Intercultural Education in Switzerland

Abstract

Before analysing the circumstances leading to the emergence of intercultural education in Switzerland, it would first be useful to explain how the country has dealt with migration. It bears, indeed, all the hallmarks of a paradox. In the first place, the country welcomes and has welcomed in the past a large number of immigrants coming for the most part from Southern Europe, but also from other regions of the world (D’Amato, 2008). This relatively ancient immigration contributed to the country’s economic prosperity. Secondly, the country’s attitude in relation to immigration has gone through periods of closing the borders and subsequently reopening them again. Thus, Switzerland has modified and adapted its policy on migration on several occasions, particularly concerning the management of the flow of migrating people (D’Amato, 2008).

1 Introduction

Before analysing the circumstances leading to the emergence of intercultural education in Switzerland, it would first be useful to explain how the country has dealt with migration. It bears, indeed, all the hallmarks of a paradox. In the first place, the country welcomes and has welcomed in the past a large number of immigrants coming for the most part from Southern Europe, but also from other regions of the world (D’Amato, 2008). This relatively ancient immigration contributed to the country’s economic prosperity. Secondly, the country’s attitude in relation to immigration has gone through periods of closing the borders and subsequently reopening them again. Thus, Switzerland has modified and adapted its policy on migration on several occasions, particularly concerning the management of the flow of migrating people (D’Amato, 2008). Even if popular xenophobic initiatives (proposals submitted to the people’s vote) have not succeeded overall, it nevertheless remains evident that they reflect a certain apprehension or nervousness on the part of public opinion with regard to multiculturality.¹

We should also note that, due to the Swiss education system’s extreme decentralization, the measures taken for the education of foreign children are usually the responsibility of the cantonal authorities, even if they are generally inspired by federal recommendations. We would add on this subject that the matter of intercultural education concerns above all the country’s urban areas and large cities. Until recently, rural and mountainous regions have remained little affected by migration.

In this chapter, we analyse first the emergence of intercultural education in the country. Next, we describe the actions and programmes introduced to react to cultural diversity. We will examine, thirdly, the schooling of migrant children.

2 The Emergence of Intercultural Education

In Switzerland, it is difficult to isolate the principal stages in the development of intercultural education due to the extreme decentralization of the country’s educational policy. In fact, each canton has the last word on educational matters. Thus, one sometimes hears the true words spoken that in Switzerland “there are twenty-six education systems”. However, in the absence of a federal minister of education, it is the Conférence suisse des directeurs cantonaux de l’instruction publique (CDIP—Swiss Conference of Cantonal Directors of Public Instruction) which draws up the recommendations proposed for the cantons with the intention of coordinating and harmonizing various educational policies (CDIP, 2017b). It was in the 1970s and 1980s that the first recommendations were issued by this federal body. These consisted principally of measures relating to immigration and the need to educate and integrate “the children of migrant workers” (CDIP, 1972a, b).

As a general rule, the CDIP’s recommendations deal basically with such matters as integrating children of migrant origin and their schooling (CDIP, 1972a, b, 1974, 1976, 1985a, 1991b, 1999), the teaching of national and foreign languages (let us recall that Switzerland is divided into four linguistic regions) (CDIP, 1975, 1985a, b, 1986, 1999, 2017a, b) or even the school’s role in the struggle against racism and discrimination (CDIP, 1991a). Two recommendations from 1992 and 1993 were focused on the European dimension of education.

It could be noticed that the dates of these decisions by the CDIP are not without relevance; the construction of intercultural education in Switzerland would appear to have taken shape at the time of social (the arrival of migrant peoples (during the 1970s) or refugees (the war in Kosovo in 1999)) and political changes (signature of the Maastricht Treaty within the European Union in 1992).² From a cultural and linguistic point of view, the consolidation of a diverse national identity is also involved in the evolution of the intercultural dimension of education in Switzerland.

From the earliest of the CDIP’s recommendations concerning the education of children with migrant origins at the beginning of the 1970s up to those dating from the 1990s, intercultural approaches (also sometimes called “intercultural pedagogy” in Switzerland) were regularly discussed and often considered as indispensable elements in teacher-training programmes (Lanfranchi, Perregaux and Thommen, 2000; Sieber and Bischoff, 2007).

It should be recalled that in Switzerland intercultural education was initially a struggle to obtain consent for the schooling of all foreign children. Indeed, a multitude of obstacles blocked the education of these children who had no legal status. Militant educators forced a breach in the legal and institutional measures so as to give them the possibility of attending school (Perregaux and Togni, 1989). Then, stress was placed on mastery of the French language for the new arrivals. For this purpose, reception classes were created so as to facilitate rapid learning of French and the children’s swift integration into regular classes corresponding to their age.

