Education Monitor: Around The Globe between April 15th and April 30th, 2025 Edition

Broken Chalk proudly presents a new edition of “Education Monitor: Around the Globe” between April 5sht and April 30th,, 2025 Broken Chalk aims with this letter to increase public awareness of  Educational problems, challenges, and violations in the scope of the world. This newsletter is unique. This is a weekly newsletter in which we attempt to monitor and convey educational news from around the world in a concise manner. This monitor will be published biweekly with the effort of our young and enthusiastic team.

You can contribute to our work if you like. If you witness any violations in the scope of education, you can write the comment part of this post. Broken Chalk will try to address the issue in its next monitor edition.

April-15th-till-April-30th-2025

To download this edition as a PDF, click here

Broken Chalk Platform, in March 2019, was founded by a group of educators abroad who experienced and have been experiencing severe human rights violations in Turkey and had to ask for asylum currently in several countries.

These education volunteers also suffered greatly and started their new lives in their new countries without human rights violations. They gained respect just because they were considered human beings in those countries. However, they left one part of their minds and hearts in their homeland. They assigned themselves a new duty, and the human rights violations they left behind had to be announced to the World. A group of education volunteers who came together for this purpose started their activities under the Broken Chalk platform’s umbrella. However, the Broken Chalk platform was not enough to serve their aims. Therefore, they completed their official establishment as a Human Rights Foundation in October 2020.

Broken Chalk is now much more than a platform, and we have reviewed and enlarged our vision and mission within this framework. Violations of rights would be the first in our agenda in the field of Education all over the World. At the point we reached today, Broken Chalk opened its door to all individuals from all across the globe, from all professions, and to all individuals who say or can say ‘I also want to stand against violations of human rights in Education for our future and whole humanity, where our generations grow up together.’

Education is essential because it can help us eliminate the evils from society, introduce, and increase the good. We want to draw the public’s and stakeholders’ attention to the fact that Education is in danger in several different parts of the World. The attacks are wide-reaching, from the bombing of schools to the murder of students and teachers. Raping and sexual violence, arbitrary arrests, and forced recruitment also occurred, instigated by armed groups. Attacks on Education harm the students and teachers but also affect the communities in the short and long term.

We invite all individuals who want to stop human rights violations in Education to become Volunteers at Broken Chalk.

Education Monitor: Around The Globe between April1st and April15th, 2025 Edition

Broken Chalk proudly presents a new edition of “Education Monitor: Around the Globe” between April 1st and April 15th,, 2025 Broken Chalk aims with this letter to increase public awareness of  Educational problems, challenges, and violations in the scope of the world. This newsletter is unique. This is a weekly newsletter in which we attempt to monitor and convey educational news from around the world in a concise manner. This monitor will be published biweekly with the effort of our young and enthusiastic team.

You can contribute to our work if you like. If you witness any violations in the scope of education, you can write the comment part of this post. Broken Chalk will try to address the issue in its next monitor edition.

April-1st-till-April-15th-2025

To download this edition as a PDF, click here

Broken Chalk Platform, in March 2019, was founded by a group of educators abroad who experienced and have been experiencing severe human rights violations in Turkey and had to ask for asylum currently in several countries.

These education volunteers also suffered greatly and started their new lives in their new countries without human rights violations. They gained respect just because they were considered human beings in those countries. However, they left one part of their minds and hearts in their homeland. They assigned themselves a new duty, and the human rights violations they left behind had to be announced to the World. A group of education volunteers who came together for this purpose started their activities under the Broken Chalk platform’s umbrella. However, the Broken Chalk platform was not enough to serve their aims. Therefore, they completed their official establishment as a Human Rights Foundation in October 2020.

Broken Chalk is now much more than a platform, and we have reviewed and enlarged our vision and mission within this framework. Violations of rights would be the first in our agenda in the field of Education all over the World. At the point we reached today, Broken Chalk opened its door to all individuals from all across the globe, from all professions, and to all individuals who say or can say ‘I also want to stand against violations of human rights in Education for our future and whole humanity, where our generations grow up together.’

Education is essential because it can help us eliminate the evils from society, introduce, and increase the good. We want to draw the public’s and stakeholders’ attention to the fact that Education is in danger in several different parts of the World. The attacks are wide-reaching, from the bombing of schools to the murder of students and teachers. Raping and sexual violence, arbitrary arrests, and forced recruitment also occurred, instigated by armed groups. Attacks on Education harm the students and teachers but also affect the communities in the short and long term.

We invite all individuals who want to stop human rights violations in Education to become Volunteers at Broken Chalk.

Silenced Erasure of the Kurdish Language in Turkey’s Education System

Introduction 

Education is a basic human right. It is a pivotal tool for both the individual and the collective. It provides a base for self-fulfilment, self-development, and a brighter future; moreover, it offers [marginalized] communities a medium to preserve their culture, thus language, practices, art, literature, and history. Schooling has become a means of socialization, cultural transmission, and identity formation. Given such functions, however, education may become a propagandistic tool, a medium for an end far away from ethical values. For instance, it may transmit unity messages through a revision of history, like in the case of some Cyprian schoolbooks i Furthermore, education reproduces economic, cultural, and social inequalities; it is a primary mechanism of the network of power used by the State to punish, discipline, and legitimize. This paper focuses on such aspects of Turkey’s education system. In particular, the essay deals with Kurdish linguistic discrimination in Turkish schooling through specific legislative measures. Kurdish is an Indo-European language, related to Persian, and belongs to a different linguistic family tree from Turkish. There are two primary dialects of Kurdish: Sorani and Kurmanj ii. It is the fortieth most spoken language worldwide and the first in Kurdistan, a geo-cultural region divided between four countries ii. 

Methodology 

The essay will start by explaining the history of the Kurdish people. It will mention the first settlements in the area, how Kurds lived under the Ottoman Empire, and the changes that First World War brought. Then, the paper will explore the life of the Kurdish population in Turkey post-Lausanne, and highlight the discriminatory legislative measures taken to ensure internal cohesion. Finally, the essay will explain the consequences of such “linguicide”iii on education.  

The paper is based on academic manuscripts, national newspaper articles, a qualitative interview, and blogs.  

This essay focuses exclusively on discrimination faced by the Kurdish population; however, it is important to mark how other Muslim minorities are negatively impacted by such nationalistic policies.  

 

A Look At The Past 

Kurdistan has the nickname of “invisible nationiv:” it is there, it exists, but it doesn’t have any tangible geo-political borders. This section will focus on such invisibility. 

Kurdish people have lived in Central Anatolia since the Middle Ages when the first tribe arrived in 1184v.Then, three centuries later, they founded the first large settlement named Kürtler, in proximity to modern-day Ankaravi When the Ottomans reached the region, they formed an alliance with Kurdish groups and the latter worked as local officials and informators during the Battle of Chaldiran. Due to their great involvement in belligerent actions, the Ottoman Empire rewarded the tribes. The Kurds benefitted from fiscal exceptions, and the recognition of a semi-autonomous status, entailing virtual independence and the maintenance of the Kurdish tribal organizative systemviiOttomans and Kurds’ relationship changed in the 1830s with the start of a centralization process, resulting in the weakening of the Kurdish semi-autonomous status and tribal system.  

 

During the First World War, Kurds’ dissatisfaction with the Empire resulted in a series of uprisings. The relationship with the Ottomans deteriorated as the Kurdish people wanted more autonomy and aimed at the creation of a Kurdish state. They fought the Ottomans encouraged by the British and the Russians who shared the idea of Kurdish independence. When the war ended, the Kurds should have received an independent state, according to the Treaty of Sevrès which promoted self-determination and autonomy for nationalities under the Ottomans. However, the Kurdish population was split into 4 States: Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Turkeyviii. 

Kurds in Turkey 

The Treaty of Lausanne officialised the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire and the partition of the Kurdish population. The new Turkish leader, Mustafa Atatürk promised to treat the Kurdish minority equal to the Turkish population. However, the Treaty itself recognized only non-Muslim minorities in Turkish territories: Greeks, Jews, and Armenians ix; as a result, the Kurdish population was left out, without any concrete protectionsxand, despite the promises,  the Turkish President promoted a process of assimilation and homogenization which entailed territorial reforms and the removal of the “Kurds race”xi. The government aimed at canceling any trace of multi-ethnicityxii as it represented a threat to internal unity. Inhabitants of the Dersim region refused the new policies and did not pay taxes; thus, it became Turkey’s “…most significant interior problem…”xiii.The government levied new laws to contain the threat. They involved displacement: Dersim kids were forced to attend schools outside their native region and Dersim authorities were free to resettle the residentsxiv. Moreover, in the Eastern part of the country, Turkish troops led a massacre that killed over 4000 civiliansxv.  

 

Kurdish: a forbidden language 

“New-born” Turkey made cultural homogenization and assimilation its goal. Everybody must be of Turkish heritage, and, in case this is not plausible, everybody must act like a Turk, marry a Turk, and speak like a Turk. In 1924, the Turkish government banned the Kurdish language, Kurdish dictionaries, and the words “Kurdistan” and “Kurds”xvi. The government also kept the schooling rate low in Kurdish regions in fear of future independence ideas and national consciousnessxvii. Turkish nation-building went through processes of forced standardization, cultural assimilation, and consequent domestic and international legislative measures to legitimize the subordination of non-Turkish languages. For instance, domestically, the Constitution proclaims Turkish as the mother tongue and the official language of the State; internationally, Turkey expressed doubts regarding Article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which states that individuals belonging to minorities should not be refused the right to speak their language, perform cultural activities, and profess their religionxviii. Furthermore, it had some reservations regarding articles of the UN Convention Right of Child proclaiming that kids from minority groups have the right to preserve their cultural identityxix. Finally, the country refused to sign the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages which states that minorities have the right to learn and speak their first languagexx. 

