1

Ethnicity and Participation in Primary Education: Some Statistical Results

from the 2005 Census

Richard Noonan

The Lao PDR is a multi-ethnic nation, with nearly 50 officially recognised ethno-

linguistic groups. Its government is committed to achieving quality basic education

for all. Collectively, the Lao-Tai ethno-linguistic group represents 65% of the

population according to the 2005 census. Recent demographic trends, however,

are bringing about change in the ethno-linguistic distribution. These changes are

increasingly visible in schools and will have important policy implications for

development of the education system.

quity, quality, and efficiency are the major pillars of Lao education policy (for the most current policy

overview and progress assessment, see MOE, 2007). The ability of young children to understand and

benefit from instruction is an important aspect of quality that must be taken into account if universal basic

education targets – Education for All (EFA) goal 2 and MDG 2 – are to be achieved. Laos has a rich

ethno-linguistic diversity, and more than 30% of children have a mother tongue other than the national

language, Lao. This presents a complex challenge to the education authorities, whose duty is to ensure that all

children, regardless of the language used in the home, can benefit from primary school instruction.

Scope and Methodology

Data

This paper briefly describes the ethno-linguistic context of primary schooling in the Lao PDR, presenting

statistical results from the 2005 census and recent results from the Ministry of Education (MOE) annual school

census. This article is purely descriptive and focuses on the statistical association between ethnicity, primary

school participation, and reported literacy in the Lao language. The census results are based on the author’s

analysis of the data for all children aged 0-16 years. The MOE data is based mainly on either 2004/05 or

2005/06 data, with some reference to earlier figures. Reference is also made to the Lao National Literacy

Survey conducted in 2000.

In the 2005 census, the following questions on education and training were asked (valid responses in

parenthesis):

• Variable 11: Can [name, person of age over 6 years] read and write Lao? (Yes / No / No answer);

• Variable 12: Has [name] ever attended school? (No, never / At school / Left school / No answer);

• Variable 13: What is [name]’s highest level of education? (No education / Grade 1 / Grade 2 / Grade 3 /

Grade 4 / Grade 5 / Grade 6 / Lower secondary 1 / Lower secondary 2 / Lower secondary 3 / Upper

secondary 1 / Upper secondary 2 / Upper secondary 3 / Don’t know);

• Variable 14: What is [name]’s highest level of vocational education? (First level / Middle level / High or

university / Post graduate / Other / Don’t know).

Statistical combinations of data from these variables, together with gender, age, and ethnicity, provide a rich

source of information about the relationship between ethnicity and education. A small portion of this richness is

reported here.

Problems of Ethno-Linguistic Classification

In a multi-ethnic, multi-linguistic context, policy-making leading to successful ‘nation-building’ is crucially

dependent on agreed and factually correct ethno-linguistic classification that shows respect for the linguistic

diversity, cultural values and human rights of all groups, as declared in the 1991 Constitution. Collection of

education statistics by ethno-linguistic group is problematic because the administrative classification system

which, in the absence of careful and systematic ethno-linguistic evidence, has been in use at least since the

1950s, is not based on ethno-linguistic features. That system labelled the peoples of Laos under three major

categories, based on the topographical distribution the groups were believed to display at the time:

• Lao Loum (the ‘lowland’ Lao, now representing some 65% of the population);

• Lao Theung (the ‘upland’ or ‘midland’ Lao, now accounting for roughly 23% of the population);

2

• Lao Soung (the ‘highland’ Lao or ‘hill tribes’, now representing nearly 11% of the population).

These elevation-related figures are, of course, imprecise and reflect only general tendencies. Moreover,

individuals and whole villages migrate, and some communities have lived for generations at the ‘wrong

elevation’. The population percentages are based on figures from the 2005 census.

This classification was originally adopted partly for political purposes, to show that all ethnic groups were part

of the Lao nation. It was abandoned in the 1991 constitution, and the 1992 Central Party Resolution on Ethnic

Minorities recommended that these topographical categories should no longer be used. The 2005 census (GOL,

2006) lists 49 groups, as shown in Table 2 below. The categorisation of these groups is not standardised.

Hopefully future censuses will use, as a minimum, the four main ethno-linguistic groups as classified on the

Ministry of Information and Culture website (MOIC, 2007) and shown in Table 2, as a basis for ethno-

linguistic categories. Beginning with the 2007/08 school census, the MOE will use these four main ethno-

linguistic categories.

