Mayan Education in Guatemala: A Pedagogical Model and Its Political ContextAuthor(s): Meike HecktSource: International Review of Education / Internationale Zeitschrift fürErziehungswissenschaft / Revue Internationale de l'Education, Vol. 45, No. 3/4, Learning,Knowledge and Cultural Context (1999), pp. 321-337Published by: SpringerStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3445230Accessed: 05/10/2008 01:35

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available athttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unlessyou have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and youmay use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained athttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=springer.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printedpage of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with thescholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform thatpromotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Springer is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to International Review ofEducation / Internationale Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft / Revue Internationale de l'Education.

http://www.jstor.org

MAYAN EDUCATION IN GUATEMALA: A PEDAGOGICAL MODEL AND ITS POLITICAL CONTEXT

MEIKE HECKT

Abstract - In order to give an idea of the present situation of education in Mayan communities, the article starts with a survey of published anthropologocal and edu- cational information on the content, values and methods of education in indigenous communities in Guatemala. The second part deals with the formation of a new col- lective identity in Guatemala, exploring the relationship between the recent debate on Mayan identity, and Mayan education. Finally, attention is given to the relation- ship between education in indigenous communities and official, formal education, which is itself being called into question. Mayan education in Guatemala is not only a historical tradition which has survived centuries of alien domination, but is also a forceful voice of criticism in the debate about general educational reform.

Zusammenfassung - Um einen Einblick in die gegenwiirtige Situation der Erziehung in Dorfgemeinschaften der Maya zu gewahren, beginnt der Artikel mit einer Ubersicht iiber die anthropologischen und bildungsbezogenen Informationen, die bisher iiber Inhalte, Werte und Methoden der Erziehung in indigenen Gemeinden Guatmalas veroffentlicht wurden. Der zweite Teil des Textes behandelt einige grundlegende Aspekte einer neuen kollektiven Identitat in Guatemala, die Ethnogenese der Maya, wobei die Beziehung zwischen den Diskussionen beziiglich der Identitat der Maya und deren Erziehung im jiingsten geschichtlichen EntwicklungsprozeB dargelegt wird. AbschlieBend wird auf die Beziehung zwischen der Erziehung innerhalb ein- heimischer Gemeinden, wie im ersten Teil beschrieben, und der offiziellen formalen Ausbildung, die in den gegenwartigen Diskussionen iiber eine Bildungsreform in Frage gestellt wird, hingewiesen. Eine hauptsachliche SchluBfolgerung liegt in der Erkenntnis, daB die Erziehung der Maya in Guatemala nicht nur eine historische Tradition ist, die Jahrunderte hegemonialer Politik iiberlebt hat, sondern auch ein Hauptelement des Widerstandes und der Kritik, die eine zentrale Rolle in den Debatten iiber eine Bildungsreform spielen.

Resume - Pour donner une idee de la situation actuelle de l'education dans les com- munautes mayas, l'article debute par un apercu de l'information anthropologique et educative qui a 6et publiee jusqu'ici sur les contenus, les valeurs et les methodes d'edu- cation dans les communautes autochtones du Guatemala. La seconde partie du texte traite les aspects essentiels de l'apparition d'une nouvelle identite collective au Guatemala, l'ethnogenese des Mayas, en expliquant la relation entre d'une part les d6bats sur l'identite maya et d'autre part l'education maya au cours de l'histoire recente. Enfin, il focalise l'attention sur la relation entre l'education dans les com- munautes autochtones decrites en premiere partie et 1' education officielle et formelle, qui est remise en question par le debat actuel sur la reforme educative. Une conclu- sion principale reside dans l'observation que 1' ducation maya au Guatemala n'est pas seulement une tradition historique qui a survecu a des siecles de domination de l'Etat, mais aussi un element essentiel d'opposition et de critique, qui joue un role de premier plan dans les debats sur la reforme educative.

l International Review of Education - Internationale Zeitschrift fiir Erziehungswissenschaft I - Revue Internationale de l'Education 45(3/4): 321-337, 1999.

? 1999 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.

322

Resumen - Para proporcionar una idea de cual es la situaci6n actual de la educaci6n en las comunidades mayas, el articulo comienza con un estudio de la informaci6n antropologica y educacional que se ha publicado hasta ahora sobre los contenidos, valores y metodos de la educaci6n en comunidades indigenas de Guatemala. La segunda parte del texto trata algunos aspectos fundamentales de una nueva identidad colectiva que esta teniendo lugar en Guatemala, la etnogenesis de los mayas, expli- cando la relaci6n que existe entre los debates sobre la identidad maya por una parte y la educaci6n maya por otra en el proceso historico mas reciente. Finalmente, centra la atenci6n en la relaci6n que existe entre la educacion dentro de las comunidades indigenas, tal como se ha descrito en la primera parte, y la educacion oficial y formal, puesta en tela de juicio en los debates actuales sobre las reformas de la educaci6n. Una de las conclusiones principales reside en la observaci6n de que en Guatemala la educaci6n maya no es solamente una tradicion hist6rica que ha sobrevivido siglos de politicas de dominio estatal, sino que tambien es un elemento importante de oposi- ci6n y critica, que juega un papel central en los debates sobre reformas de la edu- caci6n.