The publication of works by Perregaux (1994b), by Poglia, Perret-Clermont, Gretler and Dasen (1995) and by Perregaux, Ogay, Leanza and Dasen (2001) marked the beginning of an important qualitative and quantitative development for intercultural education in Switzerland. Today, curricular reforms, language awareness (including those of the migrants), teacher training for intercultural education and the distribution of information intended to raise the awareness of children and teachers about the themes of cultural diversity and racism are the principal sectors where intercultural approaches in education are deployed in the Swiss Romande (Akkari and Tardif, 2006; Dasen and Perregaux, 2002; Nicollin and Müller Mirza, 2013).

Despite this apparent craze for intercultural education, it is interesting to observe that in Switzerland the cultural diversity associated with the country’s linguistic and religious identity (four national languages and two principal historical religions (Protestantism and Catholicism)), and the diversity brought about by the waves of migration were not discussed as an ensemble in order to identify a common approach and harmonious development.

It should also be noted that in the context of the Swiss Romande (the French-speaking part of the country), the term “intercultural education” was preferred to “multicultural education” under the initiative of Micheline Rey’s work as part of the Council of Europe’s activities (Rey, 1984).

3 Official Recommendations Concerning Intercultural Approaches in Education

The CDIP, mentioned above, is a central body for all of Switzerland with the authority to express recommendations intended to coordinate and harmonize cantonal educational policies (CDIP, 2017b). Examining their evolution gives us an understanding of how intercultural education managed to create a place for itself in the Swiss educational scene. An analysis of these recommendations shows that they were based on three working principles, namely: (1) the schooling of pupils with migrant origins; (2) language teaching; (3) the struggle against racism (other principles concerning cultural diversity could also have been mentioned but they seem to us secondary compared to the ones presented here).

One of the first recommendations concerning the schooling of pupils with migratory origins goes back to 1972. It aimed at the integration of the pupils through the school, the struggle against discrimination that they might suffer, but also their preparation for an eventual return to their country of origin. The matter of the struggle against discrimination is on-going in the CDIP’s recommendations; it intended to create the foundations for intercultural education and to give all the necessary instructions to ensure the joint schooling of national and foreign pupils.

For this purpose, the CDIP recommended the integration of pupils with migratory origins into regular classes, possibly with support, particularly for the acquisition of the teaching language (CDIP, 1972a). As the years passed, matters concerning the schooling of these pupils became more precise. The CDIP recommended that they should be offered vocational training (CDIP, 1972b) and later further studies (CDIP, 1991b). Concerning their support, it promoted an approach to decisions bearing in mind the language shortcomings of these pupils. These recommendations aimed particularly at avoiding that they should be systematically directed towards special education (CDIP, 1985a) or repetition (CDIP, 1991b).

Over time, the Conference of Cantonal Directors of Public Instruction modified its viewpoint on the child with migratory origins. As time passed, it defined these children less by their status (in 1972: “children of migrant workers”; in 1976, “migrant children”; in 1985: “foreign-language children” or “foreign children” (CDIP, 1985a)). This evolution reflected a progression from migration considered as transient in 1972 towards a migration considered as permanent for Swiss society (see, for example, the recommendation issued by the CDIP in 1985 which aimed at complete integration (CDIP, 1985a)).

In parallel with this evolution, it was intercultural education that intervened in the CDIP’s official recommendations. The term “intercultural” appears for the first time in a 1985 recommendation: since these children were likely to remain permanently on Swiss territory, it seemed necessary to encourage what the CDIP called “intercultural teaching” (CDIP, 1985a). Little by little, this body insisted upon the development of this facet of education. It mentioned particularly respect for the children’s cultural identities (CDIP, 1991b); it reaffirmed the need for intercultural education (CDIP, 1991b) and expressed the wish that university research should take an interest in this area.

Concerning language courses and the culture of origin, we observe an evolution in the CDIP’s position between 1972 and 1985. In 1972, the Conference showed itself to be sensitive to the importance of the language of origin, both to appreciate it in its own right but also for a subsequent return by the children to their country of birth (it recommended particularly authorization to attend foreign-language private schools to make it easier for some children to return). In the same year, it encouraged the development of courses in the original language and culture (CDIP, 1972a). In 1985, the CDIP renewed the principle of integrating foreign-language children into public schools and of avoiding any form of discrimination (1985a). At the same time, it stressed that integration should be accompanied by the right of respect for the parents’ cultural identity.

