Necesidades del desarrollo

As outlined in chapter 1, language and language planning are critical for minoritized languages (Cummins, 2001; S. K. Taylor & Skutnabb-Kangas, 2009). While Inuktitut is currently a strong language, research indicates that it is beginning to decline. In most of the interviews, Inuit shared that they felt that L2 were clearly preferenced over L1. Concerns regarding language loss were prevalent in many of the interviews. One educator stated that

136

“For five or six year now we have been losing our language, really, really fast …when they are in their secondary level their Inuktitut skill is more like grade 2 or grade 3 level” (Susie). This insight brings into focus a major concern with language loss. Decline of the younger speakers is considered the greatest risk for language loss (Norris, 2007). Many of the educators I interviewed suggested that their main role was to support Inuktitut and transmit their language to younger generations. “This is a minority language …we are really, really trying to find ways to preserve it and also be proud of the language and who we are….I have a way of helping the students” (Sarah). A young educator discussed how at first she did not see the big issue with language, but after teaching for two years she realized the impact. Malayia stated that “they are losing their language.” Her concern was based on her own experiences teaching grade 1. Malayia has changed her mind, “I would say that kids should be learning their language…all the way through grade 6…then they would keep their

language forever.” When I asked why the change of opinion, Malayia looked at me and said, “I want them to learn everything about English and French, but mostly Inuktitut.” She understood well the need for this and the risk of losing her language.

The call for mastery of Inuktitut was strong by almost all of those interviewed, but there were some who suggested that not everyone felt the same way. Some of the educators, with whom I spoke felt that the parents were at fault for preferencing the L2 over the L1. This colonized consciousness (Fanon, 2008), occurs when the minority group has been colonized and no longer sees the benefit of his or her own distinct culture.

As an example of this, Maina stated that:

When it is report cards parent will go to the English teacher and not come to me because they think they are learning more in English than in the Inuktitut classroom. It’s, I don’t

137

know, even some Inuit, not all, think that learning English or French is so, so much better than learning their own language. They think that but at the same time they don’t want to lose their own language.

Maina shared a growing concern. If a master narrative is told for long enough, do the dominated group end up believing it? Roberta Jamieson (2013), a lawyer and Aboriginal Rights activist, speaking at a summit on post-secondary education states that “we seem to still be combating myths and stereotypes which lead too many to believe they are inferior, incapable, unworthy” (p.1). It is this self-doubt that concerns many of the Inuit educators, and many researchers. These narratives are strong. At times, parents see the choices between learning the L1 and being successful as their only choice. This choice is unfair and other, better options such as bilingual or multilingual education exist (Fukudo-Parr, 2004). Another educator suggested that it is not all parents who want the L2 stronger, a “few parents want them to learn English quicker…but I don’t really like that. I want them to learn Inuktitut first, the mother tongue” (Leena). This was the prevalent attitude of those I interviewed.

Most of the Inuit I interviewed, who are also parents and grandparents of school aged children, want children to master Inuktitut. This raised the questions about the language planning process. When I asked this, many of those interviewed had a great deal to share.

They started without asking the community people. We really want Inuktitut until grade 4 or 5, but they are starting even younger…There is no communication, No one questions…. It’s being erased little, by little, our language and they are adding more second language. (Malayia)

There is clearly a lack of communication. These educators do not feel that they are considered when major issues, such as language, are discussed.

138

Ah those commissioners always decide what they want before they talked to

teachers…they are not communicating…so commissioners, want English starting in grade 1…they have to ask the teachers what is best for the students because the teacher knows, they are with the children all the time… they just decide what they want and we have to follow what they decided…I have to have at least a half an hour in English or French now. (Leena)

Leena was very concerned about the early integration of English. As she was speaking she was getting more and more agitated. She clearly did not feel that the commissioners, those who make decisions about education in Nunavik, cared about what the teachers felt was best. She was worried about the shift in language policy.

When I asked a person with a highly responsible position at KSB why the change in language policy was instituted, he was unable to articulate the reasons and the expectations from the change. It is possible that the deficit model discussed earlier in this paper has been applied to both the students and the teachers. Inuit, in positions of authority, may feel that they are not capable and therefore quickly move to “fix” the language situation. Eva agreed She said that,

They were talking about…the research, and told us and gave us dreams that Inuktitut is going to go longer, past grade 3. Many times they come and tell us and they spend all that money and …it just never happens.

I asked her why, and after quite a long pause, and a look of frustration, she shared that she believes that they (the commissioners, the principals, and the administration) think that the Inuit can’t teach well.

139

The impact of moving language targets and planning for language that is encumbered by a lack of belief in the role of the Inuit educator has a devastating effect on the learning of the Inuit students, and the role of the Inuit educator. Still, a few educators believe that equality of language can exist within the school board. Maggie, who has taught all primary grades, shared that she “ like[s] both. It is good to have both”. Many models of language planning agree with her. Since bilingual education shows strong tendencies to support both languages, especially when both languages are used for content teaching, then a shift from the current subtractive language model would best support the students and increase the sense of identity desired by the Inuit educators (Cummins, 2000; Hornberger, 2002; Skutnabb-Kangas, 2000; S. K. Taylor & Sknutnabb-Kangas, 2009).