Today in Riga (27/10/2016) I was part of a conference, which considered questions related to quality in informal adult education.

Since I represent the Latvian Association of Teachers of English (LATE) I spoke not only about the work of the Association but also about some of the problems that we face in getting involved in the informal sector.

IN 2017, we will be celebrating our 25th anniversary and during this time our brief has been to provide professional development courses and opportunities for teachers of English in Latvia. This year alone, we have organized our annual conference, a summer school for the British Council, sat on numerous advisory groups at the Ministry of Education, sent a couple of teachers and some of their students to a Tolerance Camp in Lithuania which we have run with the support of the Embassy of the United States in Riga. Also, every month we run a Teachers’ Club(TC) where the teachers discuss issues, which concern them most.

The reason for the outline of what we are involved in is that except for the Teachers Club, the participants get a certificate, which their school directors recognize. We will give a certificate to the participants of the TC , but these will NOT be recognized by the school directors!

BUT – the ridiculous thing is that if I (or any members of LATE ) run workshops under LATE’s umbrella, school directors will not accept our certificates. If we run the same sessions with approved local council or Ministry registered courses then the certificate is accepted! Strange? Odd?  Why?

And, that’s the problem:

• Latvian law requires that we are registered as an educational institution (the criteria are impossible for us to fulfill)
• Programmes must be approved – we can find a way to do this but it is time-consuming and does not allow us to act spontaneously and is often dishonest.

LATE

• Does not conduct courses/workshops following a template – we custom tailor each activity for our clients – and this is something that the system cannot accept.
• We believe that an individual approach works best
• If lecturers have ownership of their courses/seminars then they will do a better job.

The Ministry, or maybe it is society, seems to require an assembly line approach with extremely tight controls. There seems to be a prevalent culture of not wanting to trust teachers to make their own decisions ie. be able to decide for themselves what workshops are worth attending and what are not.

25 years after independence and we still do not trust teachers? Unbelievable!

It begs the question; when will this time come?

Anyway, these constraints really inhibit LATE’s ability to run say language courses for the general public, which would also generate some income in order for us to be able to improve our offerings to our teachers.

At the moment, we are all volunteers, with no salaried staff, with no suitable premises to enable us to register as an educational institution.

Our experience is not unique. I suspect that almost all the professional subject associations are caught in the same bind.  The associations have excellent reputations – the best lecturers are generally speaking our members and we are the ones who ensure that our teachers are kept up to date with the latest trends in the profession.

And yet, the Ministry seems intent on keeping our hands tied. Why?

Silvija Andernovics MA TEFL Latvian Association of Teachers of English – President.