Agenda Profile: Ants Frosch
A written motion submitted by 22 members of the Riigikogu for a vote of no confidence in the Minister of Education and Research, Kristina Kallas
2024-05-06
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session.
Political Position
The political stance is highly critical of the Minister of Education's actions, particularly concerning the instruction of non-Estonian speaking children in primary schools. The primary emphasis is placed on Estonian children failing to complete the required curriculum and the resulting loss of their future competitiveness. This position is clearly outcome-based and centered on safeguarding the educational interests of Estonian children.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise in the field of education, utilizing specific terminology such as "special support," "class composition," and "educationally developmentally delayed." The expertise centers on practical implementation issues in small schools, particularly concerning teacher shortages and the impact of language immersion on learning outcomes. They present concrete scenarios (e.g., four non-native speaking children in a class of ten) to illustrate the problem.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is formal and concerned, emphasizing logical argumentation (the lack of special support leads to developmental delay). Rhetorical questions are used, drawing attention to the concerns of parents and the consequences of the policy. In the second speech, slight irony or skepticism emerges when describing opportunities for cooperation ("to cook a richer soup").
2 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
Data is unavailable. The remarks were presented as questions during the debate on the motion of no confidence at the Riigikogu session.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The primary opposition is directed at the Minister of Education and Research and the implementation of the policies under their leadership. The criticism is policy-driven, focusing on the lack of specialized support and its negative impact on the education of Estonian children. The intensity of the criticism is high because it concerns the future competitiveness of children and stunted educational development.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The cooperation style is one of cautious opposition, while acknowledging the theoretical possibility of discussing specific school issues. At the same time, the speaker skeptically points out that this kind of limited cooperation will not resolve the systemic issue regarding the broader lack of specialized support.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is regional, centering on the issues of "small schools" and "small localities." Specifically highlighted is the teacher shortage in these regions, which impedes the provision of specialized support.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
The economic perspectives are implicit, emphasizing the direct impact of educational deficits on children's future "competitiveness." This points to the belief that the quality of education is a critical factor in ensuring future economic success.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The main social issue is the impact of education policy and linguistic integration on primary schools. The speaker emphasizes the need to protect the right of Estonian children to complete the curriculum and prevent their educational developmental delay, which is caused by insufficient special support for non-Estonian-speaking pupils.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
No data available. The discussions focus on the deficiencies and consequences arising from the implementation of the existing education policy, rather than on new bills or proposed amendments.
2 Speeches Analyzed