As a first approximation, for those familiar with the old Lao government system, ‘Lao Loum’ represents the

Lao-Tai sub-group of the Austro-Tai linguistic family. ‘Lao Theung’ represents the Mon-Khmer sub-group of

the Austro-Asiatic linguistic family, and ‘Lao Soung’ represents the Hmong-Yao Mien category sub-group of

the Austro-Tai linguistic family plus the Tibeto-Burman and Sinitic sub-groups of the Sino-Tibetan linguistic

family. Whereas the old ‘Lao Loum’ category is a relatively homogeneous category linguistically, the ‘Lao

Soung’ category is particularly heterogeneous. This paper uses both census data and MOE data to show some

general trends, however, and in Table 4 these two data sets have been combined by re-categorising the census

data.

Findings: Changing Times

The Ethnicity and Language Context

The ethno-linguistic context of the Lao PDR is more complex than in many other countries. The columns on

the left side of Table 2 give the distribution of the total population by linguistic category based on the 49 ethnic

groups defined for the 2005 census. The columns on the right show the distribution of the population aged 0-16

years. The figures in the last column (%) are shaded and italicized if the percent distribution in the age 0-16

population is greater than the percent distribution in the total population. They are bold and italicized if the

difference is greater than one percentage point.

Declining Fertility Rates

One of the most profound but quiet changes occurring in Laos over the past decade has been the decline in

fertility rates, which was found in the 2005 census and the Lao Reproductive Health Survey 2005 to be

substantially faster than had been anticipated. It had been observed in recent years in some of the major towns

that the number of primary school teachers required was declining, because enrolments were declining, because

the number of school age children was declining, because fertility rates were declining.

Ethnicity and Declining Fertility Rates by Ethnic Composition

The magnitude of the decline on the national level was surprising, but at least as

significant as the overall decline was its geographic and (by implication) ethnic

composition. In urban areas (where the Lao-Tai are the predominant ethnic

group), the fertility rate seems to have stabilised at just over 2.04. This is close to

fertility rates in Europe and possibly, given the relatively high mortality rate, even

below the population replacement rate in Laos. In rural ‘on road’ areas, the

fertility rate is still relatively high at 3.70. In rural ‘off road’ areas (i.e. in remote

and often ethnic group communities), the fertility rate is still very high at 4.74.

There is thus an obvious, if complex and diffuse, link with ethnicity. This will

have significant implications for education development policy, because it is essentially rural off-road

communities into which primary education must expand if universal basic education is to be achieved.

Provision of school inputs in such communities, especially the services of qualified teachers, has so far proven

difficult.

