scholarly journals HEGEMONIA E OS PROGRAMAS DE EDUCAÇÃO INDÍGENA NO MÉXICO E NO BRASIL (1940 – 1970)

Author(s):  
Lígia Duque Platero

L’hégémonie et les programmes d’éducation autochtone au Mexique et au Brésil (1940-1970)Lígia Duque Platero Dans cet article, l’auteure présente des renseignements sur les programmes d’éducation autochtone des agences indigénistes du Brésil et du Mexique, entre 1940 et 1970, et elle propose également un survol de l’influence de ces programmes sur les processus de formation d’hégémonie des États au sens large, au sein des peuples amérindiens de ces pays durant la même période. Les écoles de l’Institut national indigéniste (INI), au Mexique, et surtout celles du Service de protection de l’Indien (SPI), au Brésil, ont mis l’accent sur l’enseignement de la langue nationale dans leurs programmes et elles ont exercé une influence sur la création de l’idée d’existence de la nationalité « métisse », visant le « développement » et l’« intégration » des peuples autochtones à la nation. Dans les deux pays, les missions religieuses ont participé à l’éducation autochtone, notamment le Summer Institute of Linguistics (SIL). Au Mexique, la participation des promoteurs culturels bilingues en tant qu’« intermédiaires culturels » entre les institutions indigénistes et les communautés s’est avérée un élément clé pour la formation de l’hégémonie. Au Brésil, les enseignants étaient « non autochtones » et leur influence fut moins importante.Mots clés : éducation autochtone, politique indigéniste, éducation bilingue, intégration indigénisme, hégémonie  Hegemony and Indigenous Education Programs in Mexico and Brazil (1940-1970)Lígia Duque Platero This article describes the education programs of indigenist agencies in Brazil and Mexico between 1940 and 1970. It provides an overview of the influence that these programs have had on the formation of State hegemonies, broadly considered, and their extension to Indigenous peoples during this period. The schools of the National Indigenist Institute (INI) in Mexico, and even more those of the Indian Protection Service (SPI) of Brazil, have put an emphasis on the teaching of the national language in their programs, and have contributed to the creation of the idea of « mestizo » national identity, while centering their mission on the « development » and « integration » of Indigenous peolples within the nation. In both countries, religious missions have played a role in Indigenous education, notably through the Summer Institute of Linguistics (SIL). In Mexico, the participation of bilingual cultural promoters acting as « cultural intermediaries » between indigenist institutions and the communities has played a key role in the formation of State hegemony. In Brazil, teachers were non-indigenous, and their impact was less significative.Keywords: Indigenous Education, Indigenist policy, bilingual education, Indigenism Integration, hegemony  Hegemonía y programas de educación indígena en México y Brasil (1940-1970)Lígia Duque Platero En este artículo la autora presenta informaciones sobre los programas de educación indígena de las agencias de asuntos indígenas de Brasil y de México, entre 1940 y 1970. Para este mismo período, la autora da también una mirada a la influencia de dichos programas sobre la constitución de formas hegemónicas en los Estados, en un sentido amplio, y en el seno de los pueblos indígenas de dichos países. Los programas de las escuelas del Instituto Nacional Indigenista (INI), en México, y sobre todo las del Servicio de Protección a los Indios (SPI), en Brasil, pusieron el acento en la enseñanza de la lengua nacional e influyeron en la creación de la idea de la existencia de la nacionalidad “mestiza”, apuntando hacia el “desarrollo” y la “integración” de los pueblos indígenas a la nación. En ambos países las misiones religiosas han participado en la educación indígena, especialmente el Instituto Lingüístico de Verano (ILV). En México, la acción de los promotores culturales bilingües como “mediadores culturales” entre las instituciones de asuntos indígenas y las comunidades fue un elemento clave para la configuración de formas hegemónicas. En Brasil, los profesores eran “no indígenas” y su influencia fue menos importante.Palabras clave : educación indígena, política indigenista, educación bilingüe, integración indigenismo, hegemonía  Hegemonia e os programas de educação indígena no México e no Brasil (1940-1970)Lígia Duque Platero Nestas notas de pesquisa, apresentamos informações sobre os programas de educação indígena das agências indigenistas do Brasil e do México, entre 1940 e 1970, e realizamos uma breve discussão sobre a influência desses programas nos processos de formação de hegemonia dos Estados ampliados entre os povos indígenas desses países, no período citado. Nas escolas do Instituto Nacional Indigenista (INI), no México, e principalmente do Serviço de Proteção aos Índios (SPI), no Brasil, as escolas enfatizaram o ensino da língua nacional em seus currículos e influenciaram na criação da ideia da existência da nacionalidade “mestiça”, visando o “desenvolvimento” e a “integração” dos povos indígenas à nação. Em ambos os países, missões religiosas participaram da educação indígena e aqui destacamos a atuação do Summer Institute of Linguistics (SIL). No México, a participação dos promotores culturais bilíngues como “intermediários culturais” entre as instituições indigenistas e as comunidades resultou na grande importância da educação indígena para a formação da hegemonia. Já no caso do Brasil, os professores e professoras eram “não indígenas” e sua influencia foi mais restrita.Palavras-chave : Educação Indígena; Política indigenista; educação bilíngue; Indigenismo de Integração; Hegemonia 

2008 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 109-120
Author(s):  
Francisca De la Maza

It is presented an argumentative theoretical and methodological discussion for the analysis of intercultural bilingual education programs (EIB) in Chile. It is proposed an approach that deepens into the implementation of national policies to local areas, highlighting the role assumed by the local government agent in its performance and in the construction of the state and, particularly in its relationship with the indigenous peoples. Based on the analysis of this program, it is deepened in the representations and social practices that are transmitted in respect to the indigenous otherness from the teachers’ speech.