Pe3ioMe: AaHHaS CTaTbA HaHHHaeTCAI C o63opa aHTpoInojorHleIecKoi H o6pa30BaTenbHOHi HH4OpMaLuHH, Ony6JIKKOBaHHOi 0

cogAep)KaHHH, UeHHOCTsIX H MeTOgax H 06pa30BaHHH B Ty3eMHbIX o6IuecTBax B FBaraTeMane RnI Toro, ITo6bI AaTb npeAcTaBJIeHHIe o

ceroaHxmIIHeH CHrTyaIHH H o6pa30BaHHH B o6uiecTBe MaHsi. Bo BTOpOH TIaC CTH TaTbH paCCMaTpHBaIOTCA HeKOTOpbIe OCHOBHbIe aCneKTbI C03HaHHI HOBOH KOJIJeKTHBHOH HaeHTHqHOCTH B

rBaTeMaJe, 3THOreHe3 B HapOAHOCTH MaiiH, o6bSCHIS OTHOmeHHA B HeaaBHeM HCTOpwHeCKOM npoiecce Mecay ae6aTaMH 06 HaeHTTHHOCTH HapoaHOCTH MafiA, c OAHOH CTOpOHbI, H

o6pa3osaHHH HapOaHOCTH MafiA, c apyro i. B 3aKJIioLHTeJjbHo0i

IaCTHI CTaTbHI aBTop yaejmeT BHHMaHHe OTHOIIIeHHIO MeIy o6pa30BaHHeM BHyrpH Ty3eMHbIX o6iLeCTB, TO onHHaHO B nepBOi qaCTH, IH O4HImHajIbHO-4OpMaJIbHbIM o6pa30BaHHeM, KOTOpOe ocnapHBaeTcs B Ae6aTax 06 o6pa3oBaTeJIbHofi pecopMe ceroaHi. rjiaBHbIi BbIBOA 3aiKIoiaeTCA B Ha6JInIoeHHH Toro, rTO

o6pa3oBaHHe HapoaHOCTH MaiiH B FBaTeMaJIe ABjICeTC He TOIbKO

HCTOpHlIeCKOH Tpa/HIAHeH, COXpaHHBmeHCc Ha npOTDKceHHH CTOJIeTHH BO BpeMeHa aOMHHHpyIOuleH rOCyAapCTBeHHOH

noJIHTHKH, a TaiKce OCHOBHbIM 3JIeMeHTOM Onn03HIHH H KpHTHKH,

Hrpai0oIHM aeHTpanbHyb ) pojb B aRHCKyCCHAX 06 o6pa3oBaTeAbHoHi

pe4opMe.

323

What is Mayan education?

There really is no system of Mayan education as such. There is no curriculum, the very first seeds of it are Mayan schools. ... These are small seeds, small efforts in this direction.... But if we speak of Mayan education itself in our current situation, perhaps the one thing that has contributed most to the formation of our identity and our culture is what there has been in the way of an oral tradition passed down from generation to generation, from grandparents to grandchildren, from parents to children in family and community life. It is that which has shaped our survival and our lives through agriculture and education within the family, because Mayan education cannot really be separated from life, from economic activity, from politics, from all aspects of life. (Interview with Juana Vasquez, July 1994)

Taking as our starting point this picture painted by the Mayan educator Juana

Vasquez of what many people understand by Mayan education in Guatemala, we shall attempt in this article to pick out and describe some key features of the recent debate on Mayan education and educational reform in Guatemala. The first section of the article brings together anthropological and educational information about the content, values and forms of instruction currently prac- tised in many indigenous communities in Guatemala. The emphasis is placed on non-formal education, elements of education within the family, and general aspects of socialization.

In the second section, a number of basic key requirements are set out for the creation of a new collective Mayan identity in Guatemala, as this has been discussed in the debate on Mayan education.

In the final section of the paper, the focus shifts to the relationship between family education and official, formal education, with the aim of analysing the role that different groups assign to Mayan education in the debate on educational reform in Guatemala.

Education in the various Mayan communities in Guatemala

By way of introduction to the topic, we shall begin with an overview of the information to be found in the literature about family education in indige- nous communities in Guatemala. One problem that arises is the generaliza- tions used in terms describing Mayan culture. No distinction is usually made in the literature other than between Mayas and Ladinos, although it is fun-

damentally necessary to differentiate within the two groups, given that these are made up of different ethnic groups and cultural traditions. The "Agreement on the Identity and Rights of Indigenous Peoples" signed by the Government and the URNG guerrilla movement in 1995 recognises that four peoples live side by side in Guatemala: the Mayas, the Ladinos, the Garifuna and the Xinca. The Maya are subdivided into 21 linguistic groups, each of which has its own language. Like the Xinca, the Mayas are regarded as indigenous peoples.

324

The Garifunas are descended from Caribbean immigrants and have their own language. All the non-indigenous (and non-Garifunas) in Guatemala are called Ladinos (Smith 1990: 74).

However, the available literature does not allow for subdivisions, distin- guishing only between Mayan and Ladino education. In discussions of Mayan education, most information relates the K'iche', Kaqchikel and Q'eqchi' tra- ditions, which are the cultures that are best documented in terms of ethno- graphy and education.