 

Linguistic homogenization aims to awaken a sense of nation, identity, and community within people living in the same State. Such a strategy is implemented through education; thus, it is no surprise that Turkey follows a one-language instruction policy, prohibiting public schools from teaching Kurdish as a native language. As a matter of fact, Article forty-two of the Constitution states that “no language other than Turkish may be taught as a mother tongue to Turkish citizens at any institutions of training or education.” Moreover, in 1980, following the military coup, the government banned the usage of Kurdish in public and private life. Despite the prohibitions, teachers unofficially and secretively still used Kurdish in madrasah institutionsxxi. The ban on domestic usage would be lifted in 1991xxii. Turkey implemented positive education reforms in the following decades, attentive to minority rightsxxiii. For instance, the first Kurdish language class is organized at the University in Mardin. Moreover, fourth-grade-and-up schools offered Kurdish lessons as electivesxxiv.  

The status of the Kurdish language changed after the 2016 military coup when Kurdish media programs were terminated, and Kurdish cultural institutions, and NGOs were shut down. Furthermore, the government closed private schools teaching in Kurdish and language departments of universitiesxxv. Such legislative and governmental adversity towards the Kurdish language led to popular aggressions. In 2019, an elder couple was expelled from an hospital after they spoke Kurdish to each other; in 2020, several seasonal workers were killed because of “kurdophobia” a couple of years prior, an elementary school kid was beaten up for speaking his language with their family on the phone xxvi. 

 

Education, Employment and Language 

The consideration of the Kurdish language held by the Turkish State “…as a divisive, existential threat rather than an instrument of unity…”xxvii has terrible effects on the realm of education. 

Kurds do not have the right to learn their native language as a subject or employ it as a medium to study other educational topics. In some Eastern parts of Turkey, like Diyarbakir, parents oppose the governmental policies and encourage their children to “academically” learn Kurdish. For instance, a human-right activist from that area sent his child to a Zarokistan preschool xxviii. Moreover, in the Eastern and Southeastern parts of the country, where the majority of the Kurdish population resides, people still speak the vernacular at home. Researchers identified several issues connected to the erasure of the Kurdish language in schoolsxxix. Firstly, a linguistic -and legislative- barrier separated Turkish-speaking teachers and Kurdish-speaking pupils. They do not understand each other, forcing the former to stay quiet in class as they could not express themselves in the correct languagexxx. Secondly, Kurdish students usually learn how to read and write and develop literary skills, and comprehension later than their counterparts xxxi. They are generally made to fail and, thus, repeat the grade. Those who have to repeat several years tend to develop a negative view of schooling and drop outxxxii. According to Balkan and Cilasunxxxiii, Kurds have a lower rate of finishing high school studies than their Turkish counterparts, and even less probabilities of achieving a bachelor’s degree or higher education. Quitting school before completion leads to unemployment and poverty, hence “uneducated” people are employed as “low-skilled,” unspecialized workers. My interviewee identified two different job paths for Kurdish and Turkish people. The latter tend to work in more mentally draining fields; whereas, the former are employed in physical fields such as construction, and agriculture. Another disadvantage that Kurdish people face is their place of living as location correlates with employment: people living in urban areas experience better labour market outcomes. Turkish urban areas tend to be populated by Turks, whereas the Kurdish population tend to reside in rural locationsxxxiv. Education and location come together and created disadvantageous circumstances for the Kurdish people in the workplace Kurdish people tend to be unemployment longer than their Turkish counterparts xxxv.  

 

The subordination of the Kurdish language leads to catastrophic consequences in the educational dimension. As a matter of fact, such linguistic -and cultural- discrimination measures create a hostile learning environment, and the school becomes an oppression site, instead of a liberation force. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights proclaims that “everyone has the right to education” and the Turkish Constitution declares that “no one shall be deprived of the right of education;” however, various factors interfere between Kurdish students and the achievement of education. The Turkish nation-building project stand on “othering” processes, thus on dividing citizens with Turkish heritage from citizens belonging to ethnic minorities by implementing strategies to standardize the former and forcing the latter to adjust their language and culture to the finely crafted norm. Ethnic minorities, including Kurdish people, hence, become an obstacle to a strong national sentiment, and education becomes a weapon, another mechanism through which dissolving multi-ethnicity by reproducing the language everybody must speak and the culture everybody must adhere to. Schooling, however, should not be an aggressive weapon, but rather an emancipation tool for the individual and the community. Kurdish people do not benefit from education and do not have the same access to higher studies as Turkish people. It is important to implement policies that will positively impact marginalized groups’ schooling rates which will, eventually, lead to a betterment in future opportunities.  

 

Conclusion 

The essay delved into linguistic discrimination towards Kurdish people in scholastic environments. Language represents a pivotal tool for creating internal cohesion and a shared identity, and history, thus, the emphasis of Turkish authorities on the realization of linguistic homologation within the national borders. However, the legislative measures taken to achieve such a goal negatively impact learning-age children. As a matter of fact, despite the prohibitions, families still prefer to communicate in Kurdish and kids do not understand Turkish when starting the first grade; as a result, a student with a Kurdish background will face more obstacles than their Turkish counterparts, leading them to develop a negative view of education and quitting school.  

It is pivotal to tackle this issue, internationally and domestically, to ensure that 1) Kurdish-heritage kids have the same opportunities as Turkish-heritage kids and 2) no erasure of the Kurdish language is carried out. 

REFERENCES

i Eriksen, Thomas Hylland. Small Places, Large Issues: An Introduction to Social and Cultural Anthropology. London: Plutopress, (1995) 2015. 

ii Hassanpour, Amir, Tove Skutnabb-Kangas, and Michael Chyet. The Non-Education of Kurds: A Kurdish Perspective. International Review of Education / Internationale Zeitschrift Für Erziehungswissenschaft / Revue Internationale de L’Education 42 (4): 368. 1996 

iii Idem, 369. 

iv Torelli, Stefano. Kurdistan La Nazione Invisibile. Milano: Mondadori, 2017. 

v Cowen, Katie. The Kurdish Dilemma in Turkey. Washington Kurdish Institute. 2023. https://dckurd.org/2023/01/26/the-kurdish-dilemma-in-turkey-2/. 

 vi Ibid. 

vii McDowall, David. A Modern History of the Kurds. London: I.B. Tauris. 1997.  

viii Ali, Othman. The Kurds and the Lausanne Peace Negotiations, 1922-23. Middle Eastern Studies 33 (3): 521–34. 1997. 

https://www.jstor.org/stable/4283891 

ix LoBianco, Joseph. The Cultural Dimension in the Educational Process (The case of Turkey). Maat for Peace, Development and Human Rights. 2016.  https://www.jstor.org/stable/3444908.

xi Cowen, Katie. The Kurdish Dilemma in Turkey. Washington Kurdish Institute. 2023. https://dckurd.org/2023/01/26/the-kurdish-dilemma-in-turkey-2/. 

xii Çevik, Esra. KURDISH LANGUAGE RIGHTS and MOTHER TONGUE in EDUCATION. Civil Rights Defenders, 2. 2019. 

https://crd.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/EUTH-Turkey-Kurdish-Language-Rights-Mother-Tongue-in-Education-Esra-Cevik.pdf. 

xiii ibid.  

 xiv Ibid.  

xv Cowen, Katie. The Kurdish Dilemma in Turkey. Washington Kurdish Institute. 2023. https://dckurd.org/2023/01/26/the-kurdish-dilemma-in-turkey-2/. 

xvi Ibid.  

xvii Çevik, Esra. KURDISH LANGUAGE RIGHTS and MOTHER TONGUE in EDUCATION. Civil Rights Defenders, 2. 2019. 

https://crd.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/EUTH-Turkey-Kurdish-Language-Rights-Mother-Tongue-in-Education-Esra-Cevik.pdf. 

xviii LoBianco, Joseph. The Cultural Dimension in the Educational Process (The case of Turkey). Maat for Peace, Development and Human Rights. 2016. 

xix Kaczorowski, Karol. Kurdish Language and Multicultural Education in Turkey. Ez Mafê Xwe Dizanim! I Know My Rights! – Manual on Human Rights Education and the Right to Mother Tongue Education, 57. 2016. 

https://www.academia.edu/48963803/Kurdish_language_and_multicultural_education_in_Turkey. 

xx Ibid.  

xxi Ibid.  

xxii Hassanpour, Amir, Tove Skutnabb-Kangas, and Michael Chyet. The Non-Education of Kurds: A Kurdish Perspective. International Review of Education / Internationale Zeitschrift Für Erziehungswissenschaft / Revue Internationale de L’Education 42 (4): 371. 1996. 

https://www.jstor.org/stable/3444908. 

xxiii Aydin, Hasan. Status of Education and Minorities Rights in Turkey. Georgetown Journal of International Affairs. 2020. 

https://gjia.georgetown.edu/2020/12/20/status-of-education-and-minorities-rights-in-turkey/ 

xxiv Ibid.  

xxv Ibid.  

xxvi Editor. Suppression of Kurdish language in Turkey is reflection of general intolerance towards Kurds: community leader. 2021. https://stockholmcf.org/suppression-of-kurdish-language-in-turkey-is-reflection-of-general-intolerance-towards-kurds-community-leader/ 

xxviii Letsch, Constanze. In Turkey, Repression of the Kurdish Language Is Back, with No End in Sight. The Nation. 2017.  

https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/in-turkey-repression-of-the-kurdish-language-is-back-with-no-end-in-sight/ 

xxix Çevik, Esra. KURDISH LANGUAGE RIGHTS and MOTHER TONGUE in EDUCATION. Civil Rights Defenders, 4.2019. 

https://crd.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/EUTH-Turkey-Kurdish-Language-Rights-Mother-Tongue-in-Education-Esra-Cevik.pdf. 

xxx ibid.  

xxxi Ibid.  

xxxii Ibid.  

xxxiii Balkan, Binnur and Seyit Mumin Cilasun. ETHNIC DISCRIMINATION IN THE TURKISH LABOR MARKET: EVIDENCE FROM SURVEY AND FIELD DATA. 2018.  

xxxiv Ibid. 

 xxxv Ibid.  

