Papers by Nicolas Salem-Gervais
Moussons (39), 2022
In Myanmar, the 2011-2020 period—before the February 2021 military coup—has witnessed limited but... more In Myanmar, the 2011-2020 period—before the February 2021 military coup—has witnessed limited but steadily increasing momentum in terms of introducing ethnic minority languages (as subjects and oral media of instruction) in government schools, a shift liable to bring significant educational and political benefits, while contributing to the preservation of cultural and linguistic diversity. Focusing on Kachin State, this article deals with the underlying challenges and inherent tradeoffs of producing a list of languages (as opposed to mere dialects) to be introduced in formal education. We argue that this educational shift, despite its genuine and multiple potential benefits, also contributes to an ethnolinguistic discretization process, reinforcing the conditions for the mobilization of labels within labels, in fractal patterns, through recursive ideological layers of common languages on the one hand, and the affirmation of ethnolinguistic distinctiveness, on the other. While the political and educational landscape described in this paper has been deeply shaken and transformed by the 2021 military coup (with arguably a strengthening sense of belonging to the Kachin ethnic identity, and a greater attractiveness of the Jinghpaw language) these language politics and decentralization challenges should nonetheless be taken into account, when envisioning the future of education in a federal state.
Moussons (45), 2025
This article serves as an introduction to Issue 45 of Moussons, which is dedicated to local langu... more This article serves as an introduction to Issue 45 of Moussons, which is dedicated to local languages and education in Southeast Asia. Characterized by its diversity—including linguistically—the region tends to face particularly acute questions regarding language-in-education policies. The stakes associated with these choices are diverse and crucial: (1) preserving linguistic and cultural diversity, (2) ensuring access to education for ethnic/linguistic minorities, and (3) including local identities within national construction processes. After a brief review of key terminology and some considerations on linguistic diversity in Southeast Asia, we outline the arguments in favor of introducing local languages into formal education, the various possible modalities for their use, and the multiple challenges that may stand in the way of such policies. We conclude this introduction with a brief presentation of the six contributions—dealing with Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Myanmar, the Philippines and Singapore—that make up this issue.
Moussons (45), 2025
Myanmar is a country of complex ethnic and linguistic diversity, whose independence was founded u... more Myanmar is a country of complex ethnic and linguistic diversity, whose independence was founded upon federal principles and compromises. Language-in-education policy has remained a contentious issue since, especially under successive military juntas that had systematically restricted the use of ethnic minority languages in formal education. In contrast, the reform period from 2011 to 2021 saw slow but notable progress: by 2020, 64 minority languages had been introduced as subjects in government schools, and collaboration between non-state ‘ethnic education providers’—often affiliated with ‘ethnic armed organisations’—and the Ministry of Education was gradually improving. However, the 2021 military coup disrupted these advancements, upending Myanmar’s political landscape and triggering conflicts across the country. The coup has also intensified calls for a fundamental reconfiguration of Myanmar’s federal system, while leading to considerably increasing enrolments in non-state education programs, including both longstanding and newly established systems linked to specific ethnic identities. Drawing on a literature review, historical analysis, examination of the current situation, and three case-studies, this article critically assesses the changing role of local languages in education in post-coup Myanmar, highlighting both emerging opportunities and persistent challenges.