The following summary of the general basis of education in Mayan cultures is based on recent educational and anthropological studies and on the author's own interviews carried out in 1994. Where possible, it is specifically Mayan culture which is referred to, with a note as to whether it is the Mayans them- selves or others who provided the information. The aim is to describe the different versions of what is understood by the ideal Mayan values that influ- ence Mayan education, without seeking to lay down definitions of Mayan values.

Ideal values

Many writers agree in their observation that work, as both a practical skill and a worthwhile activity in its own right, is highly valued in Mayan families. A positive attitude towards work in general can be deduced from this: produc- tivity, discipline and determination are deemed qualities which parents wish to pass on to their children. Working for the family and the community is thought important, as is the ability to contribute to economic subsistence. This attitude is also explained by the extremely difficult economic circumstances in which most Mayan families find themselves (ASIES 1995: 33; FRMT and UNESCO 1997: 60ff).1

A community spirit, reflected in values such as solidarity, co-operation and mutual support within the family and community, is another fundamental concept in Mayan cultures. Among other things, this is also due to the diffi- cult economic situation in which most Mayan families live, which creates a need for greater family and community solidarity. This feeling of community cohesion is a factor that has contributed to the survival of the culture (ASIES 1995: 42; FRMT and UNESCO 1997: 77ff; Ramirez and Mazariegos 1993: 114).2 Dialogue and consensus as ways of resolving conflicts and taking deci- sions are also considered part of solidarity, and are explicitly stated to be values of Mayan culture, while being contrary to the principles of Ladino values.3

Respect for a Supreme Being, for nature and people, especially older people, is another essential value of Mayan cultures. Where human beings live together, this respect must be maintained through obedience and courtesy (appropriate greetings, for example) towards older people such as grand- parents, parents, neighbours or siblings, and also by recognising authority within the family and by carrying out allotted tasks (Ramirez and Mazariegos

325

1993: 106; Alvarado in CECMA 1992: 37ff; ASIES 1995: 36). On a spiritual level, human beings must accept their place in the universe. Starting from the complexity of the universe, human beings have responsibility, in their own interest, for maintaining a balance offorces. This holistic vision of the relationships between humanity, nature and the universe, between science, arts, medicine and mathematics, between philosophy, politics and religion, etc., has also to be reflected in life and everyday practices (FRMT and UNESCO 1997: 84ff; Alvarado in CECMA 1992: 38; interview 1994 No. 5 with K'iche' Mayan teacher).

Underlying these concepts is generally the idea that the members of a com- munity must know and accept their place within it. To this end, the different gender roles also to a degree play a positive part through the respectful recog- nition of difference. Nonetheless, there are opinions on this matter which allege discrimination against women and girls, in the observation that girls, for example, have to start working at an earlier age than boys, or that they are allowed to play less. This example of gender roles clearly teaches that concepts such as "equality in difference" and mutual respect do represent ideals. In practice, it is largely women who are critical of their heavier burden of tasks and occupations, and of the meagre recognition accorded to their work. Against this background, there is a noticeable recent trend for increasing numbers of parents to demand that both their sons and their daughters should receive school education (ASIES 1995: 104ff).

Skills

In the same way as the ideal values that teachers in Mayan education pursue in family and community education, and those which they aim to transfer to formal education, it is possible to identify certain skills that are key elements of family education in Mayan communities. Working skills are obviously the most important abilities that children have to learn in Mayan families. Different types of work can be distinguished, according to age and gender. The following are considered women's jobs: domestic tasks (cooking, washing, cleaning, etc.), most upbringing of children, animal husbandry, help with work on the land, income generation through trade, craftwork, textiles, services, agricultural labour, etc. And the following are regarded as men's work: work on the land, waged employment, and some upbringing of children. Children's work is seen as: looking after younger siblings, looking after animals, running errands and - in the case of older children - helping their mothers or fathers. At the age of six to eight, the tasks assigned to boys and girls start increasing; at that age, many already have their first paid job. At the age of 15, young people generally have to carry out their tasks indepen- dently (ASIES 1995: 33, 79; Cojti and CISMA 1990: 67ff).4

A sense of responsibility is another important quality which children have to learn. This includes independence, self-confidence and the ability to make decisions. Depending on their age, they have to be able to carry out the tasks

326

assigned to them so that they contribute to the community (Ramirez and

Mazariegos 1993: 105; Loukota Soler and Chacach 1992: 16).5

Ways of teaching values and skills

The most important principle in the transmission of knowledge and skills in

Mayan cultures is its practical approach. Children have to gain confidence and experience by learning from practical example and by helping their

parents. Imitation of adults, observation and repetition of their actions by the children are supplemented by explanations and demonstrations by adults.

Working in groups is seen as positive (Ramirez and Mazariegos 1993: 104-106; Cojti and CISMA 1990: 75ff; ASIES 1995: 64).

By assigning tasks to their children, parents provide children with new

challenges and learning opportunities. They allocate specific tasks according to the ages of the children (e.g., responsibility for looking after an animal), which gives the children recognition and a sense of security (Loukota Soler and Chacach 1992: 10; Burgos 1984: 56).