Concerning language teaching, the CDIP issued several recommendations aimed at the advancement of all pupils in their command of national languages. These were necessary for interactions between cantons. For this purpose, linguistic and intercultural exchanges between cantons were promoted (CDIP, 1985b; 1986), as well as the development of bilingual teaching (CDIP, 1995a). The characteristic of this type of recommendation makes us aware that Switzerland developed its relationship with intercultural education basically through matters concerning migration, whereas its own identity is already very diverse due to the presence of different cultural and linguistic regions.

In 1999, the CDIP participated in the implementation of English, a non-national foreign language, in the official curricula of all pupils from the seventh year of compulsory schooling (primary level) (CDIP, 1999). In 2017, it pursued its work in this domain and proposed a series of recommendations so that the teaching of national and non-national foreign languages took place as seamlessly as possible (CDIP, 2017b).

In its recommendation entitled “Racism at school” (CDIP, 1991a), the CDIP promoted cultural openness and the development of intercultural competences for all pupils. It is one of the first recommendations which was not focused entirely on the pupils with migratory origins, nor uniquely on pupils who might be called “native” (non-migratory). Through this recommendation, the CDIP positions the school as one of the principal agents in the struggle against racism and discrimination present in Switzerland—as also in the rest of the world.

4 Intercultural Activities and Projects

In this part, we will attempt to present the different educational projects and activities which could appear on the banner of intercultural education in Switzerland. It is necessary to point out to the reader that we will concentrate principally on the Swiss Romande (French-speaking) part of the country.

In the first place, mention should be made of reception classes in the Canton of Geneva intended to welcome pupils aged 7 years or more upon their first arrival who did not speak French (Rastoldo, Wassmer, Evrard and Kaiser, 2013). Upon their arrival, the primary school pupils were enrolled half-time in this system and half-time in regular classes alongside pupils of their own age, which encouraged their progressive integration into the school assisted by language support. The reception classes should basically hasten the learning of the teaching language in order to facilitate complete integration into the regular class. Generally, the time spent in the reception class does not exceed twelve months (Rastoldo et al., 2013). For pupils aged 4 to 6, the Canton of Geneva foresees immediate schooling in a regular class for their age group (Rastoldo et al., 2013).

In second place, we must present the courses in the original language and culture (CLCO). This arrangement, based on the CDIP’s recommendations dating from the 1970s, aims today at the development and maintenance of the link with the original culture, but is also intended to promote diversity. In 1991, during the preparation of recommendations dealing with racism at the school, the CDIP confirmed the right of children with migrant origins to speak their own language (CDIP, 1991b). Otherwise, today the CLCO are also based on the theory of linguistic interdependence developed by Cummins (1979).³

Concerning their organization, the CLCO may involve the participation of consulates from the countries of origin who, thanks to bilateral agreements, recruit teachers to provide these courses. They may also rely upon the assistance of local cultural associations. The Swiss education system, for its part, ensures that classrooms are made available. Today, it is possible to observe that these courses remain “outside the curriculum” and that the languages of migration, despite these arrangements, have not yet entirely found their place in the Swiss Romande schools.

The integration of CLCOs into the regular school would permit this objective to be reached [assisting the integration of pupils from other cultures and their readiness for this integration (DGEP, 2008, p. 4)]. Furthermore, the collaboration taking place between regular teachers and those of the LCO could have a beneficial effect on all pupils (Radhouane, Fuentes and Akkari, 2017, p. 37).

To these two arrangements can be added extra-curricular and curricular activities having a certain influence on the inclusion of intercultural approaches into the school. Intercultural libraries providing access to the written culture in several languages are useful not only for the children but also for the parents. One of the most interesting innovations that could be mentioned is the EOLE programme (Éveil et ouverture aux langues—Awakening and openness to languages), which consists of an awareness about diversity of languages intended for all children. This teaching develops metalinguistic competences (see De Pietro and Matthey, 2001), assists in the learning of languages, strengthens intercultural openness for all pupils and develops their knowledge of language diversity.⁴ The EOLE programme seeks to oppose the hierarchization of languages (Candelier and De Pietro, 2014).

Furthermore, we may mention that in numerous Swiss cantons support programmes have been introduced for pupils in difficulties usually concerning schools with a large number of migrant pupils. In Geneva, for example, a Réseau d’éducation prioritaire (REP—Priority Education Network) has been created to provide more resources to certain schools enrolling pupils with wide sociocultural diversity. Here, there is a better supervision rate, a higher number of teachers responsible for educational support, and more arrangements to encourage success in the school (Soussi and Nidegger, 2015).