 

Photo by ‪Salah Darwish on Unsplash

School Shooting in the U.S: The Urgent Need for Change and Prevention 

Shooting at American schools has become fatal phenomenon that has caused the loss of the lives of many students and educators. According to CNN’s report as of November 11, this year alone the number of school shootings in the US has reached 76, resulting in 36 deaths and at least 103 injuries (CNN, 2024). Sadly, according to the statistics, for the last decades this number has continued to increase, evoking strong concern among students, parents, educators, and communities.  

One of the earliest recorded incidents occurred in 1966 in Washington and Tennessee. In both crimes, an armed high school student killed a teacher and several students (Midlarsky et al., 2005). In 1999 Columbine High School massacre became a defining moment in the history of school shootings, as two students killed 13 people before taking their own lives. Columbine not only shocked the nation but also introduced terms like “active shooter” into public discourse. Subsequent decades saw an increase in the frequency and severity of such incidents. Notable cases include the Virginia Tech shooting in 2007, where 32 lives were lost, and the Sandy Hook Elementary School tragedy in 2012, where 20 children and six educators were killed (Statista, 2024). These events have not only deepened the collective trauma but also reignited debates over gun control, mental health services, and school safety. 

How do such horrible incidents occur at safest public institutions where people trust their children? 

 Many experts agree that one key factor contributing to these tragedies is the U.S. gun ownership law, which allows any citizen above the age of 18 to legally own firearms, subject to minimal requirements. VCU homeland security expert William V. Pelfrey Jr. in his interview to the VCU news highlighted: “Guns are ubiquitous in the U.S. There are more guns than people. The U.S. population is about 334 million and the number of guns in the U.S. is more than 390 million” (WCUnews, 2022). On the other hand, justification on the behavior of the perpetrators is typically their mental health decline. Study conducted by Metzl and Macleish (2015) suggests that untreated mental health conditions can increase the likelihood of violent behaviour in a small subset of individuals. According to the BBC report (2023), violent actions can also be the result of an increase in life stressors, both overall and those intensified by the pandemic, particularly challenges related to finances, employment, and family or relationship dynamics. Peer dynamics also have an impact, as bullying or social rejection often leave individuals feeling isolated and resentful, which can escalate into violent behaviour (Borum et al., 2010). As it is seen, the factors contributing to school shootings are multifaceted and there is a complex interplay of social, psychological, and systemic factors. 

The Impact of school shootings on society 

The impact of school shootings on society is profound, extending far beyond the immediate victims and their families. These tragic events contribute to a pervasive sense of fear and insecurity, particularly within schools, which are traditionally considered safe spaces for children and educators. The research conducted by Maya Rossin-Slater (2022), the associate professor at Stanford University, revealed that even though students who have been physically unharmed by the shooting, have found consequences in their mental health as well as academic performances. It was shown that people under 20 who live near the school, where the shooting happened, consumed 21 % higher amounts of anti-depressants. Moreover, school shootings resulted in a decrease in student enrolment and a reduction in average test scores, together with the rise in the proportion of students’ absences. Simultaneously, school shootings have a significant impact on teachers, both professionally and personally. Many educators report feeling less safe in their classrooms, which can affect their teaching effectiveness and overall job satisfaction. Unfortunately, despite efforts to enhance school safety, gaps in preventative measures continue to exist and US schools remain not the safest place for both children and educators. 

The Impact of school shootings on the quality of education 

School shootings have far-reaching effects on the quality of education, disrupting learning environments and eroding educational outcomes. A primary concern is the frequent closures of schools following such incidents. These closures, which can last days or even weeks, interrupt the academic calendar, forcing students and teachers to grapple with gaps in learning. Even when schools reopen, increased security protocols—such as mandatory bag checks, metal detectors, and restricted access—lead to delayed start times, which cumulatively reduce classroom instruction hours (Stevenson, 2019). 

Additionally, the psychological toll on students and staff contributes to diminished academic performance. A study by Rossin-Slater et al. (2022) highlighted a marked decline in test scores and graduation rates in schools that experienced shootings. Persistent fear and anxiety among students hinder focus and engagement in lessons, while teachers face increased burnout and difficulty maintaining effective classroom management. These challenges underscore the long-term consequences of school shootings on both individual learning trajectories and the broader educational system. 

Conclusion 

School shootings in the United States represent a complex and urgent issue that demands immediate attention and comprehensive action. The increasing frequency and devastating impact of these tragic events underscore the need for stronger measures to address the root causes, including access to firearms, mental health challenges, and societal influences. In my opinion, this issue requires not only continued research but also the implementation of proactive, effective solutions to prevent further tragedies. Initial step is to tighten gun control laws with the minimum age over 25 for firearm purchases. In many cases, young people under 25 may still feel irresponsible for their own actions and still go through transition phase of growth. Moreover, people over the age of 25 typically have no direct involvement with schools. Secondly, educational institutions should be equipped with enhanced security measures, such as controlled access points and modern surveillance systems, but without disrupting the established school regime and educational process. Lastly, parents, educators, and policymakers should work collaboratively to identify warning signs, promote responsible gun ownership, and build a culture of nonviolence. Awareness campaigns that educate the public about the interconnected causes of school shootings can drive collective action and societal change.

The time to act is now to ensure that schools remain safe spaces for learning and development, free from the threat of violence.

References:

Borum, R., Cornell, D. G., Modzeleski, W., & Jimerson, S. R. 2010. What Can Be Done About School Shootings? A Review of the Evidence. Educational Researcher, 39(1), 27–37. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X09357620 

Irwin V., Wang K., Thompson A. 2021. Report on indicators of school crime and safety: National Center for Education Statistics. Accessed June 28. https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2022092  

Joan Tupponce. 2022. “Why do school shootings keep happening in the United States?”. VCUnews. June 17. https://www.news.vcu.edu/article/2022/06/why-do-school-shootings-keep-happening-in-the-united-states 

Metzl, J. M., & MacLeish, K. T. 2015. Mental Illness, Mass Shootings, and the Politics of American Firearms. American Journal of Public Health, 105(2), 240–249. https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.2014.302242 

Midlarsky, Elizabeth, and Helen Marie Klain. 2005. “A history of violence in the schools.” Violence in schools: Cross-national and cross-cultural perspectives. Boston, MA: Springer US. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/0-387-28811-2_3 

Rossin-Slater, Maya. 2022. “Surviving a school shooting: Impacts on the mental health, education, and earnings of American youth”. Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research (SIEPR). June. https://siepr.stanford.edu/publications/health/surviving-school-shooting-impacts-mental-health-education-and-earnings-american 

Statista. 2024. Number of victims of school shootings in the United States between 1982 and September 2024. September 11. https://www.statista.com/statistics/476381/school-shootings-in-the-us-by-victim-count/ 

Stevenson D. D. 2019. Gun Violence as an Obstacle to Educational Equality. 50 University of Memphis Law Review. November 25. P: 1091-1143. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3492793 

Yousif, Nadine. 2023. “Why number of US mass shootings has risen sharply”. BBC. March 28. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-64377360 

 

Photo by Samantha Sophia on Unsplash

Poverty and Inequality Within Thailand’s Education System

Thailand Divided: Inequality and Poverty  

The urban-rural divide in terms of education and life opportunities is stark in Thailand. Anand Panyarachun, the former Prime Minister of Thailand, stated that the country’s education system is steeped with an “inequality of opportunity”; that those who were given opportunities to move forward in life were often from favourable socio-economic backgrounds.i 

Thailand has the highest income inequality rate in East Asia and the Pacific region.ii According to The Economist in 2017: Thailand’s social divide is interlinked with its poor rating in education, with one-third of 15-year-olds in the country having been “functionally illiterate”.iii It was argued that the country focused too much on establishing small schools in villages, with almost half of them having less than 120 students and only one teacher per class. With the over-expansion of education at the cost of efficient and quality teachers, students rated in the bottom quarter of 70 countries in terms of maths, reading and science. 

