Learning, Teaching, and the Space Between

The Guatemalan school year runs from January through October, which means that this is our last week teaching in the schools until January. When we, the new group of PDs, began running English programs, we did so more than halfway through the Guatemalan school year. And while we’ve only run these programs for a few short months, the semester’s end provides a valuable opportunity for reflection and evaluation.

Though I’ve spent the past three months teaching English, I’ve done so in two very different settings. The first of my programs is Teachers’ English, which equips elementary school teachers with the skills and materials necessary to teach English in their own classrooms. I also helped lead a new section of After School English. This program differs from all of our other English programs in that it occurs outside of regular school hours. It’s essentially an extracurricular activity, which gives us, as teachers, more control over the schedule, discipline, and grading.

Having dedicating hours to lesson planning, I’ve often stepped back to ask myself why. Why do we teach English? What are the community members gaining from these programs? MPIG has asked this question more than once. We teach because that’s what the community requested that we do. They see our English language skills as a valuable asset in their community. If that’s the case, then that’s what we’ll do, trusting that the community knows its own needs better than we do. But we also teach to cultivate trust and relationships with teachers, students, parents, and administrators. In this respect, it doesn’t really matter what we’re teaching. The point is that we’re in the schools, week after week, building Manna’s reputation as a consistent and reliable presence in the community.

Given these facts, my favorite part about teaching English has been watching my students learn. Some of the kids in After School English—the majority, even—learn just enough material to eke by on their exams (if that much). They pay attention in class, though they rarely study at home. But a handful of my students have taken ownership of their English education, and it’s incredible to see just how quickly they learn when they do so. Two students have even started bringing their younger siblings—kids no older than 6 or 7—to class with them. The older students learn the material and then teach it to their younger siblings. I’ve seen a similar phenomenon in my Teachers’ English class, in which the most dedicated students are both kindergarten teachers—in other words, they will never need to teach a word of English in their own classrooms. But they come week after week, studying at home, learning at a much faster pace than their peers. One of the women told me she does so simply because she enjoys learning.

In some ways, it doesn’t really matter what my students are learning. I could teach them math, or German, or cake decorating (if I knew how to do any of those things!), and some of the benefits would remain unchanged. Learning provides individuals—children and adults, Americans and Guatemalans alike—with confidence and self-assurance that is a valuable part of human development. Think about it: education is one of the world’s oldest institutions, having played a role in virtually every one of the important ancient world civilizations. I’ve spent 18 years of my own life as a student, but as a teacher in Guatemala, I’ve had the opportunity to participate in education in a new way. And so, while our English language programs these past few months have contributed to Manna’s presence in Chaquijyá, they’ve also contributed to my own growth as a person and as a teacher.

Who will you vote for?

Though the 2012 American presidential election is still (more than) a year away, election season already is very much upon us. As a native Texan, I’ve watched Rick Perry’s campaign for the 2012 Republican nomination with relish. The man elicits strong reactions from Texans: some hate the man as much as they did his predecessor George W., while others attribute Texas’ relatively strong economy to Perry’s leadership. Either way, Texans have opinions about Perry, and they’ve expressed them freely and frequently in the past month.

And while Americans watch these elections unfold, most of us will limit our participation to just that: watching. Yes, we follow the major issues, discuss them with one another, and hopefully make an informed vote come November. But candidates expect little more than votes from the majority of us (that’s what matters in the end, after all).

It’s an entirely different scenario in Guatemala, where more than a dozen parties are represented in the elections taking place this Sunday. These parties come from all points on the political spectrum, from the radically leftist Frente Amplio to Partido Patriota, whose slogan “Mano Dura” reflects the party’s hard line against increasing criminal activity in Guatemala. Come November 2012, Americans will, for the most part, be deciding between the Republican and Democratic candidates. But election day in Guatemala is this Sunday, and while Perez Molina of Partido Patriota leads the polls by a significant margin, Guatemalans have myriad candidates from which to choose (unless Molina gets 50% of the vote this Sunday—which is unlikely—the country will hold a second round of presidential elections this November).