To sum up, intercultural approaches to education in Switzerland were originally intended for the integration of migrant children. However, these approaches have progressively been aimed at all pupils. The adoption of the Plan d’études romand (PER—Swiss Romande Study Plan), the study programme at present in use in the Swiss Romande, is a perfect illustration since the curriculum guidelines are aimed at all pupils and some of them are oriented towards openness, tolerance, a critical approach and the struggle against stereotypes. One can note, for example, the following objectives:

• Freeing oneself from prejudice and stereotypes (creative thinking);

• Taking a step back, to remove oneself from the situation, the information and one’s own actions, to abandon preconceived ideas, to compare one’s opinion with that of others, to accept one’s prejudices and to compare one’s judgement with that of other people (reflective approach);

• […] To ask oneself questions about the relationships which form both within societies and between them and their territory (extracts from the PER (CIIP, 2019)).

This change of viewpoint on intercultural approaches is here taken from official texts. It will now be necessary to discover their impact in the classroom through research. Beforehand, Fig. 1 recapitulates the main arrangements referring to intercultural approaches in Switzerland.

Fig. 1

The range of intercultural approaches in Switzerland

5 The Place of Migrant Children in the Education System

The evolution in the composition of the school population compared to that of the original culture reflects the migratory movements taking place in Switzerland. During the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s, the origins of migrant pupils were essentially in Southern Europe (Italy, Portugal, Spain). It has progressively diversified over recent decades (the Balkans, Turkey, France, Germany, and more recently Eritrea, Afghanistan, Syria, Somalia,⁵ etc.).

Since a large number of migrant children leave secondary education at the end of compulsory schooling to enter dual vocational training, the growth of cultural diversity affected in the first instance compulsory schooling (until 15 years of age).

For the school year 2016/2017, 937,000 pupils were enrolled in Swiss compulsory education. Eighteen percent of them were in 1P–2P (the two first years of compulsory school, formerly called the infant school); 52% of them were in the 3P–8P levels (the continuation of primary education), 26% in secondary 1 and 3% of pupils were enrolled in special education. Foreign pupils in Switzerland represent about one quarter of total enrolments of pupils in compulsory education (OFS,⁶ 2018) (Table 1).

Table 1 Evolution of the composition of pupil enrolment in compulsory education in Switzerland, 2000/2001–2016/2017

During the 2016/2017 school year, the proportion of foreign pupils in Switzerland reached an average of 27%. There are considerable variations from one canton to another. Thus, the Canton of Geneva numbered the highest proportion of foreign pupils (43%) and the Canton of Appenzell-Rhodes-Interior the lowest (almost 9%) (OFS, 2018). Some of these differences can be explained by the canton’s characteristics: some of them, the most rural, are less inclined to receive a surge of migrant people, unlike the Canton of Geneva, historically a destination for migration.

In Switzerland, the Federal Office of Statistics (OFS) analyses the cultural composition of classes, considering both the nationalities present and the languages spoken by the pupils. In this way, the various proportions represented allow three types of class to be distinguished:

• 1. Homogenous classes containing no children with a foreign nationality and/or speaking a language other than that of instruction at the school.

• 2. Heterogenous classes, which include less than 30% of children with a foreign nationality and/or speaking another language.

• 3. Very heterogenous classes counting at least 30% of pupils of foreign nationality and/or speaking another language.

An analysis by OFS (2016) threw light on the non-proportionality in the increase in cultural diversity and the increase in the proportion of very heterogenous classes, which reflects greater segregation of foreign pupils in certain classes.

In Switzerland, the matter of cultural diversity crosses different strata of the education system with the question of specialization seeming to be particularly sensitive. In fact, for the school year 2016/2017, the OFS’s figures (2018) allow us to observe the over-representation of foreign students in the less-demanding classes. If they represent 24.6% of all students enrolled in secondary 1 (approximately up to 15 years of age), they only represent 17% of students enrolled in more-demanding streams and 34.43% of students in less-demanding streams (OFS, 2018).⁷ It should also be noted that the presence of foreign students in more-demanding streams has dropped by ten percentage points between 1990 and 2008 (OFS, 2018). Two explanations can be offered for this evolution. On the one hand, it should be recalled that foreign students come from less-favoured social strata compared to their Swiss colleagues. On the other hand, specific action reserved for foreign students by the school cannot be ruled out.

The over-representation of foreign students in the less-demanding streams is linked to a series of factors which can be classified into two categories:

• 1. Attitudes in the school (including those of the teachers). This concerns not using the students’ mother-tongue, selection procedures and the school’s expectations.

