Agenda Profile: Jaak Valge

The political position is strongly value-based and focuses on protecting the status of the Estonian language in both academic and public spheres. The speaker vigorously opposes the Anglicization of higher education, deeming it an inexplicable abandonment of the language of science, especially in the absence of demonstrable academic success. The criticism is aimed at the minister's assessment of the situation, which, in the speaker's view, contradicts the clear negative trend observed over the last five years. The policy is directed toward holding universities accountable and modifying migration policy to ensure the dominance of the Estonian language.

The speaker demonstrates comprehensive expertise in the fields of higher education and language policy, highlighting specific statistical data regarding the number of doctoral students, the proportion of foreign-language curricula, and net migration figures. Technical terminology is employed, and specific rankings (CWTS Leiden Ranking) and clauses of administrative agreements are referenced to substantiate the claims. This expertise is further supported by referencing the views of language experts (Martin Ehala, Peeter Päll) concerning the necessity of the practical application of academic language.

The rhetorical style is polemical, logical, and data-driven, emphasizing the need to substantiate claims with figures, contrasting with the minister's "general beliefs or ideology." Quotes and specific examples are utilized (e.g., the required length of doctoral thesis abstracts and a comparison with the University of Helsinki) to ensure the criticism is sharp and detailed. The tone is concerned and demanding, stressing that the ongoing trend is more than just incomprehensible, as it yields no corresponding academic success.

The speaker's pattern of activity demonstrates consistency, as this current inquiry is a continuation of two previous inquiries submitted on March 17. This pattern includes detailed follow-up, where the speaker re-examined the doctoral dissertations scheduled for defense this spring and seven university rankings. The speaker is prepared to engage in debate to ensure the recognition of facts and trends.

The main confrontation is with the policy of the Minister of Education and Research and the ministry, who are accused of ignoring and enabling the narrowing of the scope of use of the Estonian language. Criticism is also directed at the universities (Tallinn University of Technology and the University of Tartu) for failing to fulfill administrative agreements regarding the promotion of Estonian as a language of science. The Minister has been accused of providing an "intelligently retreating" response and denying the situation, which prevents peace in the house.

The style of cooperation is evident within the group of questioners who submitted the follow-up inquiry, but broader cross-party collaboration is not mentioned. The speaker highlights and recognizes positive examples within the academic community, naming a doctoral student and their supervisors (Elisabeth Kaukonen, Liina Lindström, Raili Marling) for an exemplary Estonian-language summary.

The focus is heavily on the national level, concentrating on the status of the Estonian language and the quality of higher education in Estonia, specifically at the University of Tartu and TalTech. International comparisons (such as the University of Helsinki and the CWTS Leiden Ranking) and examples from other countries (Moldova, Georgia) are used to evaluate the situation in Estonia and substantiate the criticism.

The speaker objects to the practice of using international students as cheap labor, stressing that they came to Estonia to study, not to work. Criticism is leveled against "transit education," given that most foreign students leave Estonia shortly thereafter due to their lack of Estonian language proficiency. The economic viewpoints emphasize that migration policy must be geared toward supporting the long-term contribution of a workforce that possesses Estonian language skills.

The primary social concern is the preservation and dominance of the Estonian language in the public sphere, which is perceived as being threatened by the current migration policy and net migration figures. Systemic language instruction is demanded for foreign students in order to strengthen their ties with Estonia. The speaker sharply criticizes the Russian-language website of the Ministry of Education and Research, deeming it inappropriate.

The legislative focus centers on overseeing the execution of existing administrative agreements, particularly regarding the preservation and advancement of the Estonian academic language at the University of Tartu and TalTech. The speaker stresses the necessity of amending migration policy and references the 2020 findings of the National Audit Office, which support the requirement for systematic language instruction for international students.