Language-in-education policies have constituted an enduring concern under the successive politica... more Language-in-education policies have constituted an enduring concern under the successive political eras in Burma/Myanmar , with critical implications regarding cultural and linguistic diversity, access to education, as well as the emergence of a nation. While this issue has often been described too simplistically, the overall sidelining of ethnic minority languages in formal education under military regimes is nevertheless patent. The national language-in-education policy has recently evolved, slowly at first, in the wake of the 2011 political transition towards democratization and decentralization (Salem-Gervais and Raynaud, 2020). In 2019-2020, 64 languages were taught in government schools throughout the country, a few periods every week, as subjects. While this shift is insufficient for proponents of Mother Tongue Based Education (MTBE), the ongoing development of the Local Curriculum gives the possibility to States and Regions to progressively incorporate some local content in the syllabus, including the languages, cultures and histories of the groups living in their respective territories, supposedly up to high school. Based on an analytical framework developed in previous publications (notably Salem-Gervais and Raynaud, 2020) and series of interviews conducted in 2019 and 2020, this paper deals with the teaching of Chin languages in government schools, with a focus on Chin State itself. We discuss the rationale for including ethnic minority languages in formal schooling in the Chin context, provide a brief historical background of the issue, and examine the latest developments and prospects of language-in-education policy in Chin State, such as the project of promoting a limited number of “major” languages as “common languages”. The challenges involved in producing a list of languages with official recognition, as opposed to dialectal variations with a less formal status, constitute a central question in this paper. As noted by linguist Peterson (2017), the classical language vs dialect issue is indeed particularly relevant in highly multilingual Chin State, where language politics, underpinned by a multitude of faith-based written cultures, often militates against the idea of two regional varieties being considered two dialects of the same language. Illustrating the fractal patterns often observed by language ideology scholars (Irvine and Gal 2000), this situation leads to what seems to constitute two opposite threat: the prospect of what could be called “ethno-linguistic balkanization”, on the one hand, and the perspective of giving priority to certain languages over others, which would entail multiple and significant tradeoffs (in terms of maintaining language diversity, improving access to education, and promoting “national reconciliation”) on the other.
Journal of Burma Studies, 2012
Books by Nicolas Salem-Gervais
The 2021 military coup ended a decade of reforms and shattered Myanmar’s political landscape. Thi... more The 2021 military coup ended a decade of reforms and shattered Myanmar’s political landscape. This event has triggered conflict in nearly all regions of the country as well as numerous deaths, arbitrary detentions, massive population displacements and migrations, and a dramatic drop in people’s livelihood. The realm of education has been at the heart of great political and cultural battles throughout the country’s history, playing decisive roles to legitimize and to oppose colonial and independent governments, including repressive military regimes. With a myriad of actors demonstrating unshakable determination and resilience in their opposition to the coup, the education sector has certainly held its place as a key component of Myanmar’s politics this time around. As part of the Civil Disobedience Movement, civil servants and students have massively boycotted the national education system. Numerous historical and newly created non-state education systems also play increasingly important roles in providing an alternative to education under the control of the military. These education providers (with broad and partly overlapping categories such as pro-revolution/NUG, ethnic, monastic, private, or Chinese) operate both within and beyond State-controlled territories. Many of them face daunting challenges, including extremely limited resources and the use of deadly violence by the military. Mobilizing a wide historical and geographical perspective and using a simple transversal lens of quantity, quality, and identity, this book aims to document and make sense of these dramatic and fast-evolving developments, towards a better understanding of the opportunities and challenges concerning education under and beyond the current military regime.
Konrad Adenauer Stiftung (KAS), 2020
ISBN 978-99971-0-558-5
Key messages: ► The (re)introduction of ethnic minority languages in fo... more ISBN 978-99971-0-558-5