• 2. The varied usage that the student and his/her family make of the school. Given the lack of knowledge about the language and the Swiss school system on the part of some migrant parents, they accept in general the school stream offered and may in this way limit their expectations concerning the school performance of their children.

These two categories can be found in different contexts and are not restricted to the Swiss situation. However, it is useful to examine their implications. The first describes the manner in which the school reacts to the pupils’ diversity. By employing its own set of codes and not those of the pupils, it creates a gulf often interpreted as learning difficulties. The second brings us back to the families which sometimes, due to a poor understanding of the institution and its functioning, cannot make their opinion known and therefore do not participate fully in their child’s choice of stream.

The use of standardized tests is one factor which affects the first category, particularly during the guidance of pupils towards specialized classes. Since the pioneer work of Binet-Simon, tests have served to guide and select pupils.

Meanwhile, in Switzerland, we should observe that the presence of pupils in less-demanding streams does not represent, as it does in some countries, a path inevitably ending in failure. In fact, the dual vocational system accepts young people at age 15 from all sections of compulsory schooling and is particularly appreciated. Despite more positive prospects than those in other contexts, the question of choice of stream remains a problem with regard to the distribution of foreign pupils in the education system.

If we examine the rate of access to the maturité (a diploma granting access to university in Switzerland), the difference between Swiss and foreign students is flagrant. We remark that 42.4% of young Swiss people obtain the maturité (including the gymnasiale, which opens the doors to the most prestigious higher studies), while only 23% of young foreigners born abroad obtain this diploma (OFS, 2018).

These inequalities can also be analysed from the aspect of school drop-out. In fact, among the pupils leaving the school prematurely, we observe that once again the foreign pupils are over-represented (OFS, 2018). Nevertheless, this incidence has greatly improved over recent years, dropping from 25% in 2003 to 12.5% in 2017 (OFS, 2018). For pupils of Swiss nationality, the rate remains stable at around 2.5% in 2017 (OFS, 2018). Twenty years ago, these analyses of the educational trajectory of children of migrant origins show outcomes that were rather disappointing (OFS, 1997), whereas the most recent ones are more encouraging but still show the persistence of a gap between Swiss and foreign pupils. Cultural diversity is often associated with the less-demanding classes and school failure. We should, however, avoid any causal and unidimensional explanation of school failure and any grouping of pupils by culture or their supposed manners of learning (Abdallah-Pretceille, 1992).

As Doudin (1999) has rightly suggested, support measures depend upon a paradox which consists of wanting to better integrate migrant pupils by excluding them from their age group, either for a brief period (support outside the classroom) or for longer period (smaller classes), even in some cases permanently (development classes). This paradox is all the more noticeable because these methods of exclusion affect precisely those migrant pupils who are trying their best to integrate into the host country.

6 Conclusion

Switzerland displays a strong cultural diversity which can be observed on two distinct levels. Firstly, the country’s composition is diverse, since there are four different linguistic regions and twenty-six cantons (each entirely responsible for its education system) resulting in regional diversity. Secondly, the country’s great diversity can be attributed to successive waves of migration. Concerning this diversity, Switzerland seems sometimes to fall between two stools, since it recognizes diversity but wants also to conserve its extremely decentralized political organization and its historical national identity. In our opinion, these two trends are not necessarily opposed to each other; they could also lead to policies of integration (as perceived by Berry (1991) discussed in Chap. 4, stressing the need to maintain links with the original cultures while establishing those with the host culture). Nevertheless, these two objectives confront each other when political propositions⁸ are put to the vote. In fact, there have been a large number of popular initiatives intending to limit the rights of foreigners (or at least not extending them), which however have often been refused during popular referendums.

Within the Swiss school, tensions are also evident. The evolution in the CDIP’s recommendations illustrates a change in its opinion about migration in the school context. Today, migrant pupils are considered as full members of the Swiss school. Their affiliations of identity must be recognized at the same time as their integration is facilitated. Numerous initiatives, often supported from within the education system, reflect these recommendations and recognize the cultural origins of pupils with migrant backgrounds.

Nevertheless, the statistical analysis of foreign pupils’ school careers in Switzerland shows that, despite initiatives in their favour aimed at integration, their future is still frequently predicted by their origins. Through the analyses in this chapter, we have shown that these pupils are over-represented in less-demanding streams and they are more frequently at risk of dropping out (OFS, 2018). Concerning their subsequent training, Switzerland promotes particularly vocational training; however, the stakes remain high on the choice—by the pupil—of future studies.

There remain, therefore, a number of challenges to be overcome in Switzerland in order that the recognition of cultural diversity can be introduced at all levels of the education system.