A whole range of methods exists for correcting mistakes that have been made, from admonitions, explanations, reprimands, threats and scares to pun- ishments such as physical punishments, withholding of food, tasks given as

punishments or bans on watching television. The use of incentives such as entertainment (for small children) and rewards (presents or free time for play or buying things, etc.) is also mentioned (Cojti and CISMA 1990: 72ff). It is often stated that some form of verbal action is taken first since parents are anxious that children should understand why action is necessary (Ramirez and

Mazariegos 1993: 106). Most research studies report educational practices that seldom use physical punishments. Two studies, however, are specifically devoted to this topic, finding from interviews with parents and children that

physical punishments are frequently administered by mothers and fathers (FRMT and UNESCO 1997: 96ff), and especially by drunken fathers (ASIES 1995: 126).

There are sharply differing attitudes to the role of play and its importance in children's different learning processes. On the one hand, many parents believe that their children should not play too much, but should devote themselves more to work, especially when they are older (from about eight years of age). On the other hand, it is said that small children learn many things through play and imitation; they are given presents of miniature tools, domestic implements and crockery (Ramirez and Mazariegos 1993: 108). The

argument that work is more important than play may once again reflect the great economic pressure with which many Mayan families are burdened.

Languages in Mayan education

According to the literature, most parents nowadays think it very useful for their sons and daughters to be able to speak, read and write Spanish, since

327

with this knowledge it is hoped that they will have a better chance of earning money, and it is seen as a prerequisite for success at school. Many parents therefore set out to teach some basic notions of the language to their children within the family, so that Spanish is eroding the place of Mayan languages even in the family environment (ASIES 1995: 43, 124ff; Cojti and CISMA 1990: 58).

This apparent preference for Spanish as the language of instruction has also to be seen against a history of rejection of their own languages by the indige- nous peoples. According to most research studies, parents do not explicitly mention speaking, or reading and writing Mayan languages among the skills to be taught at school. This gives rise to various interpretations: on the one hand, it may be that this is taken for granted, so that there is no need to mention it. At best, learning Spanish at school means a plea for bilingual education, although this is not stated outright. On the other hand, it is also possible that parents do not mention Mayan languages because they do not consider them important. On the question of the role of Mayan languages in education, there is a clear discrepancy between the views of parents and those of Mayan educators. While the majority of parents do not have much expe- rience themselves of formal schooling, a large number of Mayan teachers have wide and generally negative experience of being educated in a foreign language. A different approach to this issue can be found in two recent studies which support the argument for Mayan schools and take a clear stance in favour of teaching indigenous children through their mother tongues (FRMT and UNESCO 1997: 120ff; Chaclan and Solis 1995: 87).

The importance of school for children's education

Parents who are asked about what they expect from school seldom make heavy demands. The main advantage of school education is thought to be that their children will learn to speak, read and write Spanish, and perhaps also to do arithmetic. Another aspect, which not all parents regard as positive however, is that their children will meet other children at school and will play together. Many parents do not agree with this, thinking that their children will waste too much time at school and will to a certain extent be exposed to harmful influences. They believe that one aspect of these bad influences is that children pick up bad manners at school, learn disobedience, and start smoking ciga- rettes and swearing (Cojti and CISMA 1990: 59; ASIES 1995: 104ff). All of this reflects the problem that school activities bear little relation to daily life, and especially to the work of the family. In many communities, school life and the way of life of the people in the village have little in common. However, there may be some parents who have no desire to see these worlds converge.

328

The foundations of education in Mayan cultures

The family and the community are the starting point for studying the features of education in indigenous cultures. The traditions and foundations of indige- nous cultures are passed down from generation to generation, including spirituality, moral norms and values, their own systems of justice, medical knowledge, agricultural and economic practices, and general techniques and practical skills. So far, Mayan languages have been a key factor in the survival of these cultural systems.

It may be recalled that in indigenous cultures, education is also the result of more than 500 years of confrontation with the dominant cultures of the invaders. Even before the arrival of the Spanish conquistadors in Guatemala, there had been foreign conquests and influences, the Toltec invaders from central Mexico who reached the Guatemalan highlands in the 12th century, for example, but it can be assumed that the most profound changes in Mayan cultures were brought about by the Spanish invasion that began in 1524. Following this, adaptations and changes have gradually become an integral part of indigenous cultures. It does not seem sensible, however, to attempt to construct an artificially "pure" form of Mayan education, bearing in mind the dynamics and capacity for change of cultures in general, and of the indige- nous cultures in this particular case.

One conclusion to be drawn from this overview of the core features of edu- cation in Mayan communities is that most of the values, skills and methods of transmission which form the basis of Mayan education are generally shared by many rural communities and are not specific or unique to Mayan cultures. It can be assumed that elements such as the value of work, solidarity and responsibility, the teaching methods and the emphasis on practicality, and the assignment of tasks and imitation of adults, are of equal importance in the Ladino rural communities in Guatemala. In the light of this finding, we have to ask ourselves what exactly is meant by "Maya".

"The Mayas": a new collective identity

As we look for an interpretation that goes beyond a mere description of what is understood by Mayan education, it is important to consider the social envi- ronment that has made the upsurge in Mayan education possible. To this end, we must first outline the origins of the concept of "Maya".

Where did "the Mayas" come from?

The term "Maya" was originally introduced by Central American researchers - archaeologists, linguists and anthropologists - who began at the end of the last century to describe the "linguistic family relationships" within the "Quiche-Mayan" group. The only language group that had, and still retains,

329

a tradition of calling itself "Maya" is the Yucatan Mayas who occupy the Mexican peninsula of that name, and particularly those in the Mexican state of Quintana Roo, who are also called Cruzoob.