  

In 2023, a United Nations Development Programme Report found that, compared to other ASEAN countries, Thailand has made the most progress in eradicating poverty.iv However, individuals who may live above the monetary poverty line may yet suffer from poor health, education and/or a lack of good standards of living. Thailand worked to reduce poverty from 58 percent in 1990 to 6.8 percent in 2020.v However, 79 percent of the poor people are from rural zones and work mainly in agriculture, and from 2016 onwards poverty increased in Thailand to reach over 3 percent in rural areas compared to urban ones. By 2020, the rural poor outnumbered the urban poor by 2.3 million. As rural households have an average monthly income of around 68 percent of those in urban households, they also face low education standards and opportunities. Indeed, UNICEF reports that the current levels of child grants received by the poor, which is 600 baht per month, is not adequate to meet their needs.vi 

 

Thailand Compared to Indonesia – A Personal Perspective 

In an interview with a current bachelor’s student studying in Singapore, the interviewee talked about their experiences in the Indonesian school system, where they studied for most of their life. In Samarinda City, a rural area, the interviewee noted that the quality of teaching was below average. Their school lacked facilities and specialized teachers, an issue which did not repeat itself when they moved to Jakarta to complete high school. There, the attention from the government was greater: “There is…quite a huge gap in equality I would say between the regions in Indonesia…” 

Due to the social inequalities in Thailand, more highly skilled youths are choosing to leave the nation to find better job opportunities elsewhere. In an opinion piece for Pacific Forum, Assavanadda claimed that some of the “push factors” for emigrants include dissatisfactions with the current socio-political order, weak welfare benefits, and economic downturn post-pandemic.vii Indeed, in a seminar about the future of Thai society, Former PM Panyarachun claimed that social inequality has pushed youths out of the country as they are failing to see a future for themselves if they stay.viii  

 

This might be true for more well-off individuals, but the reality for children from poor families remains disappointing: as richer parents send their kids to private schools in major cities like Bangkok and Pattaya to prepare them for overseas opportunities, less well-off families must contend with possibly barring their children from educational opportunities. As noted by Panyarachun, Thailand’s education is “beset” with an inequality in terms of the opportunities those from different classes are offered.ix 

 

Children Barred from Education: The Government Must Do More 

In a 2024 report by the Equitable Education Fund, it was estimated that 1.02 million children either dropped out of education or chose to stay home because of poverty; currently, 3 million students are at risk of withgoing education due to extreme poverty.x In a House of Representatives debate on the fiscal budget for 2025, MP Paramee Waichongcharoen from the Move Forward Party raised the issue of not enough attention being paid to the “dire needs” for extra funding that millions of students require to stay in education.xi  

 

MP Waichongcharoen said that the government was giving organizations aimed at removing educational disparities less funding than is required for efficient functioning. Although the Student Loan Fund (SLF) asked for 19 million baht in subsidies during the 2024 fiscal year, the government gave them only 800 million baht. A study by UNICEF and the Thailand Development Research Institute also revealed that over 34 percent of poor children fail to receive the monthly allowance that is promised to them under the Child Support Grant scheme.xii However, if Thailand were to spend 0.1 percent of their GDP on extra spending for the Child Support Grant, an action which is supported by 81 percent of Thais, over 1 million children under the age of 6 would benefit from the scheme in terms of health and nutrition.  

 

Recommendations 

Based on the challenges that have permeated the Thai social and educational system, some recommendations can be made to alleviate the social inequality and poverty faced by citizens.  

  1. Quality over quantity: (government) schools should focus more on employing qualified teachers to educate students in small village schools, instead of setting up more institutions and having only one teacher conduct educational activities. 
  2. Prioritise poverty reduction: more attention needs to be paid to the millions of students who are at risk of dropping out of education due to poverty. The government should spend more on funding the Child Support Grant scheme, given that over one-third of children in poverty fail to receive the benefits that are owed to them, and four-fifth of Thais support increasing support for the scheme.
  3. Motivate Thais to stay: the government should aim to strengthen Thailand’s social equality to motivate graduates to stay and work in the country rather than finding better opportunities elsewhere. In turn, the government will need to improve political discontentment and economic growth to provide firm grounds for better social equity. 

 

End notes 

i. nationthailand. (2024, May 25). Anand flags serious inequalities in Thailand’s education system. Nationthailand; null. https://www.nationthailand.com/news/general/40038310Modern Diplomacy. (2022). Rural Thailand Faces the Largest Poverty Challenges with High Income Inequality.

ii Modern Diplomacy. https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2022/10/21/rural-thailand-faces-the-largest-poverty-challenges-with-high-income-inequality/

iii. The Economist. (2017). Poor schools are at the heart of Thailand’s political malaise. The Economist. https://www.economist.com/asia/2017/01/19/poor-schools-are-at-the-heart-of-thailands-political-malaise?utm_medium=cpc.adword.pd&utm_source=google&ppccampaignID=18151738051&ppcadID=&utm_campaign=a.22brand_pmax&utm_content=conversion.direct-response.anonymous&gad_source=1&gclid=CjwKCAjwpbi4BhByEiwAMC8JnRd4s5naAnZ0qR7nxxFZRybdjEnS4R2jAVwV7mVdqAmXo-ViB7X7GRoCsF0QAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds  

 iv UNDP. (2023). Thailand is among 25 Countries that Halved Multidimensional Poverty Within 15 Years | United Nations Development Programme. UNDP. https://www.undp.org/thailand/press-releases/thailand-among-25-countries-halved-multidimensional-poverty-within-15-years

 v Modern Diplomacy. (2022). Rural Thailand Faces the Largest Poverty Challenges with High Income Inequality. Modern Diplomacy. https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2022/10/21/rural-thailand-faces-the-largest-poverty-challenges-with-high-income-inequality/

iv UNICEF. (2024). A new study finds 34 per cent of poor children in Thailand are excluded from the Child Support Grant. Unicef.org. https://www.unicef.org/thailand/press-releases/new-study-finds-34-cent-poor-children-thailand-are-excluded-child-support-grant

vii. Assavanadda, A. J. M. (2024). Explore Pacific Forum’s Insightful Indo-Pacific Analysis. Pacific Forum. https://pacforum.org/publications/yl-blog-65-thailands-brain-drain-challenge-trends-and-implications/ 

viii. nationthailand. (2024, May 25). Anand flags serious inequalities in Thailand’s education system. Nationthailand; null. https://www.nationthailand.com/news/general/40038310 

ix. nationthailand. (2024, May 25). Anand flags serious inequalities in Thailand’s education system. Nationthailand; null. https://www.nationthailand.com/news/general/40038310

x. Sattaburuth, A. (2024). Student poverty “falling on deaf ears.” Bangkok Post. https://www.bangkokpost.com/thailand/general/2814730/student-poverty-falling-on-deaf-ears

xi. Sattaburuth, A. (2024). Student poverty “falling on deaf ears.” Bangkok Post. https://www.bangkokpost.com/thailand/general/2814730/student-poverty-falling-on-deaf-ears

xii. UNICEF. (2024). A new study finds 34 per cent of poor children in Thailand are excluded from the Child Support Grant. Unicef.org. https://www.unicef.org/thailand/press-releases/new-study-finds-34-cent-poor-children-thailand-are-excluded-child-support-grant 

Physical and Psychological violence in Latin America, how does it hinder the quality of education.

Latin America is a diverse region in the American continent. The area consists of 33 countries where populations speak Latin languages. Latin America is known for its rich culture, hospitality, and joyful spirit for life (Redmond and Juliao 2022) i. However, like any other region in the world, Latin America comes with its own challenges particularly widespread violence. According to the Global Peace Index 2024, it is one of the most violent places in the world (World Population Review 2024)ii. Unfortunately, students cannot escape this violence either and sometimes they become victims of it in educational institutions.  This article will examine the relevance and impact of school violence on the quality of education in Latin America and discuss educational policies that can mitigate this issue. 

 

Bullying, a prominent issue in schools of Latin America 

When it comes to school violence, one of the most prominent issues globally is bullying, and Latin America is no exception. The definition of bullying is not standardized. Generally, it is understood as repeated behaviour with the intention of hurting someone (Government Digital Service 2011)iii. The behaviour may involve psychological and physical violence. For instance, psychological bullying might include name-calling, discriminatory jokes, and spreading rumours (Dimensions 2022)iv. Whilst physical bullying can involve vandalizing lockers, hitting, and shoving (Fraserhealth 2022)v. For example, the World Bank documented the case of one Latin American student who was the victim of physical abuse, insults, and name-calling (World Bank Group 2016)vi. This case perfectly illustrates what bullying is not an isolated incident. Despite the inconsistency in the data due to different methods of assessing and defining bullying (Vivolo-Kantor et al. 2014)vii, the studies still show a high prevalence of bullying across the region. 

 

In some statistics, the bullying rates in countries like Brazil, Mexico, and Argentina can be higher than 60% (World Bank Group 2016)viii. The issue was also highlighted in the PISA study.Primarily, Costa Rica faces the most significant challenge. The country ranked first in bullying among students globally, with 44% of students reporting being victims of bullying at some point in their lives. Colombia ranks 11th in the study and has a bullying prevalence rate of 23%. Brazil, Peru, and Chile are tied for 16th on the list with a rate of 20% (Tico Times 2024)ix. Another 2018 study summarizing different reports showed that the mean prevalence rate in the region was 29.3% (Herrera-López, Romera, and Ortega-Ruiz 2018)x. It should be noted that the issue has become systemic and extends beyond schools. For instance, 32.28% of university students have also encountered bullying in their universities (Franco and Puglia 2023)xi . 