Table 1: Fertility

rates in Laos by

location

Area of

residence

Fertility

rate

Urban 2.04

Rural, on road 3.70

Rural, off road 4.74

3

Table 2: Population by gender and ethnicity, total and aged 0-16

Total population Population aged 0-16

Code Ethnic group Male Female Total % Male Female Total %

Lao-Tai linguistic sub-group

1 Lao 1,528,269 1,538,736 3,067,005 54.6 630,411 612,395 1,242,806 49.8

2 Tai 108,257 106,997 215,254 3.8 49,957 47,958 97,915 3.9

3 Phoutai 91,634 95,757 187,391 3.3 42,502 41,994 84,496 3.4

4 Lue 61,100 61,954 123,054 2.2 23,096 22,609 45,705 1.8

5 Nyouan 14,493 14,949 29,442 0.5 5,487 5,437 10,924 0.4

6 Yang 3,101 3,059 6,160 0.1 1,308 1,308 2,616 0.1

7 Xaek 1,799 1,934 3,733 0.1 857 900 1,757 0.1

8 Tai Neua 7,382 7,417 14,799 0.3 3,078 2,972 6,050 0.2

Total 1,816,035 1,830,803 3,646,838 64.9 756,696 735,573 1,492,269 59.8

Mon-Khmer sub-group

9 Khmou 306,875 307,018 613,893 10.9 150,813 147,779 298,592 12.0

10 Phai 10,843 11,079 21,922 0.4 5,537 5,422 10,959 0.4

11 Xing Moul 4,354 4,211 8,565 0.2 2,245 2,023 4,268 0.2

12 Phong 13,171 13,143 26,314 0.5 6,465 6,490 12,955 0.5

13 Thaen 248 266 514 0.0 131 115 246 0.0

14 Oedou 329 320 649 0.0 180 151 331 0.0

15 Bit 1,014 950 1,964 0.0 492 427 919 0.0

16 Lamet 9,460 10,367 19,827 0.4 4,644 4,815 9,459 0.4

17 Samtao 1,761 1,772 3,533 0.1 838 806 1,644 0.1

18 Katang 58,366 59,910 118,276 2.1 30,674 30,200 60,874 2.4

19 Makong 57,823 60,019 117,842 2.1 29,697 29,655 59,352 2.4

20 Tri 13,130 13,550 26,680 0.5 6,344 6,282 12,626 0.5

21 Yrou 23,009 24,166 47,175 0.8 11,904 12,067 23,971 1.0

22 Tariang 14,356 14,778 29,134 0.5 7,250 7,071 14,321 0.6

23 Ta Oy 16,156 16,021 32,177 0.6 8,132 7,836 15,968 0.6

24 Yaeh 5,274 5,296 10,570 0.2 2,607 2,571 5,178 0.2

25 Brao 11,134 11,638 22,772 0.4 5,413 5,400 10,813 0.4

26 Katou 11,179 11,580 22,759 0.4 5,720 5,830 11,550 0.5

27 Halak 10,449 10,831 21,280 0.4 5,439 5,222 10,661 0.4

28 Oy 11,083 11,375 22,458 0.4 5,757 5,472 11,229 0.4

29 Kriang 6,375 6,504 12,879 0.2 3,198 3,174 6,372 0.3

30 Cheng 3,699 3,860 7,559 0.1 1,872 1,771 3,643 0.1

31 Sedang 467 471 938 0.0 213 212 425 0.0

32 Suay 20,792 22,042 42,834 0.8 10,553 10,563 21,116 0.8

33 Nya Heun 3,430 3,355 6,785 0.1 1,846 1,707 3,553 0.1

34 Lavi 608 585 1,193 0.0 300 264 564 0.0

35 Pacoh 8,242 8,508 16,750 0.3 4,218 4,263 8,481 0.3

36 Khmer 2,882 2,943 5,825 0.1 1,485 1,454 2,939 0.1

37 Toum 2,252 2,206 4,458 0.1 1,158 1,055 2,213 0.1

38 Ngouan 339 383 722 0.0 160 165 325 0.0

39 Moy 277 257 534 0.0 110 115 225 0.0

40 Kri 249 246 495 0.0 136 105 241 0.0

Total 629,626 639,650 1,269,276 22.6 315,531 310,482 626,013 25.1

Tibeto-Burman sub-group

41 Ahka 45,563 45,135 90,698 1.6 22,650 21,557 44,207 1.8

42 Singsily 18,554 18,893 37,447 0.7 7,973 7,872 15,845 0.6

43 Lahou 7,619 7,619 15,238 0.3 3,674 3,489 7,163 0.3

44 Sila 1,517 1,422 2,939 0.1 789 688 1,477 0.1

45 Hanyi 427 421 848 0.0 204 203 407 0.0

46 Lolo 836 855 1,691 0.0 416 436 852 0.0

47 Ho 5,317 5,120 10,437 0.2 2,466 2,371 4,837 0.2

Total 79,833 79,465 159,298 2.8 38,172 36,616 74,788 3.0

Hmong-Yao sub-group

48 Hmong 227,689 224,257 451,946 8.0 128,449 124,166 252,615 10.1

49 LewmienYao 13,875 13,574 27,449 0.5 6,839 6,538 13,377 0.5

Total 241,564 237,831 479,395 8.5 135,288 130,704 265,992 10.7

Other / 7o answer

50 Other 6,418 6,114 12,532 0.2 2,843 2,798 5,641 0.2

51 No answer 27,075 27,568 54,643 1.0 16,350 15,705 32,055 1.3

7ational total 2,800,551 2,821,431 5,621,982 100.0 1,264,880 1,231,878 2,496,758 100.0

Source: The total population figures are taken from 2005 National Census, main report, Table 2.6, page 15. Figures for age cohort 0-16 are

author tabulations based on the 2005 census data.

By comparing the percent distribution of the various ethnic groups in the total population and the population

aged 0-16, it can be seen that Table 2 verifies the link between ethnicity and the fertility rates shown in Table 1.

4

The major part of the road network is located in urban areas and passes through the lowlands, where the ‘Lao

Loum’ tend to live. The ‘Lao Theung’ tend to live in small towns and rural areas that can be described as ‘on-

road’. The ‘Lao Soung’ tend to live in upland and more remote areas likely to be categorised as ‘off-road’.