But while the entire country watches and waits for the results of the presidential election, Guatemalans are arguably more invested in local elections, which may be even more intense than the national ones. Here in Sololá, political parades, rallies, and caravans are such a normal feature of daily life that I can’t imagine the streets without them (though I’ll admit that I’m looking forward to the day when I don’t hear a remixed, political version of “Danza Kuduro” every fifteen minutes from my bedroom window). Pickup trucks, chicken buses, and tuc-tucs have all been converted to display political statements, advertising party colors and slogans. Processions make their way through town blaring campaign promises through loudspeakers. Personally, I’ve found the amount of community interest and participation in these elections to be astounding. Community members organize and attend political rallies and pass out flyers and bumper stickers. Furthermore, many of them know the candidates personally. For example, both of the schools with which we work have teachers that are running for office.

I can’t help but watch the campaign process in Guatemala and think, “so this is what democracy looks like.” Most of us know that George Washington himself condemned the two-party system under which we now operate in the United States; Guatemala’s multi-party system seems to encourage a level of community investment that just doesn’t occur in the states. Of course, that amount of participation has its dark side, too, and Guatemala isn’t always the safest place to be during the days following an election (don’t worry—we’ll be laying low for the next week).

There exists a major disconnect, however, between election season and the years that follow the elections, during which time politicians in Guatemala very rarely follow through on their promises—not to mention the fact that political corruption runs deep in Guatemala, and that the country’s impunity rate is one of the highest in the world. And maybe that’s why Guatemalans have such strong opinions and so much invested in election results: there is still much work that remains to be done in their nation.

It’s a fascinating time to be living and working in Guatemala. We’ll keep you updated on the results of this weekend’s election and, if they occur, on the run-off in November. Stay tuned.

In Search of a "Better Life"

If you've been following this blog for awhile, you're probably aware that MPIG is in a period of transition: our year-one PDs have been despedida-ed (some of them more than once!), and year two is in full swing. My name is Kelsey, and I'm pleased to bring you the first post from MPIG team 2011-2012 (read about the new team here).

Last month, the New York Times published this article by Damien Cave. In it, Cave explores the recent decline in illegal immigration to the US from Mexico, which is currently the lowest it’s been since the 1950s. Many Mexicans living in the States have started returning (of their own volition) to their native country. This fact, combined with the sharp decline in illegal traffic to the US, indicates that net traffic may even be negative.

Cave attributes the phenomenon to the fact that those living in Mexico now have access to “better lives” than ever before. But what constitutes this “better life”? The term is a general one—fittingly so. The idea of a “better life” simplifies development theory into what we all know and understand. In Mexico, that change has occurred over the past half-century. The nation has metamorphosed into a more prosperous and economically stable country. Today, Mexican people enjoy rapidly developing educational opportunities, increases in per capita GDP, and expanding job markets. Overlook the drug wars (which are, depending on who you talk to, somewhat contained), and Mexico is a pretty great place to be at the moment.

I like to imagine that Guatemala may be on the same path as Mexico—just a few decades behind. Like many of the world’s struggling countries, Guatemala suffers from a combination of illiteracy and unemployment that plagued Mexico just a few decades ago. And while economic and educational opportunities have contributed to Mexico’s progress, Cave identifies an important cultural change as well: declining birth rates. Smaller families don’t experience the financial burden that comes with feeding ten (or more) children. This is a notoriously difficult issue in Guatemala, where conservative values dominate indigenous culture, regardless of religious affiliation. This weekend I spoke with a cab driver in Guatemala City who attributed much of his country’s current struggles to the fact that, outside the city, discussing sexual health or family planning was tantamount to un pecado: a sin.

And as large families divide farmable land among multiple children (in accordance with traditional inheritance practices), new generations have less and less resources with which to feed their children. A family of twelve may be forced to feed itself using only a fifth of the land with which the previous generation accomplished the same task. Recent government programs have attempted to address the issue by distributing bolsas, bags of food staples like eggs and beans, to families in need. But these programs fluctuate as administrations change, and food often does not end up in the mouths of the children who struggle most to fend off chronic malnutrition. The alternative? Seek income elsewhere. Many Guatemalans do so by cooperating with drug cartels. Or they immigrate to the United States.

As Americans, we often ignore the fact that immigration is a global, international issue. We tend to isolate the issue from the other social and economic issues in other nations to which it is inextricably tied. But if Cave’s analysis of the transformation in Mexico is correct, then immigration is part of a broader picture: the multifaceted process by which struggling nations develop. Cave’s article provides a macro example of what Manna Project’s small-scale models are based on: holistic development. No one change in a culture or economy can catapult a community—or a nation—into prosperity.