Impact of Bullying on Students’s learning outcomes 

What is the impact of bullying on students’ learning outcomes? In general, bullying can cause fear and anxiety in victims (McLean Hospital 2024)xii. The anxiety may restrict students’ cognitive flexibility, such as adaptability to new situations or open-mindedness toward learning (RocketEd 2023)xiii. Victims also might have difficulty forming relationships with peers and teachers (McLean Hospital 2024)xiv. This is an issue because positive relationships with teachers and peers can increase students’ motivation to learn and be engaged (Yu et al. 2023)xv (Li, Bergin, and Olsen 2022)xvi . Another negative impact is that bullying decreases students’ participation in school-related activities (McLean Hospital 2024)xvii and sometimes even school attendance (Dunne et al. 2010)xviii. Most importantly, the bullying causes low educational attainment (Shaath et al. 2021)xix 

 

 Latin America is largely affected by educational attainment issues because of bullying. A study from 2016, which examined the impact of bullying in 15 Latin American countries, confirmed that bullying lowers educational achievements. For example, bullied students score 10 points less in maths and reading compared to non-bullied students. Also, the study reconfirmed that bullied students have difficulties in socialization and acceptance within schools. (Delprato, Akyeampong, and Dunne 2017)xx 

Era of digitalisation, Cyberbullying 

Furthermore, due to the era of digitalisation, a new form of bullying has emerged called cyberbullying. Students are not safe online  and may become victims of harassment via social networks, online games, and so on (UNICEF 2022). The main problem here is that cyberbullying does not stop at school and follows a child everywhere. Additionally, it is harder to notice cyberbullying compared to traditional bullying, which raises new challenges for educators. (PACER’s National Bullying Prevention Center 2019)xxi. 

 

The impact of cyberbullying on education is the same as traditional bullying and includes lower academic performance and attendance (Agile Education Marketing 2024)xxii. At the same time, Latin America experiences the highest amount of cyberbullying on social networks in the world (with a rate of 70%). Therefore, it is a challenge for Latin American governments to provide safe learning environments to boost the quality of education. 

 

Sexual violence, another burden for Latin American schools. 

In addition to bullying, Latin America struggles with other kinds of physical violence, such as sexual violence and gang violence. For instance, girls from Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, and the Dominican Republic have been victims of sexual violence and sexual blackmail . There is a chance of girls being raped in the bathrooms, which sometimes do not even have doors. There is also a precedent of other children spying on girls while they are in bathrooms. Moreover, teachers simply ignore this problem and do not attempt to engage with students. This is an issue because, according to the UNESCO Education for All Global Monitoring Report Team and the United Nations Girls’ Education Initiative (UNGEI) policy paper: “widespread gender-based violence in and around schools poses serious obstacles to the achievement of quality, inclusive, and equitable education.”. (BBC NEWS MUNDO 2016)xxiii. 

 

Taking into considering three types of violence: cyberbullying, traditional bullying, and sexual violence, it is evident that Latin America is facing an epidemic of violence.  The effects of violence cause mental health problems in students and creates an unsafe learning environment. Therefore, this situation hinders the quality of education and leads to lower educational achievements across the continent. 

How to address the issue of school violence 

The governments of Latin American countries are responsible for providing solutions to the situation to ensure that the quality of education does not decrease. The question is how governments can address this issue. First, it is necessary to identify the root causes of the school violence. For example, one of the reasons why there are bullies in schools can be their family situation. Students who grow up in families with violence or who lack emotional support can be more prone to aggressive behaviour (Nata Asatiani and Mzia Tsereteli 2022).xxiv Another reason why bullying exists in schools could be that students are intolerant of diversity and do not value it. For example, in the case of Brazil, almost a fifth of the students stated that body appearance and facial appearance were causes of bullying. Sexual or ethnic minorities were also targeted because they were different from others (Malta et al. 2022).xxv  

 

Nonetheless, the learning environment may be a key aspect of this discussion. Students should be viewed not only as creators of the environment but also as products of it. Bullying is not an independent variable; it results from the context in which individuals live. For students who usually spend a great deal of time in schools, this context is largely shaped by the school culture. School culture designs the learning environment by setting ideals, values, and norms. In schools where teachers do not pay sufficient attention to incidents of violence or maintain unhealthy relationships with students, we can assume that the school culture is weak as the school lacks ideals and norms. This lack of a strong school culture is a catalyst for bullying. (Nata Asatiani and Mzia Tsereteli 2022).xxvi 

 

Therefore, the aim of educational policies by the government and schools should be to build a positive school culture. This will foster a positive and safe learning environment. Creating a culture that stands against bullying can vary across educational levels. For example, in elementary school, the focus might be on celebrating students’ differences and conflict resolution (Grover 2022)xxvii. This might address the above-mentioned problem of students’ intolerance toward diversity. Teachers also play an important role in a strong culture; they should empower, care for, and believe in students (FranklinCovey Education 2014) xxviii. Consequently, they should give support to students in need of it, including victims of bullying and family violence who turn out to be bullies. Moreover, strong school culture means strong norms regarding bullying. One way this can be achieved is to draft a clear plan on how bullying is not tolerated and how it is handled at school (Schrepf 2024)xxix. Additionally, the development of social and emotional skills such as empathy, collaboration, and emotional regulation can be integrated into the curriculum (FranklinCovey Education 2014) xxx. As a result, schools will show that they have strong values when it comes to respect for each other. 

Chile’s anti-bullying policy a way forward. 

An example of a policy aimed at strengthening school culture is Chile’s legislation against bullying. Not only does it provide a legal definition of bullying, but more importantly, it obligates schools to have school councils. These school councils are responsible for promoting coexistence in schools and preventing any type of aggression, harassment, or physical or psychological violence toward students. Additionally, if any member of the school community is aware of a bullying case, they must report it, creating a sense of a norm. However, the situation in Chile is still not perfect, as in 2023 the country reported more than 4000 cases of bullying. It is important to give more attention to school violence so that more educators take responsibility, more families can be informed about the harms of bullying, and more schools can try to achieve a positive learning climate. (24horas 2024)xxxi 

 

In conclusion, it is evident that school violence, involving both physical and psychological forms, hinders the provision of high-quality education in Latin America. Bullying, cyberbullying, sexual harassment are just few examples of school violence in the region, but they all negatively affect learning outcomes of students by creating fear and anxiety in students. To solve this issue, it is necessary for governments in collaboration with schools to create a positive learning climate where students are empowered and strong values, ideas and norms prevail. The policy created by Chile is way forward, but more attention and resources are needed to eliminate bullying in schools. It is important for the region to aim for safer educational spaces so it can deliver the international human right of quality education.  

REFERENCES

i Redmond, Brian, and David Juliao. 2022. “Latin America | Facts, Culture & Religion.” Study.com. 2022. https://study.com/learn/lesson/latin-american-culture-traditions.html. 

ii World Population Review. 2024. “Most Violent Countries 2024.” Worldpopulationreview.com. 2024. https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/most-violent-countries. 

iii Government Digital Service. 2011. “Bullying at School.” GOV.UK. October 3, 2011. https://www.gov.uk/bullying-at-school/bullying-a-definition. 

v Fraserhealth. 2022. “Bullying at School.” Fraserhealth.ca. 2022. https://www.fraserhealth.ca/health-topics-a-to-z/school-health/mental-wellness-for-children/bullying-at-school. 

vi World Bank Group. 2016. “Latin America: Are Children Safe at School?” World Bank. World Bank Group. August 30, 2016. https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2015/01/26/latin-america-are-kids-safe-at-school. 

vii Vivolo-Kantor, Alana M, Brandi N Martell, Kristin M Holland, and Ruth Westby. 2014. “A Systematic Review and Content Analysis of Bullying and Cyber-Bullying Measurement Strategies.” Aggression and Violent Behavior 19 (4): 423–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2014.06.008. 

viii World Bank Group. 2016. “Latin America: Are Children Safe at School?” World Bank. World Bank Group. August 30, 2016. https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2015/01/26/latin-america-are-kids-safe-at-school. 

ix Tico Times. 2024. “Costa Rica Tops Global List for Bullying among Students: PISA Report.” The Tico Times | Costa Rica News | Travel | Real Estate. September 7, 2024. https://ticotimes.net/2024/09/06/costa-rica-tops-global-list-for-bullying-among-students-pisa-report. 

x Herrera-López, Mauricio, Eva Romera, and Rosario Ortega-Ruiz. 2018. “BULLYING Y CYBERBULLYING EN LATINOAMÉRICA.” Revista Mexicana de Investigación Educativa RMIE 23: 14056666. https://www.scielo.org.mx/pdf/rmie/v23n76/1405-6666-rmie-23-76-125.pdf.  

xi Franco, Silvia, and Maximiliano Puglia. 2023. “Violencias En Estudiantes Universitarios de América Latina. Prevalencias Y Reflexiones Sobre Las Comunidades Universitarias Que Construimos.” InterCambios. Dilemas Y Transiciones de La Educación Superior 10: 97–112. 

xii McLean Hospital. 2024. “The Mental Health Impact of Bullying on Kids and Teens | McLean Hospital.” Mcleanhospital.org. September 26, 2024. https://www.mcleanhospital.org/essential/bullying-kids-teens. 

xiii RocketEd. 2023. “How Does Anxiety Affect Learning?” RocketEd. June 24, 2023. https://www.rocketed.co.uk/blog/how-does-anxiety-affect-learning#:~:text=Anxiety%20can%20limit%20a%20child’s,abilities%20and%20stifling%20their%20creativity. 

xiv McLean Hospital. 2024. “The Mental Health Impact of Bullying on Kids and Teens | McLean Hospital.” Mcleanhospital.org. September 26, 2024. https://www.mcleanhospital.org/essential/bullying-kids-teens. 

xv Yu, Xiaodan, Xufei Wang, Haoyue Zheng, Xin Zhen, Min Shao, Haitao Wang, and Xinlin Zhou. 2023. “Academic Achievement Is More Closely Associated with Student-Peer Relationships than with Student-Parent Relationships or Student-Teacher Relationships.” Frontiers in Psychology 14 (February). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1012701. 

xvi Li, Xintong, Christi Bergin, and Amanda A Olsen. 2022. “Positive Teacher-Student Relationships May Lead to Better Teaching.” Learning and Instruction 80 (February): 101581–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2022.101581. 