What can be seen in Table 2 is that ‘Lao Loum’ (Lao-Tai sub-group) constitute nearly 65% of the total

population, but also less than 60% of the population aged 0-16. By contrast, the ‘Lao Theung’ make up less

than 23% of the total population but more than 25% of 0-16 year olds. The ‘Lao Soung’ constitute just over

11% of the total population but nearly 14% of the 0-16 population. The fertility rates given above make it quite

clear that these demographic trends will continue at least some decades into the future. Ironically, these trends

will continue until education levels (and general social and economic levels) in rural and remote areas rise.

Human resource development (mainly through health, education, and training) will be essential engines of

development in rural and remote areas of Laos.

Educational Consequences

Changing Composition of the Classrooms

Some of the educational consequences are suggested in Table 3. Over the period 1999/2000 to 2005/06, even in

the face of rising net enrolment rates, the number of ‘Lao Loum’ children enrolled in primary schools decreased

by nearly 50,000 (8%) due to falling fertility rates. During the same period, as a consequence of rising

enrolment rates combined with population growth, the number of ‘Lao Theung’ primary school students

increased by nearly 70,000 (an increase of 47%), and the number of ‘Lao Soung’ primary pupils rose by over

40,000 (an increase of 60%). The trend for primary school teachers was similar, if less clear and dramatic. The

number of ‘Lao Loum’ primary school teachers declined by over 360, while the number of ‘Lao Theung’ and

the ‘Lao Soung’ teachers rose by nearly 640.

These two trends are illustrated in Figure 1, which superimposes a graph of the ‘index’ of the trends on the

graph of the basic trends themselves. That is, the background graphs show the actual numbers of children

enrolled and teachers employed, by the traditional three ethnic categories previously used by the MOE. The

foreground graphs show the index of the trend, where the value for 1999/2000 is set at 1.0, and the points on the

graph represent the ratio value for the given year divided by the value for 1999/2000. Thus by 2005/06, ‘Lao

Soung’ enrolments had increased by a factor of approximately 1.6 (increased by 60%), while ‘Lao Loum’

enrolments had changed by a factor of 0.98 (decreased by 2%).

Table 3: Ethnic distribution of primary students by the three traditional categories

7umber 99/00 00/01 01/02 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06

Lao Loum 607,976 594,927 597,184 594,566 582,146 571,030 558,010

Lao Theung 148,481 154,076 168,124 184,844 196,141 207,117 218,164

Lao Soung 72,239 76,824 84,947 93,562 102,637 109,980 115,618

Total 828,696 825,827 850,255 872,972 880,924 888,127 891,792

Percent 99/00 00/01 01/02 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06

Lao Loum 73.4 72.0 70.2 68.1 66.1 64.3 62.6

Lao Theung 17.9 18.7 19.8 21.2 22.3 23.3 24.5

Lao Soung 8.7 9.3 10.0 10.7 11.7 12.4 13.0

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Source: MOE, Annual Bulletins, 1999/2000–2005/06

Note: Summation not equal to 100% due to rounding off error.

5

Table 4: Ethnic distribution of primary teachers by the three traditional categories

7umber 99/00 00/01 01/02 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06

Lao Loum 22,810 22,479 23,016 22,980 22,189 22,342 22,447

Lao Theung 3,459 3,587 3,893 4,002 3,970 3,736 3,888

Lao Soung 1,250 1,319 1,409 1,518 1,422 1,439 1,457

Total 27,519 27,385 28,318 28,500 27,581 27,517 27,792

Percent 99/00 00/01 01/02 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06

Lao Loum 82.9 82.1 81.3 80.6 80.5 81.2 80.8

Lao Theung 12.6 13.1 13.7 14.0 14.4 13.6 14.0

Lao Soung 4.5 4.8 5.0 5.3 5.2 5.2 5.2

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Source: MOE, Annual Bulletins, 1999/2000-2005/06.

Note: Summation not equal to 100% due to rounding off error.

Figure 1: Growth trends in numbers of students and teachers, by ethnicity

Equity Considerations

Table 3 shows a remarkable increase in equity in

terms of the ethnic distribution of primary school

enrolment. The ethnic distribution of students in

primary school is close to the ethnic distribution

in the population aged 0-16, as shown in Table 5

below. By 2005/06, ‘Lao Theung’ and ‘Lao

Soung’ students had become under-represented

by only one percentage point when compared

with their distributions in the age 0-16 population.