Until about 15 to 20 years ago, it was uncommon in Guatemala to use the term "Maya" to designate the contemporary "Mayas". In Guatemala, the only groups referred to as "Mayas" were the historical peoples who had occupied the territory of Guatemala before the Spanish conquest. The "Mayas" were regarded as an extinct people even before the arrival of the Spanish con- quistadors. Their descendants were given generalized names such as indige- nous people, Indians or natives. They called themselves rahal ch'och (sons of the earth), hach winik (true men), etc., or Sacapultecos, San Pedranos, Ixtahuatecos, etc. (taking the names of the localities where they lived).

From around the 1980s, a change and a new dynamism have come over the scene. The academic term "Maya", which had been an alien designation, has been appropriated by various indigenous groups and organizations and applied to themselves. In reaction to foreign labels, which had for centuries underlain the social, political and economic marginalization of the indigenous peoples in Guatemala, the various indigenous organizations are beginning to create a new common basis of positive "Mayan" identity. This expression of a new collective ethnic identity - Mayan ethnicity - has arisen out of social processes and the struggle for political participation.

Ethnicity: a product of creative processes

For the theoretical study of ethnicity, the Guatemalan case is a very interesting example of the process of the formation of ethnicity. (This process is known in the literature on sociology as "ethnogenesis".) Ethnicity is understood in this context as a principle of social organization that describes the internal cohesion of ethnic groups. According to the concept of "ethnic boundaries" developed by Barth (1969: 11), ethnicity does not derive from primordial characteristics, from biological and cultural traits allotted "by nature", but is a social act of delimitation between groups. One element of this delimitation is what groups call themselves, and what others call them: an ethnic group defines and/or identifies itself by setting itself apart from other groups. In con- sequence, the bases for this cohesion are not to be found in supposed common characteristics that exist "objectively" and are socioculturally or genetically fixed, but in conscious, subjective self-definitions applied by the social forces in an ethnic group.

The self-identification of an ethnic group can be based on a real or supposed set of common sociocultural characteristics and/or on real or supposed common (historical) experiences (Weber 1972: 237). Alien labels originally applied by outsiders are also recycled in this process.

Ethnic groups are also frequently interest groups, which develop set formal principles of organization such as delimitation, communication, structures of authority, decision-making procedures, ideology and socialization, in order

330

to impose their goals (Cohen 1974: xiiiff). Moreover, it is assumed that ethnicity is of a situational nature and that ethnic cohesion can only be analysed within the framework of the political and/or economic conditions that govern a particular social situation (Gabbert 1991: 37). Another factor to be taken into consideration in the establishment of ethnic limits and con- sequent ethnic identity is the specific historical context from which those concerned have gleaned their "stores of historical experiences" (Garbers 1993: 36).

In order to describe the process by which "Mayan" ethnicity has arisen in Guatemala, it is necessary to explore the circumstances that surrounded its creation, more or less since 1980, taking into account the following aspects: - the past and present situation of ethnic delimitation; - the resultant labels adopted by the groups themselves and assigned by

others; - the economic, political and social situation; - the interest groups that have played a role in this context.

The 1970s: the first social and ethnic movements

The debate in Guatemala about indigenous or "Mayan" ethnic identity orig- inated in the 1970s. A major role was played by groups of indigenous young intellectuals that started to form in the 1970s, with access to national and inter- national academic study. By emphasising demands for the linguistic and cultural rights of the Mayas, they began opening up a new sphere of political debate under the banner of "Maya" (Fischer 1996: 59, 62-64).

Other important factors in these new developments were the activities carried out by the Catholic Church together with related organizations such as Catholic Action, working in the western highlands, and by newly formed organizations such as the Committee of Rural Unity (CUC, Comite de Unidad Campesina). In the early days of Catholic Action in the 1950s, the Catholic Church set out to strengthen its presence in indigenous rural areas. Through practical operational experience over the years, the role played by Catholic Action in raising social awareness grew, giving rise to new organizational moves among the Guatemalan indigenous population in the 1970s and '80s (Davis 1988: 16). The CUC was founded in 1978 as an outlet for the needs and demands of the rural population, of agricultural workers and small land- owners, both indigenous and Ladino, of men and women in the western high- lands, and it achieved broad participation from all sections of the population, who had previously never acted together. The work of CUC thus marked the formation of a new basis for political organization (Davis 1988: 20).

331

The 1980s: indigenous participation in the class struggle

We must also take into account that the situation in Guatemala during this period was characterized by widespread armed struggles by various guerrilla organizations against the state and its military governments. The guerrilla organizations succeeded in gaining extensive support in many mainly indige- nous regions of Guatemala and were able to control some of the provinces of the western highlands until 1982.

Two of the four guerrilla organizations (the Guerrilla Army of the Poor, Ejercito Guerrillero de los Pobres, and the People in Arms Organization, Organizaci6n del Pueblo en Armas) explicitly explained the struggle in terms of fighting for the rights of the Guatemalan indigenous population, whose situation they saw as one of exploitation and marginalization.