xvii McLean Hospital. 2024. “The Mental Health Impact of Bullying on Kids and Teens | McLean Hospital.” Mcleanhospital.org. September 26, 2024. https://www.mcleanhospital.org/essential/bullying-kids-teens. 

xviii Dunne, Máiréad, Cynthia Bosumtwi-Sam, Ricardo Sabates, and Andrew Owusu. 2010. “Consortium for Research on Educational Access, Transitions and Equity Bullying and School Attendance: A Case Study of Senior High School Students in Ghana.” https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED512120.pdf. 

xix  Shaath, Muna , Hiba Sleem, Yaman Sulayeh, Abdel-Ghani Saifi, Hiba Ishtayah, and Odeh Hamayel. 2021. “School Bullying from Multiple Perspectives: ‘a Qualitative Study.’” Education in the Knowledge Society (EKS) 22 (September): e23953–53. https://doi.org/10.14201/eks.23953. 

xx Delprato, Marcos, Kwame Akyeampong, and Máiréad Dunne. 2017. “The Impact of Bullying on Students’ Learning in Latin America: A Matching Approach for 15 Countries.” International Journal of Educational Development 52 (January): 37–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2016.10.002. 

xxi PACER’s National Bullying Prevention Center. 2019. “Cyberbullying Definition.” Pacer.org. 2019. https://www.pacer.org/bullying/info/cyberbullying/#:~:text=Unique%20Characteristics%20of%20Cyberbullying&text=Most%20students%20have%20access%20to,home%20or%20in%20the%20community. 

xxii Agile Education Marketing. 2024. “How Does Cyberbullying Affect Mental Health in Schools? .” Agile Education Marketing. February 20, 2024. https://agile-ed.com/resources/how-does-cyberbullying-affect-mental-health-in-schools/#:~:text=The%20effects%20of%20online%20bullying,academic%20performance%20and%20social%20interactions.. 

xxiii BBC NEWS MUNDO. 2016. “Por Qué Hay Niñas En Nicaragua Que Temen Ir al Baño En La Escuela – BBC News Mundo.” BBC News Mundo. April 2016. https://www.bbc.com/mundo/noticias/2016/04/160318_nicaragua_ninas_escuela_banos_miedo_acoso_lv. 

xxiv Nata Asatiani, and Mzia Tsereteli. 2022. “THE PSYCHOLOGICAL NATURE and FACTORS of BULLYING,” July. https://doi.org/10.52340/gpj.2022.07.11. 

xxv Malta, Deborah Carvalho, Abadio de, Elton Junio, Flávia Carvalho, Santos Moutinho, and Marta Angelica. 2022. “Bullying among Brazilian Adolescents: Evidence from the National Survey of School Health, Brazil, 2015 and 2019.” Revista Latino-Americana de Enfermagem 30 (spe). https://doi.org/10.1590/1518-8345.6278.3678. 

xxvi Nata Asatiani, and Mzia Tsereteli. 2022. “THE PSYCHOLOGICAL NATURE and FACTORS of BULLYING,” July. https://doi.org/10.52340/gpj.2022.07.11. 

xxvii Grover, Nakul. 2022. “School Culture and Bullying.” Harvard Graduate School of Education. May 19, 2022. https://www.gse.harvard.edu/ideas/usable-knowledge/22/05/school-culture-and-bullying. 

xxviii FranklinCovey Education. 2014. “Prevent Bullying with a Positive School Culture: 3 Tips.” Leaderinme.org. 2014. https://www.leaderinme.org/blog/prevent-bullying/. 

xxix Schrepf, Emily. 2024. “7 Best Practices to Stop Bullying and Create a Safe Space Where All Students Can Thrive.” Scanlan Center for School Mental Health. April 2024. https://scsmh.education.uiowa.edu/2024/04/01/safety-acceptance-community-building-a-bully-free-school-culture/. 

xxx FranklinCovey Education. 2014. “Prevent Bullying with a Positive School Culture: 3 Tips.” Leaderinme.org. 2014. https://www.leaderinme.org/blog/prevent-bullying/. 

xxxi 24horas. 2024. “Bullying Escolar: Registran Segunda Cifra Más Alta En 10 Años.” 24horas.cl. 24horas. 2024. https://www.24horas.cl/data/bullying-escolar-denuncias-maltrato-estudiantes-cifra-decada. 

 

Photo by Feliphe Schiarolli on Unsplash

Educational Challenges for Ukrainian Kids in Europe: A Struggle Between Inadequate Policies and Lack of Integration

Introduction 

Three years into the conflict in Ukraine also marks the third consecutive year of disrupted education for Ukrainian children aged five to eighteen. Starting from February 2022, around 5.9 million Ukrainian refugees have crossed into neighbouring countries i, with children amounting to 1.4 million of the total number. The welcoming of refugees in Europe, however, has presented an unprecedented shock in terms of young refugee protection, with most European schools unprepared to welcome Ukrainian pupils. 

Critical challenges (with varying degrees) are still present across all 23 EU Member States despite the war ongoing for more than 2 years. Currently, the biggest challenge is the language barrier in schools when communicating with the children and, more alarmingly, their parents. Secondly, the lack of capacity of schools, particularly with teacher shortages, is also influencing the lack of educational inclusion of Ukrainian children. ii 

This article examines these two factors, looking at the EU’s position and particularly the reality in Poland and Italy. These two countries are relevant as they are the highest percentage welcomers of Ukrainian children and present concerning data on their inclusion and quality of education. 

 

Methodology  

This article will primarily use secondary sources from various organizations working in the field of education. The data collected will be quantitative and qualitative, thanks to the reports of various authoritative agencies like UNHCR, UNESCO, and OECD and reports produced by the European Commission and Eurofund. 

In the case studies for Poland, authoritative secondary sources, such as reports and websites from CARE International UNESCO and the Norwegian Refugee Council, have been cited. The information from the case study of Italy instead was collected through an interview (primary source) with the participation of a human rights expert who is experienced in the field of education and familiar with the situation of Ukrainian refugee kids in Italy. 

 

Challenges 

  1. Language Barrier 

In June 2024, with the partnership of other valuable stakeholders, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHRC) published a report analysing the main trends and challenges in accessing education for Ukrainian refugee children and youths in Europe. This report includes data from the countries hosting the most significant number of refugee youth from Ukraine, evincing that there is a considerable problem connected to the language barrier. Also, in a recent OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) survey, 63% of participating countries declared that language is a significant barrier to the education of Ukrainian kids.iii 

Looking at the data from various reports, the issue is twofold: On the one hand, the language barrier between national governments and the children’s parents makes them sceptical about enrolling their children at school. On the other hand, the quality of education for Ukrainian refugee children is not satisfactory due to lack of translators or programs preparing teachers for non-native students; making, communication between them and the teachers a major issue impairing their rights to education and overall well-being.  

Notably, across Europe, around 14% of refugee households declared that they did not enrol their children due to language barriers.iv Many Ukrainian families have reported that not speaking the language of their host country made it difficult to understand the enrolment process and requirements.v 

Currently, the UNHRC report informs that many European states are facing issues with promoting language support programmes that can include refugee students in the national systems. Various states are proposing ‘preparatory years or ‘welcome classes’ to grant additional language support to Ukrainian kids. However, the efficiency of such programmes is missing as authorities struggle to find specialised teachers to teach in such classes. vi 

2. Lack of School Capacity 

The other factor impairing a successful learning experience for Ukrainian children has often been the schools’ lack of satisfactory capacity. This entails the lack of space and material resources inside the schools and the shortage of teachers. According to the 2023 OECD survey, several European countries face teacher shortages, eventually impairing their ability to accommodate new students or create new classes.vii  In many cities and regions, schools had to introduce waiting lists for parents wanting to enrol their children, and in the worst cases, they were offered the option of home-schooling when they could not find a school for their children.viii Currently, in Europe, around 8% of the total amount of Ukrainian kids’ refugees are out of school due to capacity problems of schools. This list also includes kids who are not on waiting lists and have simply been denied access to a school because of no space.ix  

The European Commission affirms that 15 European countries (63%) have reported the availability of teaching staff as a serious challenge.x While the absence of teachers speaking a secondary language might indicate the unpreparedness of the migration of Ukrainian kids, another problem appears more concerning: the lack of staff at the European level is a structural problem independent from the presence of refugees.xi  

Case Studies

1. Poland 

Poland, along with Germany and the Czech Republic, is the country that is hosting the largest number of refugee children and youth from Ukraine. xii As of October 2023, out of the total number of Ukrainian kids (440.000), 179.677 were enrolled in the Polish national education system, with a total percentage of 46% of refugee children enrolled.xiii UNESCO has highlighted concerning data about the education of Ukrainian children in Poland.  

Firstly, there is no available data over the minimum standard capacity of the classes (meaning that there is a possible overcrowding). In addition, the highlighted barriers to enrolment in Poland are language barriers, school physical capacity, and teacher shortages.  