Key messages: ► The (re)introduction of ethnic minority languages in formal education is a key aspect of the Union of Myanmar (a country founded on supposedly federal grounds)’s unresolved issues regarding the management of ethnic diversity, which have led to decades of ethnic confl icts and military dictatorship. ► Including ethnic minority languages in government schools is liable to bring a number of benefits in at least three different dimensions: improving access to education of ethnic minority children, preserving linguistic and cultural diversity, and contributing to “national reconciliation”. ► While successive military government, and particularly the SLORC/SPDC, have undeniably contributed to the curtailing of ethnic language use in formal education, their policies have often been depicted in an overly monolithic and simplistic way, through repeating phrases along the lines of “the teaching of ethnic minority languages was banned after 1962”. ► The recognition of existing EBEPs by the MoE and the introduction of ethnic minority languages in government schools are two related, but nevertheless distinct, critical issues. The confusion between these two issues and the focus on the fi rst one, mainly through a “ethnic minorities vs Bamar State” lens, has contributed to blur the assessment of challenges regarding the second issue. ► The two main structural challenges to the introduction of ethnic minority languages and cultures in government schools are geolinguistics (and decentralization) challenges, that are also described in the literature on language-in-education policy across the world: 1. The heterogeneity of populations, in terms of ethno-linguistic backgrounds, in the schools of certain regions of the country, and notably in urban areas. 2. The diffi culties involved in the process of producing a list of ethnonyms with a standardized language attached, to be used in education. ► The Union of Myanmar presents a number of characteristics that makes the more ambitious language-in-education policies particularly challenging. While ethno-linguistic diversity and limited public resources are not uncommon in Asia and the rest of the world, the extent of the politicization of ethnicity – which largely finds its roots in colonial classifi cations underpinned by essentialist notions of race – does constitute a striking feature of contemporary Myanmar. ► Different actors within ethnic minority regions often have very different conceptions of what should be the language-in-education policy, with conflicting nation-building agendas. Blanket policies suggesting the recognition of the “main” ethnic minority languages to be used in education defeat, to a large extent, the different purposes of the reform (maintaining diversity, improving educational results, fostering “national reconciliation”). They are very likely to be resisted in the contemporary Myanmar political context. ► In the context of these structural challenges, the current language-in-education policy, (namely teaching ethnic minority languages as subjects and using them orally, as “classroom languages”), based on the 2014-15 Education law, is in our opinion well calibrated for the foreseeable future, and may constitute a decisive step towards more ambitious language-in-education policy. Despite the numerous critics saying that it did not go far enough (as opposed to a Mother Tongue Based Education system) resorting to orality (in addition to the teaching of ethnic languages as subjects) does offer a substantial amount of fl exibility, and allow to bypass, at least to some extent, the above described challenges. ► In this context, the last few years have witnessed signifi cant developments and increased momentum towards introducing ethnic minority languages in government schools. As of 2019-2020, according to offi cial fi gures, a total of 64 languages are being taught to 766,731 children by 24,792 teachers throughout the country. ► New teaching positions (the Teaching Assistants, TA) have been created for ethnic minority languages teachers, with salaries that are still modest, but constitute a very significant improvement compared to the 30,000 Kyats received by the language teachers (LT) positions created in 2013. The TAs are also encouraged to carry on their studies in order to become full-fl edged government school teachers, a shift that could be seen as a form of positive discrimination, and which contributes to link carrier opportunities to ethnic minority language skills. ► Other measures to encourage the nurturing of teachers from the more remote geographic areas, in order notably to tackle the language barrier issue, include a shift in access to Education colleges, with seats attributed for candidates of each townships, proportionally to the school children population of these townships. ► The development of the Local curriculum – content produced for each State and Region, amounting to 15% of the curriculum and including ethnic languages – is also underway since 2017, with the support of UNICEF. Five pilot states have been producing Local knowledge textbooks for the teaching of their respective local histories, geographies and cultures. There is at the time of writing signifi cant uncertainties regarding this ongoing process, which has already required a good deal of efforts and compromises to overcome diverging views, notably regarding history and its symbols. ► Despite these uncertainties, processes such as this, which entail regular interactions between State/Region levels actors (State/Region governments and parliaments, MoE, MoEA, ethnic literature and cultures committees, as well as other local personalities and CSOs) are critical in the emergence of new political ecosystems. These ongoing processes constitute decisive steps towards decentralizing the Union of Myanmar, building capacity at sub-national levels and thereby taking on the great political challenges the country has been facing since its inception.