Because of internal disagreements within the guerrilla organizations, which were not able in everyday practice to live up to their theoretical claims of participation by indigenous people on equal terms, criticism developed within these same organizations. The new ethnic identity that had arisen as a factor in arguments about political programmes became a focal point. In the face of inequality and exclusion, criticism was expressed within the guerrilla orga- nizations, as it was more generally in Guatemalan society, against marginal- ization and discrimination directed against the indigenous population. The roots of the ethnic identity of the "Mayas" can also be traced to this period.

One of the protagonists of the Mayan political movement is Juan Le6n, a founder member of CUC in the 1970s in Quiche, a vice-presidential candi- date in the 1995 elections standing for the New Guatemala Democratic Front, and currently a representative of the Defensoria Maya organization. In an interview (March 1997), Le6n expressed his view that although clear differ- ences can be found among the various Mayan peoples living in Guatemala in, for example, language, ways of expressing spirituality, and cultural tradi- tions, what unites all the Mayan peoples is their past and present experience of marginalization and the resistance which all of them have developed, in one way or another, to combat it.

Le6n goes on to explain that the indigenous people who participated in the armed movement and in the people's movements were pursuing two main aims: the fight against poverty and economic marginalization, and the struggle against discrimination. One problem, he suggests, was that the emphasis was put for much of the time on the first of these aims and that there was not sufficient pressure within the opposition organizations for demands and political action relating to the second. Leon reaches the conclusion that the purely economic struggle was the downfall of the guerrilla movement and of the Guatemalan people's and trade union movement, because the issue of culture was not taken seriously. Despite these problems, Le6n defends indigenous participation in the fight because he thinks that the part indige- nous people played was of considerable help to indigenous activists in current struggles:

332

I believe that ... the indigenous people succeeded in exploiting their opportuni- ties and in accumulating experience, in the guerrilla war and in the people's movements, and in strengthening their demands, because most of the people who took part in the people's movement were the same people that are now taking part in the indigenous movement.... The two are complementary. For us it was of advantage.

The 1990s: the rise of the "Maya"

As the most confrontational phase of the armed struggles in Guatemala came to an end in the mid-1980s, the Mayan groups and organizations which had not participated in the class struggle returned to the political scene, espe- cially in the field of educational policy. The foundation and establishment of the Academy of Mayan Languages of Guatemala (ALMG) can be seen as one of the first successes of a new movement, together with the holding of various seminars and conferences for the exchange of experience at regional, national and international level. High-level organizations of Mayan women, Mayan priests, Mayan teachers, etc., were soon set up. As a result, there was some advance in participation and some broadening of the influence exercised in the Guatemalan political arena: the nomination in 1993 of two Mayas, for example, as Minister and Deputy Minister of Education, gave Guatemala its first Mayan Ministers.

From 1990, there has been a cautious rapprochement between the different tendencies within the Mayan movements, between the sectors that had sup- ported revolutionary and popular struggle, and the representatives of Mayan organizations that had rejected the class struggle. One political field in which the different Mayan tendencies have played a full part has been the peace negotiations. A number of indigenous organizations have been very active drafting proposals and demanding their right to take part in the negotiations, pooling their efforts, for example, in the Co-ordination of Organizations of the Mayan People of Guatemala (COPMAGUA). The Agreement on the Identity and Rights of Indigenous Peoples, signed in 1995 as part of the peace accord, was an important step in the struggle for equal rights for indigenous people in Guatemalan society, but also in the struggle for their particular right to be different. In the interview mentioned (March 1997), Juan Le6n states that the Agreement made a major contribution to the political struggle of the Mayan movement:

The greatest leap forward brought about by the guerrilla war - and it need not concern us whether its leaders were convinced of the indigenous cause - the most profitable, was the fact that they were fighting so that the agreement that is in force today or about to be implemented might open up all these possibilities for growth, for dialogue with the state, for putting into effect a whole series of things that will be of real advantage to the growth of identity and the exercise of rights. ... I believe that both the guerrilla movement and the Government did show flexibility in accepting each other and reaching agreement. And the fact that the Government, as the representative of the state, admitted systematic discrimination against indige- nous people and for the first time agreed that there were peoples with different

333

identities, is a major advance and now it will not be possible to go back, because they have entered into commitments and have to stand by them. There was wide agreement between indigenous people and it opened the doors to work.

Given the recent history of Guatemala, and its social and political devel- opments, we can conclude that the 1990s were an important stage in the creation of Mayan organizations with a "Mayan identity". Against a back- ground of continent-wide activities opposing the celebration of the anniver- sary of the first arrival of Columbus in America, and the award of the Nobel Peace Prize to the Guatemalan human rights activist Rigoberta Menchui, new movement has been in evidence. A new "Mayan" collective identity has been created by reference to common historical experiences.

Another factor has been the new sources of international funding (UNESCO, UNICEF, European Union, etc.), which have been opening their doors to the work of ethnic organizations and ethnic issues. From the 1990s, with a new interpretation of the world political situation, attention has shifted from the class struggle to ethnic struggles, and this has opened up new areas of political analysis and activity.

