of the general population (2%). The rate of Roma lacking formal education trebles the Spanish average. While school dropout at the national level (19.4%) is several points higher than in the EU (14.9%), rates for Roma dropout hit a staggering 64%. On average, Spanish students remain in formal education until they are 21. Roma male students see this figure decrease to 17 years of age, while for Roma female students it is as low as 15, revealing an existing gender gap. In the face of such numbers, which clearly point towards a systemic educational failure, many have irresistibly pointed fingers at the Roma community as the epicentre of all problems.

The statement ‘’Roma don’t want to integrate’’ is a useful political scapegoat which sees Roma as having some sort of natural predisposition to be problematic in the classroom. This approach allows authorities and governments to escape responsibility regarding integration. If we consider how much easier it is to feed upon pre-existing prejudice in society and blame Roma culture, we can recognise a perverse institutional hostility built on the base of blaming otherness. Worse even, this position neglects attention to the real possibility of approaching Roma communities and building bridges over the cultural differences.

 Researchers Crespo et al. (2014) recognise the limitations of the ‘’Fordian’’ model of education established in Spain, a victim of an ‘’industrial conception of the teaching/learning processes, planned equally for all, without attention to the enormous individual, social and cultural diversity found in classrooms today’’. Learning through transmission, that is, through an almost unilateral transference of knowledge, is favored against meaningful participation and collaboration from the students. This faulty pedagogical approach, seriously flawed in many respects, exacerbates the difficulties some communities such as the Roma encounter when trying to find a real sense of purpose in formal education. 

A key aspect of successful integration of Roma kids in schools lies on an institutional setting that favours the development of shared goals and motives. In the words of Padrós et al. (2014), ''progress in education [...] cannot exist outside the motives of the child or the orientation of his or her goal-directed activity and the meaning that is given to it.'' There has been little institutional effort to create school environments which nurture on-going motives and a sense of purpose for Roma children. As a result, this absence makes school learning remain a peripheral identity marker for Roma. When Roma students fail to incorporate school activity as an integral part of their personal development, they internalise an identitarian construction which sees school as an unnecessary, forceful, and meaningless space.

The lack of shared narratives about the benefits of schooling is also an important factor deepening the distance between cultural perceptions of formal education that dominant and minority groups have. The insights of Lalueza et al. (2001) direct our attention towards diverging cultural preferences. For example, the clearly individualistic approach found in the process of transmitting, assessing, monitoring and rewarding knowledge in schools contrasts with the precepts of Roma tradition, which tend to place greater emphasis on collective values. The challenges deriving from not just this dichotomy (autonomy vs communitarism) but also others, when not addressed in a constructive way, result in conflicts which are detrimental to Roma students.

These authors locate the main problem not in the existence of cultural differences but on the relations of power (ie subordination of one group to another) that derive from those differences. These relations hierarchize certain cultural practices over others. The process of systematically ignoring these power asymmetries in the educational field ''can only be explained by an absolute undervaluation of (when not contempt for) Roma culture, estigmatised as deficient''.

One way for Roma children to cope with this failure to integrate common narratives and with the tendency to impose cultural assimilation in education relies on defiance. Erickson (1987), cited in Beremenyi, (2011), points out the following:

''Refusal to learn in school can be seen as a form of resistance to a stigmatised ethnic or social class identity that is being assigned by the school. Students can refuse to accept that negative identity by refusing to learn.''

The reason the citation is extremely revealing can be traced back to the essentialising conceptions of Roma rebelliousness referred to in the beginning of this article. The perversity of the sentence ''Roma don't want to integrate'' largely ignores how Roma students' resistance to learning is often a response to pre-existing stigma that dominant society has placed on Roma culture. Rebelliousness is, to a large extent, the visible face of a desperate attempt to resolve the cultural conflict and distance existing between Roma and non-Roma entities. A conflict which, in any case, continuously remains overlooked by education policy-makers in Spain, and which could greatly benefit from increased attention and response to it. Considering the embarrassing size of the educational gap for Roma, this clearly is a job long overdue.

Cultural barriers are one of obstacles faced by Roma students in their attempt to integrate, they remain relevant nevertheless and deserve serious attention.