The main key points from the UNESCO research show that as of 2023, there is a shortage of at least 20.000 teachers, and urgent support is required for school supplies and equipment of laptops and tablets. xiv 

UNHCHR also provides alarming data about the pressure on the education system in Poland. In 2023, due to the shortage of Polish teachers speaking a second language, only 11% of enrolled Ukrainian kids can attend preparatory classes. xv  

In 2021/2022 more Ukrainian kids were able to attend preparatory classes reaching almost 27%. This means that Polish schools are currently suffering from a capacity-problem. The issue varies across the nation, with rural areas being the most affected by these shortages. xvi 

  

Moving again to the topic of the language barrier, joint research conducted by CARE International Poland, the International Rescue Committee, and Save the Children shed light on the issue. According to their study, 72% of Ukrainian adolescents have declared that they face language difficulties inside the school environment. xvii Delving more into these numbers, the study affirms that the Polish education system does not incentivise learning the Polish language. Insufficient resources are present for Ukrainian kids’ refugees to learn Polish in the school curriculum, forcing them to seek language support outside the public-school preparatory system. xviii According to government data, only 37.2% of Polish education students receive free Polish language courses. This means that refugees (at their expense) should attend Polish courses for 1-2 years before entering the public school system. xix Such decisions further disrupt the right to education of refugees, impacting an already troubled economic and socioemotional status. 

Poland has tried to respond to this educational crisis by making education for refugees not compulsory under the parents’ approval, or lifted the individual class limits, maintaining the same number of teachers recruited with larger classes, impacting the overall quality of education. xx 

This strategy contravenes the EU’s goal of granting a high-level education to public school students from different backgrounds. It also confirms the idea that European schools are burdened by a pre-existing shortage of teachers and physical capacity and are forced to cut classes or overcrowd them, hampering the right to education of Ukrainian refugees.  

2. Italy 

Since the beginning of the Russian invasion, Italy has become one of the main destination countries for refugees coming from Ukraine. The Italian Ministry of Interiors has recorded 173.589 Ukrainian refugees, of which around 28% are children. xxi 

To partially examine Italy’s attitude toward integrating Ukrainian children’s refugees, we interviewed an Italian expert in human rights who offered valuable firsthand insight since one of her relatives is a teacher. 

Our interviewee immediately points out that language is the most significant barrier for Ukrainian children in Italy. According to her, Italy is typically a country that finds difficulties in using other languages consequently forcing Ukrainian children to be placed in Italian classes without sufficient preparation. Following up on this topic, our interviewee affirms that even if education is mandatory for refugees, the process in Italy lacks a clear framework amplifying a general sense of discouragement these kids already face. 

Another example from our interviewee’s Italian experience is the educational strategy enacted by some schools. To align the educational goals of Ukrainian kids, sometimes Italian schools decide to put Ukrainian kids in lower-grade classes. However, this strategy fails to conform to the principle of the EU that every national and refugee should be treated in the same way, lacking a satisfactory right to education. 

Our interviewee, at the same time, affirms that creating only Italian classes is, per se, not negative unless it exists an external familiar figure, like a Ukrainian translator. However, in some instances in Italy, there is an approach to integration that primarily depends on the responsibility of foreign groups. This means that integrating would entail following private Italian classes to align the kids with the standards of the classes.  

Our interviewee concluded her contribution by pointing out that education needs more precise frameworks and capacity-building considering different economic and political situations across Europe.xxii 

Findings 

The data provided by various organisations regarding the main two challenges, language barrier and capacity building, suggests that education is highly multifaceted and requires substantive strategies. Indeed, the response to the movement of Ukrainian refugees varies across Europe, with data different from those in Poland and Italy. However, these two countries are relevant since they host the most refugees and are evident educational challenges. From the findings of these studies, it appears that education challenges are both central (at the EU level) and peripherical (at the state level). 

At the European level, resolutions are published over the crisis of Ukrainian kids in Europe. However, the implementation of this resolution is too horizontal, not considering the existing educational country-level crisis. This applies both to the language barrier and building capacities where is demonstrated that some European countries seriously lack second-language teachers and capacity inside the schools. 

Meanwhile, at the state level, the resolutions taken at the European level are poorly implemented, with countries allocating insufficient funds for education, perpetuating a capacity-building crisis present before the Ukraine crisis. 

 

Conclusion and Recommendations 

This article examined some of the issues connected with welcoming Ukrainian children’s refugees into the European educational system. Looking at the data, the main concerns remain the language barrier and school capacity. While the number varies across EU states, Poland and Italy offer a worrisome image of structural barriers to education. 

To answer the issues, the European Parliament’s stance is straightforward: create a common policy framework to develop efficient integration for migrants and refugees in Europe as part of the 2021-2027 EU Action Plan on integration. This plan was also exemplified by Resolution 2022/2618 of the European Parliament, which urged member states to take measures swiftly to solve the education challenges.  

However, while the EU has shared competence on migration and integration, it is the responsibility of the member states to adopt national policies conforming to the expected standards. Consequently, the inadequacy of the EU side policies derives from a horizontal request for collaboration between the EU member countries, not creating special packages or requests for countries with historical educational crises. By having stricter requests and packages for states, the EU could have ensured equal treatment of Ukrainian refugee kids among the member countries. However, now, the plans lack a precise framework, with some EU countries having compulsory education for Ukrainian kids and others exempting them from schools. 

On the other hand, member states’ attitudes towards integration (and education) suffer from a lack of funds and interest in investing in education and welcoming refugees, which resulted from the rise of populism. 

From this analysis, some recommendations may follow: 

  • Jointly contribute to the capacity-building of schools by allocating funds from the EU to member states and expecting them to share their best practices and overview of projects and expenses. 
  • Create tailored plans for member states with educational and integration crises to align them with EU standards. 
  • Create a joint refugee plan by hiring additional trained and qualified teachers from countries with many incoming refugees. 
  • Improve resource management by investing money on NGO, creating a network able to cope with the lack of capacity present in education. 
  • Ensure that the education standards are similar across different member states, meaning that parents receive clear information and kids are in an inclusive environment that respects their educational level. 
  • Authorities from Ukraine should coordinate with the European host states to recognize diplomas obtained in their territory. 

 

 

@Panashe Marie Louise Mlambo  

Breaking the Cycle: Addressing Child Marriage in India and Its Impact on Future Generations and the role of education: A qualitative analysis

Child marriage in India, despite decades of reform, remains a significant social issue, affecting millions of young girls, particularly in rural areas. Marrying girls off at a young age has become a tradition deeply rooted in cultural norms and exacerbated by economic hardships. According to recent data, over 23% of women aged 20 to 24 were married before the legal age of 18 i,ii; . This figure is still high, but it represents a decline from previous decades. This article will explore the factors that perpetuate child marriage in India, the consequences it has on future generations, and the actions needed to break the cycle. The article will also provide insights on the role of education

Factors that Perpetuate Child Marriage
1. The Cultural Drivers of Child Marriage Issue

One of the main reasons for the persistence of child marriage in India is the deep-rooted cultural belief that early marriage secures a girl’s future. This practice is particularly prevalent in rural areas where traditional norms hold greater sway over people’s decisions than modern laws. In some communities, parents believe that marrying their daughters early is the best way to protect their honor and ensure their economic security iii.

According to our interviewee, from rural India described, “It’s not just about poverty—it’s about long-standing beliefs that are hard to change. No matter how much education you have, the cultural expectation that girls should marry young often takes precedence.” These entrenched beliefs are often passed down through generations, making it difficult to challenge them. Efforts to change these attitudes must be rooted in community engagement and dialogue iv.

2. Economic Pressures and Poverty
Another issue that arose in our interview was that of the economic status of families. Economic factors play a significant role in driving child marriage in India. For many families living in poverty, marrying off a daughter early is seen as a way to reduce financial burdens. When resources are scarce, having one less mouth to feed can seem like a viable solution. Furthermore, many families view marriage as a way to transfer financial responsibility to the husband’s family.

A study by the National Family Health Survey (NFHS) highlights the correlation between poverty and child marriage, showing that nearly 40% of girls from the lowest wealth quintile marry before the age of 18, compared to just 8% from the wealthiest families v . These statistics reveal the stark economic divide that contributes to the continuation of child marriage. Without addressing the economic pressures that lead families to marry off their daughters, it will be difficult to eliminate the practice entirely.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic
The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated the issue of child marriage in India. The economic fallout from the pandemic, including widespread job losses and school closures, has led many families to marry off their daughters as a way to cope with financial uncertainty. According to UNFPA, the pandemic has pushed an estimated 10 million more girls globally into early marriage, with India seeing a sharp increase in child marriages during this period vi.
The pandemic also disrupted educational programs and community-based interventions aimed at preventing child marriage, further compounding the problem. As one student reflected, “During COVID, the unemployment rates soared, especially among women, and families who were already struggling found it even harder to provide for their children. Marriage became a way to reduce the burden”.

Legal Framework and Enforcement Background and Fact
India has strong legal frameworks designed to prevent child marriage, most notably the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act (PCMA), 2006. This law sets the legal age of marriage at 18 for women and 21 for men and provides penalties for those who violate the law. Despite these legal protections, enforcement remains a challenge, particularly in rural areas where awareness of the law is limited, and traditional norms are more influential than legal mandates vii,viii; .

The Indian government has made strides in promoting gender equality and reducing violence against women and girls. The creation of One Stop Centres and the implementation of a national helpline have provided vital support to women and girls at risk of violence and early marriage ix. However, the gap between policy and practice remains significant. Strengthening enforcement mechanisms and raising awareness about the legal consequences of child marriage are essential steps in addressing the issue.

The Consequences of Child Marriage
The consequences of child marriage are far-reaching and devastating, not just for the individual but for society as a whole. Girls who marry young are more likely to drop out of school, experience domestic violence, and face health complications related to early pregnancies. According to Plan International, girls who marry before 18 are also more likely to experience economic hardships later in life, as they are less likely to achieve financial independence.

Child marriage also perpetuates cycles of poverty, as girls who marry early are denied the opportunity to contribute meaningfully to their communities. Additionally, the practice reinforces gender inequality by limiting the opportunities available to women and keeping them in subordinate roles within society. Addressing child marriage is therefore essential not only for protecting the rights of girls but also for promoting gender equality and reducing poverty.