Uploads
Papers by Nicolas Salem-Gervais
Books by Nicolas Salem-Gervais
Key messages: ► The (re)introduction of ethnic minority languages in formal education is a key aspect of the Union of Myanmar (a country founded on supposedly federal grounds)’s unresolved issues regarding the management of ethnic diversity, which have led to decades of ethnic confl icts and military dictatorship. ► Including ethnic minority languages in government schools is liable to bring a number of benefits in at least three different dimensions: improving access to education of ethnic minority children, preserving linguistic and cultural diversity, and contributing to “national reconciliation”. ► While successive military government, and particularly the SLORC/SPDC, have undeniably contributed to the curtailing of ethnic language use in formal education, their policies have often been depicted in an overly monolithic and simplistic way, through repeating phrases along the lines of “the teaching of ethnic minority languages was banned after 1962”. ► The recognition of existing EBEPs by the MoE and the introduction of ethnic minority languages in government schools are two related, but nevertheless distinct, critical issues. The confusion between these two issues and the focus on the fi rst one, mainly through a “ethnic minorities vs Bamar State” lens, has contributed to blur the assessment of challenges regarding the second issue. ► The two main structural challenges to the introduction of ethnic minority languages and cultures in government schools are geolinguistics (and decentralization) challenges, that are also described in the literature on language-in-education policy across the world: 1. The heterogeneity of populations, in terms of ethno-linguistic backgrounds, in the schools of certain regions of the country, and notably in urban areas. 2. The diffi culties involved in the process of producing a list of ethnonyms with a standardized language attached, to be used in education. ► The Union of Myanmar presents a number of characteristics that makes the more ambitious language-in-education policies particularly challenging. While ethno-linguistic diversity and limited public resources are not uncommon in Asia and the rest of the world, the extent of the politicization of ethnicity – which largely finds its roots in colonial classifi cations underpinned by essentialist notions of race – does constitute a striking feature of contemporary Myanmar. ► Different actors within ethnic minority regions often have very different conceptions of what should be the language-in-education policy, with conflicting nation-building agendas. Blanket policies suggesting the recognition of the “main” ethnic minority languages to be used in education defeat, to a large extent, the different purposes of the reform (maintaining diversity, improving educational results, fostering “national reconciliation”). They are very likely to be resisted in the contemporary Myanmar political context. ► In the context of these structural challenges, the current language-in-education policy, (namely teaching ethnic minority languages as subjects and using them orally, as “classroom languages”), based on the 2014-15 Education law, is in our opinion well calibrated for the foreseeable future, and may constitute a decisive step towards more ambitious language-in-education policy. Despite the numerous critics saying that it did not go far enough (as opposed to a Mother Tongue Based Education system) resorting to orality (in addition to the teaching of ethnic languages as subjects) does offer a substantial amount of fl exibility, and allow to bypass, at least to some extent, the above described challenges. ► In this context, the last few years have witnessed signifi cant developments and increased momentum towards introducing ethnic minority languages in government schools. As of 2019-2020, according to offi cial fi gures, a total of 64 languages are being taught to 766,731 children by 24,792 teachers throughout the country. ► New teaching positions (the Teaching Assistants, TA) have been created for ethnic minority languages teachers, with salaries that are still modest, but constitute a very significant improvement compared to the 30,000 Kyats received by the language teachers (LT) positions created in 2013. The TAs are also encouraged to carry on their studies in order to become full-fl edged government school teachers, a shift that could be seen as a form of positive discrimination, and which contributes to link carrier opportunities to ethnic minority language skills. ► Other measures to encourage the nurturing of teachers from the more remote geographic areas, in order notably to tackle the language barrier issue, include a shift in access to Education colleges, with seats attributed for candidates of each townships, proportionally to the school children population of these townships. ► The development of the Local curriculum – content produced for each State and Region, amounting to 15% of the curriculum and including ethnic languages – is also underway since 2017, with the support of UNICEF. Five pilot states have been producing Local knowledge textbooks for the teaching of their respective local histories, geographies and cultures. There is at the time of writing signifi cant uncertainties regarding this ongoing process, which has already required a good deal of efforts and compromises to overcome diverging views, notably regarding history and its symbols. ► Despite these uncertainties, processes such as this, which entail regular interactions between State/Region levels actors (State/Region governments and parliaments, MoE, MoEA, ethnic literature and cultures committees, as well as other local personalities and CSOs) are critical in the emergence of new political ecosystems. These ongoing processes constitute decisive steps towards decentralizing the Union of Myanmar, building capacity at sub-national levels and thereby taking on the great political challenges the country has been facing since its inception.