2013 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dr Martin John Cannon

This paper suggests that, so long as we are focused on racism and colonialism as an exclusively Indigenous struggle, we fail to engage non-Indigenous peoples as “allies” of Indigenous education and sovereignty.  My goal is to place a developing literature on settler-Indigenous alliances into a productive and more explicit dialogue with anti-oppressive educational theory and praxis.  I address two critical questions: 1) How might we engage structurally privileged learners, some of whom are non-Indigenous peoples, to think about colonial dominance and racism in Canada? and 2) How might we work in coalition with privileged learners—and especially with new Canadians—to consider matters of land, citizenship, and colonization?  I conclude by identifying a series of pedagogical practices aimed at the troubling of normalcy—an approach to teaching that disrupts the binary of self/Other.  I consider briefly in turn the implications of this pedagogy for decolonization, the invigoration of teacher education programs in Canada, and the building and rejuvenation of relationships between Indigenous peoples and settler, diasporic, and migrant Indigenous populations.


1996 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 201-211 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas H. Moore

The concept of human rights has evolved through three historical generations: liberty, equality, and now fraternity. Each generation of anthropologists, missionaries, and human rights advocates cultivated its own distinct mission and rhetoric. The current generation of a family of nations (fraternity) emphasizes the concept of group rights, as exemplified by the Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. For 50 years the Summer Institute of Linguistics has been laboring for the ethnic identity rights of indigenous peoples in language development and literacy.


2015 ◽  
Vol 44 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 29-37
Author(s):  
Lígia Duque Platero ◽  
Alice Fiuza

Dans cet article, l’auteure présente des renseignements sur les programmes d’éducation autochtone des agences indigénistes du Brésil et du Mexique, entre 1940 et 1970, et elle propose également un survol de l’influence de ces programmes sur les processus de formation d’hégémonie des États au sens large, au sein des peuples amérindiens de ces pays durant la même période. Les écoles de l’Institut national indigéniste (INI), au Mexique, et surtout celles du Service de protection de l’Indien (SPI), au Brésil, ont mis l’accent sur l’enseignement de la langue nationale dans leurs programmes et elles ont exercé une influence sur la création de l’idée d’existence de la nationalité « métisse », visant le « développement » et l’« intégration » des peuples autochtones à la nation. Dans les deux pays, les missions religieuses ont participé à l’éducation autochtone, notamment le Summer Institute of Linguistics (SIL). Au Mexique, la participation des promoteurs culturels bilingues en tant qu’« intermédiaires culturels » entre les institutions indigénistes et les communautés s’est avérée un élément clé pour la formation de l’hégémonie. Au Brésil, les enseignants étaient « non autochtones » et leur influence fut moins importante.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Francisco Javier Palacios-Hidalgo ◽  
María Elena Gómez-Parra ◽  
Cristina A. Huertas-Abril ◽  
Roberto Espejo-Mohedano

2007 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 425-453 ◽  
Author(s):  
Noam Schimmel

AbstractThe right to an education that is consonant with and draws upon the culture and language of indigenous peoples is a human right which is too often overlooked by governments when they develop and implement programmes whose purported goals are to improve the social, economic and political status of these peoples. Educational programmes for indigenous peoples must fully respect and integrate human rights protections, particularly rights to cultural continuity and integrity. Racist attitudes dominate many government development programmes aimed at indigenous peoples. Educational programmes for indigenous peoples are often designed to forcibly assimilate them and destroy the uniqueness of their language, values, culture and relationship with their native lands. Until indigenous peoples are empowered to develop educational programmes for their own communities that reflect and promote their values and culture, their human rights are likely to remain threatened by governments that use education as a political mechanism for coercing indigenous peoples to adapt to a majority culture that does not recognize their rights, and that seeks to destroy their ability to sustain and pass on to future generations their language and culture.


2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (35) ◽  
pp. 065-080
Author(s):  
張耀宗 張耀宗

<p>本文主要目的在於從《臺灣蕃人事情》報告,來看日治初期官方原住民教育政策之形成。《臺灣蕃人事情》是民政部事務囑託伊能嘉矩和粟野傳之丞呈給民政長官後藤新平的覆命書,此覆命書係為實施蕃人教育預作準備。本書大部分內容由人類學調查所組成,可作為從人類學的角度看待教育的特殊視角。在蕃人教育措施準備上,覆命書中提及針對各族原住民「開化發達」的程度不同,給予適當之教育措施。對照日本總督府隨後原住民教育政策之發展,覆命書確實有其若合符節之處,也有差異之處。會有差異之處的原因,在於殖產部門所管轄的原住民區域,發展出與文教部門不同的原住民教育措施。</p> <p>&nbsp;</p><p>The main purpose of this article is to analyze the relation between the formation of the official indigenous education policy in the early period of Japanese colony and the report &ldquo;The History and Custom of Taiwan Indigenous Peoples &quot;. &ldquo;The History and Custom of Taiwan Indigenous Peoples &ldquo;was the official report for the Chief of the Civil Affairs, Goto Shinpei, by two officials of Department of Civil Affairs, Ino Kanori and Suo Chuanji. The purpose of survey was the preparations for educating indigenous peoples. Most part of this report was based on field study, which could help to see education from an anthropological perspective. For establishing an education system for indigenous peoples, it divided to the different levels of civilization of each different ethnic group of indigenous peoples, and then gave each an appropriate education. Comparing the subsequent development of the indigenous education system that Taiwan Governor’s Office of Japanese initiated, it found there were some similarity and difference between the official report and the practical policy. The reason for the difference based on the development of indigenous educational policy that was different from the educational unit in the indigenous areas under the jurisdiction of the developmental department.</p> <p>&nbsp;</p>


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document