Education as a Tool for Change
Education is one of the most powerful tools in delaying marriage. Girls who stay in school longer are less likely to marry early and more likely to achieve financial independence. Research by Plan International has shown that over 70% of girls with no education marry before 18, compared to 27% of those who complete secondary school. Education provides girls with the knowledge and skills needed to contribute economically to their families, which reduces the perceived need for early marriage x.

In some regions of India, programs focused on education have shown success in delaying marriage. For example, vocational training programs that provide girls with marketable skills have enabled them to become financially independent, thereby reducing the economic pressures on families to marry them off. However, while education is a crucial part of the solution, it must be accompanied by efforts to change cultural attitudes toward marriage xi,xii ; .

Community-Based Interventions
Community engagement is key to changing the social norms that perpetuate child marriage. Initiatives that involve parents, local leaders, and youth in discussions about the harms of child marriage and the benefits of education have been successful in changing attitudes. Programs supported by organizations such as Girls Not Brides have demonstrated that when communities are involved in the conversation, real change can occur xiii.

One effective approach is to engage men and boys in the fight against child marriage. By challenging traditional gender roles and promoting gender equality, these programs help change the perception that girls are a financial burden that can be alleviated through marriage. Additionally, involving religious and community leaders can lend credibility to efforts aimed at ending child marriage, as these figures hold significant influence in rural areas xiv.

Recommendations for Addressing Child Marriage
Ending child marriage in India will require a multi-pronged approach that goes beyond legal reforms. While laws like the PCMA are crucial, they must be supported by efforts to change cultural attitudes, improve access to education, and provide economic alternatives to marriage.
1. Strengthen Education Programs: Expanding access to quality education, particularly in rural areas, is essential for delaying marriage. The government should prioritize building more schools, providing scholarships, and ensuring that schools are safe environments for girls. Programs that provide vocational training for girls at risk of child marriage are also crucial.
2. Change the Cultural Narrative Around Child Marriage: Another important recommendation from our interviewee was the need to shift cultural perceptions. The student emphasized that families need to realize that child marriage does not necessarily provide a better future for their daughters. By changing this narrative, and reinforcing the value of education, it becomes easier to convince families to delay marriage.
3. Involve Local Stakeholders in Policy Making: The student interviewed emphasized that governments and international organizations should involve local stakeholders, such as community leaders, parents, and law enforcement, in the policy-making process. By engaging these individuals, governments can tailor laws and interventions to reflect cultural realities, making them more effective. This involvement will also help spread awareness within communities about the importance of delaying marriage.
4. Engage Communities in Changing Norms: Community-based programs that involve local leaders, parents, and youth in discussions about the harms of child marriage are essential for changing cultural attitudes. Programs that involve men and boys in promoting gender equality can help challenge traditional gender roles and perceptions about marriage.
5. Strengthen Legal Enforcement and Simplify Procedures for Families: The student recommended that while legal frameworks like the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act are essential, their enforcement in rural areas remains weak due to a lack of awareness and accessibility. To improve this, the student suggested simplifying the process for families to access government schemes and legal support. This would involve reducing bureaucratic barriers, such as lengthy documentation requirements, which currently make it difficult for families to seek help. Additionally, better training for local law enforcement and officials to monitor and prevent child marriage is necessary. By making legal support more accessible and ensuring that penalties for child marriage are enforced consistently, families would be less likely to resort to early marriages.

Conclusion
Child marriage in India is a complex issue that requires a multifaceted response. While legal frameworks like the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act are crucial, they must be supported by efforts to address the cultural, economic, and educational factors that perpetuate the practice. By expanding access to education, providing economic support, strengthening legal enforcement, and engaging communities in changing social norms, India can make significant progress in ending child marriage and securing a brighter future for its girls.

REFERENCES

i  Plan International. “Child Marriage in India.” Plan International, 2024. https://planinternational.org/india.
ii  UNFPA India. “Child Marriage in India: Key Insights from the NFHS-5 (2019-21).” UNFPA India, 2024. https://india.unfpa.org.
iii  Girls Not Brides. “India – Girls Not Brides.” Girls Not Brides, 2022. https://www.girlsnotbrides.org.
Plan International. “Child Marriage in India.” Plan International, 2024. https://planinternational.org/india.
v   UNFPA India. “Child Marriage in India: Key Insights from the NFHS-5 (2019-21).” UNFPA India, 2024. https://india.unfpa.org.
vi  UNICEF India. “Reducing Child Marriage in India.” UNICEF India, 2024. https://www.unicef.org/india/reports/reducing-child-marriage-india.
vii  Plan International. “Child Marriage in India.” Plan International, 2024. https://planinternational.org/india.
viii  Girls Not Brides. “India – Girls Not Brides.” Girls Not Brides, 2022. https://www.girlsnotbrides.org.
ix  Ibid.
x   Plan International. “Child Marriage in India.” Plan International, 2024. https://planinternational.org/india.
xi   Ibid.
xii   UNFPA India. “Child Marriage in India: Key Insights from the NFHS-5 (2019-21).” UNFPA India, 2024. https://india.unfpa.org.
xiii   Girls Not Brides. “India – Girls Not Brides.” Girls Not Brides, 2022. https://www.girlsnotbrides.org.
Ibid.

World Press Freedom Day

On the 3rd of May, the world reunites to reflect on the importance of press freedom. International organizations, including Broken Chalk, urge media officers and regular citizens to remember journalists who lost their lives, got arrested, or are forced to live under fear because they chose to follow the truth. Moreover, we want the day to act as a reminder of the dangers of restraints and censorship. In 2024, 361 journalists were arrestedi. However, threats to freedom of the press are not confined to arrest and detention; they include harassment, intimidation, monitoring of communications, and economic, and political pressure.

Freedom of speech does not impact only journalists and media personnel, but everyone else partaking in information seeking. It affects how global citizens seek, speak, and receive sources.

At Broken Chalk, we recognize how freedom of the press impacts academic freedom and viceversa. Both are pedestals for societies and communities where knowledge is shared and pursued without restrictions, fear, and limits. Scholars and journalists must be able to explore, critique, examine, and propagate topics and articles without restraints. Academic and journalistic voices being silenced or lowered entail a loss in reasoning, innovation, and democracy.

 

Broken Chalk wants to express its solidarity with US news outlets, journalists, scholars, and students who are experiencing damaging consequences due to their stances which question President Trump’s notions. Broken Chalk also conveys its solidarity to all those news outlets, journalists, scholars, and students who live and work in countries all around the world where their work puts them in danger and whose names and acts of bravery are often overlooked.

Photo by Larry Alger on Unsplash

Broken Chalk urges international response to the mass detentions in Türkiye

The human rights organization Broken Chalk is urging the international community to take action following the detention of over 200 individuals primarily university students by Turkish authorities during protests earlier this month.

The recent wave of detentions happened on May 6, 2025. It is particularly worrying that the detainees were not allowed access to a legal counsel and their families for the first 24 hours. The case details were not transparent either, leading to serious worrying from families and their legal representatives. Due process and transparency are missing in the detention process.

This latest operation also marks a continued effort to detain individuals alleged to be linked to the Hizmet Movement (or “FETÖ”, as referred to by Turkish authorities). Framed as a counter-terrorism effort, the Interior Minister Ali Yerlikaya shared a propagandistic video depicting routine activities by headscarved women as subversive acts. Multiple arrests were based on questionable grounds such as attending educational events, traveling abroad, or living with persons who were detained in earlier waves of arrests of Hizmet Movement affiliated persons. Notably, young female students were heavily targeted—some detained for cultural trips or mere associations. In one tragic case, a woman was arrested despite having lost her father to cancer while he was imprisoned under similar charges. It is clear that the Turkish authorities are using the term “terrorism” broadly, increasingly targeting civic or religious activity with this approach, and consequently, undermining rule of law and civil freedoms.

The arrests did not start on the 6th of May. Ever since the arrest of the Mayor of Istanbul on the 19th of March, 2025, the number of detentions has been increasing. President Erdogan is cracking down on the freedom of speech of the population, trying to drown the voice of the people who are questioning the arrest and the withdrawal of the bachelors diploma of Mr Imamoglu. It is important to note that the diploma is needed for signing up for the presidential candidacy. It is suspected that this was a deliberate move to make the Mayor of Istanbul disqualified early on from the presidential race. The Turkish population mobilised in big numbers but this also came at a cost, more than 2000 persons, have been detained and the number could be way higher.

Broken Chalk wishes to raise awareness of these events, especially to the clear violation of fundamental human rights such as the right to freedom of assembly and the right to due process. The way the arrests are conducted and the detention procedure is happening, it is clear that there is a lack of transparency, which undermines the trust in authorities and in general, the government.

Broken Chalk is calling on global leaders and human rights bodies to monitor the situation closely and pressure the Turkish government to respect civil liberties and the rule of law:

High Commissioner for Human Rights,
Secretary General of the Council of Europe,
Chairman of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention,
Special Rapporteur on Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment,
Special Rapporteur on the Protection of Private Life,
Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression,
Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers and
Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights.

Photo by Mathias Reding on Unsplash

References

 1. BBC, “Thousands turn out for Turkey protests after more than 1,400 arrests” March 26 2025, <https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckgz58rz3k8o> 

2.  Al-Monitor, ‘Over 400 detained in Istanbul’s May day protest” May 1 2025 <https://www.al-monitor.com/originals/2025/05/over-400-detained-istanbuls-may-day-protest-turkey-restricts-transit>