At the end of the 1990s it can be seen that the Mayan organizations, which still represent a very heterogeneous spectrum, have become a key factor that is present in all the social conflicts in Guatemala. They have been able to exploit the new opportunities for participation that have been created for them at a political level. In an interview in June 1997, the co-ordinator of the UNESCO MAYA project in Guatemala, Federico Figueroa, described the situation as follows:

It was in the late 1980s and early 1990s that Mayan studies began, and that con- sideration was given to what Maya means. Logically speaking, the Maya has a grand political design, the Maya unites all the ethnic groups, which have their dif- ferences, above all historical and territorial .... We should also remember that there have been confrontations between indigenous groups. And so what really unites them is the Maya.

Mayan education as a point of reference for educational reform in Guatemala

Returning to the topic of Mayan education, we turn in this last part of the article to the existing relationship between family and community education on the one hand, and official, formal education on the other. We shall also reflect on the role that Mayan education is playing in the debate about edu- cational reform in Guatemala.

The creation of a new form of Mayan education

Taking as our starting point the essence of the concept of "Maya" outlined above, we should like to suggest here that Mayan education, besides being

334

an educational concept, can be seen as a political concept which is developing out of a particular social and political situation in Guatemala. Like the moder concept of "Mayan identity", the concept of "Mayan education" is perceived as having been created within a specific historical and social context and as being associated with the particular political aims of its protagonists. Since Mayan ethnicity is based on the shared historical experiences and interests of an ethnic group and, moreover, is the outcome of organized activities, Mayan education must also be understood in these wider social contexts. (This is not to say that "Maya" was not real or legitimate. However, as indicated above, it is not possible to determine objectively from the outside whether the points of reference for the formation of an ethnic identity are real or imaginary.)

From this perspective, Mayan education can clearly be explained also as a means of criticizing the educational situation and concepts that prevail gen- erally in Guatemala. Figueroa (June 1997) describes the situation in the fol- lowing way:

In an analysis of education in Guatemala, it must be borne in mind in respect of formal education that school education is something extra for the indigenous populations, especially in rural areas. They are able to handle far more clearly the concept of community education, the philosophical concept of education in which school is an extra. The education that is given is education for all, as UNESCO is now saying with far greater force, and is lifelong education, education at all times, starting from the family and complemented by school. And that is why schools of any type are rejected in many cases because they do not respond to, or contradict, indigenous thinking about the meaning of education.

We can see that the debate about the promotion and official recognition of values and skills taught in Mayan families and communities, about the estab- lishment of Mayan schools and a Mayan university, and about the promotion of teaching in Mayan languages, always carries within it elements of criticism of the official education system.

Taking into account that the formation of ideas of what is or might be Mayan education is a an ongoing process, it is not possible to put forward any definite conclusions. We can, however, suggest some key points to be borne in mind in consideration of this phenomenon, which will obviously continue to evolve.

Recognising the dynamic and creative process of ethnogenesis

Our initial conclusion is the recognition that the outcomes of these processes of creating Mayan ethnicity and Mayan education are significant. They are logical and functional processes that take place within the socio-political context of their creation, and which represent and support the political interests of their promoters. Moreover, we must take into account that these processes arise out of a specific historical and social situation, and are a response to the historical marginalization of indigenous people in Guatemala that is evident in education among other fields.

335

Not confusing the "new Mayas" with the "historical Mayas"

Our second conclusion is the recognition that collective ethnic identity, in this case that of the Mayas, is not something pure, natural and primordial, nor a

predetermined, inevitable and compulsory cultural and biological heritage which "descends on peoples". Mayan identity is not sustained primarily by a shared, given cosmic vision and philosophy; nor are there Mayan practices, attitudes or characteristics per se (acquired from birth, from the blood, from genes, mother's milk, etc.). What does exist is constructs and perceptions of Mayan identity, philosophy, cosmic vision, etc., that are shared and are valid in themselves, but their content depends on the perceptions which their pro- tagonists deduce from their environments, from their reflections on their social and political situation, and from their visions of history.

Recognising Mayan education as part of the process of ethnogenesis

From this second conclusion derives the third, which is the recognition of

Mayan education as an integral part of the complex, dynamic, creative and unfinished process of ethnogenesis. Depending on the way in which the sectors in society define their identity in specific contexts, so will they also define the bases of their education systems and concepts of education.

Looking back and planning ahead

In conclusion, we should like to suggest that the dynamic and creative process of building Mayan ethnicity is of positive value. We regard as extremely positive the opportunity to recognise and strengthen the "new Mayas", without wishing to reconstruct history. Instead of looking for and reconstructing supposed historical truths, we prefer to stress the dynamic processes of change and cultural interchange.

Finally, we can state that one interesting aspect of the successful promo- tion of Mayan education in the case of Guatemala is the fact that certain institutions, which were used historically to reinforce the exclusion and mar-

ginalization of indigenous populations by official Guatemalan government bodies, have been taken over once more by representatives of the marginal- ized population and now serve to strengthen the cultural identity of the Mayas. By exploiting these, indigenous peoples are reclaiming their rights and are

questioning the education system itself. Against this background, Mayan edu- cation is a creation that acts as a highly functional, efficient and successful means of criticism.

336

Notes

1. ASIES (1995) makes no distinction between the K'iche' and Q'eqchi' communi- ties which it investigated. FRMT and UNESCO (1997) carried out research in 96 indigenous communities in 14 different ethnolinguistic regions, but does not give regional sources in its findings.

2. Ramirez and Mazariegos (1993) does not identify the ethnolinguistic groups to which it refers.

3. Interviews Nos. 2 and 9. Nine educators were interviewed, two of whom were Ladinos and seven Mayan. The two Ladinos (2, 9) mentioned this aspect. See also CECMA (1992: 37). The author, a K'iche' from the region of Quetzaltenango, describes the distinctions between Mayan and Ladino education.

4. Cojti and CISMA (1990) refers to the K'iche', Mam and Q'eqchi' regions. 5. Loukota Soler and Chacach (1992) is a study carried out in the Kaqchikel region.

References

ASIES (Asociaci6n de Investigaciones y Estudios Sociales). 1995. Educacion Familiar en Comunidades Indfgenas. Guatemala: ASIES.

ASIES. 1997. Reforma Educativa en Guatemala. Guatemala: ASIES & PREAL.

Barth, Frederik. 1969. Ethnic Groups and Boundaries. Bergen: Universitetsforlaget.

Brown, R. McKenna and Fischer, Edward F. 1996. Maya Cultural Activism in Guatemala. Austin: University of Texas Press.

CECMA (Centro de Estudios de la Cultura Maya). 1992. Hacia una Educacion Maya. Encuentro Taller de Escuelas con Programas de Cultura Maya. Chichicastenango, El Quiche. Chaclan Solis, Celso Bonifacio. 1995. Enfoques Curriculares Mayas, en los programas educativos bilingiies. Iximulew, Guatemala: CEDIM & CHOLWUJ CHOLNA'OJ.

CNEM (Consejo Nacional de Educaci6n Maya). 1996. Propuesta Maya de Reforma Educativa. Seminario Nacional de Educaci6n Maya por la Paz. Xelju', Quetzaltenango.

Cohen, Abner (ed.) 1974. Urban Ethnicity. London: Tavistock.

Cojti, Demetrio and CISMA (Centro de Investigaci6n Social Maya). 1990. Pautas de crianza y necesidades educativas de la niiez maya. Estudio realizado en aldeas de las regiones II y VII de Guatemala. Guatemala: Fondo de las Naciones Unidas para la Infancia, UNICEF.

Cojti Cuxil, Demetrio (Waqi' Q'anil). 1997. Ri Maya' Moloj pa Iximulew. El Movimiento Maya (en Guatemala). Guatemala: CHOLSAMAJ.

Davis, Shelton H. 1988. Introduction: Sowing the Seeds of Violence. In: Carmack, Robert M., ed., Harvest of Violence. The Maya Indians and the Guatemalan Crisis. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.

Fundaci6n Rigoberta Menchu Tum (FRMT) and UNESCO. 1997. Realidad Educativa de Guatemala. Diagn6stico de la realidad educativa de los pueblos indigenas y otros pueblos de Mesoamerica. Iximulew: FRMT, UNESCO.

337

Gabbert, Wolfgang. 1991. Creoles - Afroamerikaner im karibischen Tiefland von Nicaragua. Hamburg: LIT.

Garbers, Frank. 1993. Guatemaltekische Fliichtlinge in Mexiko: Ausgrenzung und Flucht als Hintergrund fir ein neues ethnisches Selbstbewujitsein. Master's thesis, University of Hamburg.

Heckt, Meike. 1997. Educacion intercultural. Futuro para una Guatemala multilingiie y pluricultural. Guatemala: CIDECA, Colecci6n Debates.

Loukota Soler, Eresto and Chacach, Martin. 1992. Hogar y Escuela. Guatemala: Universidad Rafael Landivar.

MAYA UNESCO (ed.). 1995. Educacion Maya. Experiencia y Expectativas en Guatemala. Guatemala: UNESCO.

Ramirez, Margarita and Mazariegos, Luisa. 1993. Tradicion y Modernidad. Lecturas sobre la Cultura Maya actual. Guatemala: Universidad Rafael Landivar, Instituto de Linguistica. Smith, Carol A. (ed.) 1990. Guatemalan Indians and the State, 1540 to 1988. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Weber, Max. 1972. Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. Grundrifa der verstehenden Soziologie. Tiibingen.

Interviews

Guillermina Herrera, Universidad Rafael Landivar, June 94 Oscar Azmitia, PRODESSA, July 94 Rigoberto Vasquez, CEDIM, July 94 Ernestina Reyes, PRONEBI, July 94 Juana Vasquez, Movimiento 500 Anios de Resistencia, July 94 Demetrio Cojti, UNICEF, February 97 Virgilio Alvarado, CNEM, March 97 Gustavo Palma, AVANCSO, March 97 Jose Angel Zapeta, FRMT/DIREPI, March 97 Juan Le6n, Defensoria Maya, March 97 Eva Sazo, PRONADE, April 97 Federico Figueroa, UNESCO MAYA, June 97 Manuel Salazar, CNEM, June 97

The author

Meike Heckt lectures in American anthropology at the University of Hamburg. She is currently writing her doctoral thesis on Intercultural Education in Guatemala, and spent 18 months researching in Alta Verapaz, Guatemala, in 1995-1997. She is a member of the CIDECA research group in Guatemala. She has published several articles on intercultural issues.

Contact address: Meike Heckt, Intercultural Studies, Faculty of Education, University of Hamburg, Von-Melle-Park 8, 20146 Hamburg, Germany.