The remarkable progress made in the ethnic

distribution of primary school enrolment,

however, has not been matched by progress in the ethnic distribution of primary school teachers. This can also

be seen in Table 5. Although the proportion of non-Lao ethnic group teachers (Lao Loum) has increased, the

increase has not kept pace with the burgeoning enrolment of non-Lao ethnic group students. In some ways, the

Table 5: Ethnic distribution of population, students,

and teachers (percent), 2005/06

Population

Total Age 0-16 Teachers Students

Lao Loum 65 60 81 63

Lao Theung 23 25 14 24

Lao Soung 11 14 5 13

Total 100 100 100 100

Source: Tables 2, 3 and 4 above.

Note: Summation not equal to 100% due to rounding off

error

6

situation has become worse: the likelihood of a ‘Lao Theung’ or ‘Lao Soung’ student being taught by ‘Lao

Theung’ or ‘Lao Soung’ instructor has fallen, as shown in Table 6.

Table 6: Teachers per 1,000 students among the three traditional categories

99/00 00/01 01/02 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06

Lao Loum 38 38 39 39 38 39 40

Lao Theung 23 23 23 22 20 18 18

Lao Soung 17 17 17 16 14 13 13

Total 33 33 33 33 31 31 31

Student/Teacher Ratio 30 30 30 31 32 32 32

Source: MOE, Annual Bulletins, 1999/2000-2005/06.

Pedagogical Considerations

Table 5 shows the ratio of teachers per 1,000 students, by ‘ethnic’ category. The overall student/teacher ratio

has increased slightly, in line with the MOE policy of enabling expansion of other sub-sectors. However, for

every 1,000 ‘Lao Loum’ students, there are 40 ‘Lao Loum’ teachers today, compared with 38 in 1999/2000. By

contrast, for every 1,000 ‘Lao Theung’ students there are now 18 ‘Lao Theung’ teachers, compared with 23 in

1999/2000. For every 1,000 ‘Lao Soung’ students there are currently 13 ‘Lao Soung’ teachers, as against 17 in

1999/2000.

Although the substantially improved enrolment rates have obvious pedagogical benefits (more children

attending school; more ‘school learning’), the worsening access of ethnic group children to teachers who

understand their language and culture hinders efficient and effective learning. It also makes it difficult for the

educational authorities, curriculum developers, and textbook writers to understand the learning problems faced

by non-Lao speaking children.

There is no data set which allows for the estimation of dropout and repetition rates by ethnicity, but the 2005

census makes it possible to relate non-participation in schooling to ethnicity, as shown in Table 7. In total, over

100,000 children aged 11-16 (more than 11%) had never attended school. Most children who have not attended

school by that age never will attend, at least not as children. As shown by the Gender Parity Index (GPI =

%females / %males), girls are nearly twice as likely as boys to never attend (15.7% compared to 7.7%). There

are very substantial differences in non-participation rates among the ethno-linguistic groups. For the Mon-

Khmer category, over 20% of children aged 11-16 have never attended school; for the Tibeto-Burman, over

40%; and for the Hmong Yao, 20%. For all four major ethno-linguistic categories in Table 7, on average non-

participation is much higher for girls than for boys.

There is considerable variation in participation rates within these ethno-linguistic categories, as shown by some

examples in Table 8. For the Tri and Pacoh groups in the Mon-Khmer category, and the Ahka group in the

Tibeto-Burman category, more than half of children in the age range 11-16 had never attended school.

Meanwhile only 12% of the Kmhmou (Mon-Khmer) and 8% of the Singsily or Phounoi (Tibeto-Burman)

never attend school. In all of these examples, the total number of children in the base population (total number

of children aged 11-16) was over 2,000. For some other ethnic groups in which the base population was

smaller, the variation between groups was even greater.

Table 7: Children aged 11-16 who have never attended school, by gender and ethnicity

7ever attended Total % 7ever attended

Ethnicity Male Fem. Total Male Fem. Total % M % F %T GPR

Lao-Tai 10,953 22,839 33,792 299,295 278,614 577,909 3.7 8.2 5.8 2.2

Mon-Khmer 15,043 25,875 40,918 94,983 92,098 187,081 15.8 28.1 21.9 1.8

Tibeto-Burman 3,964 6,099 10,063 12,622 11,752 24,374 31.4 51.9 41.3 1.7

Hmong Yao 4,387 11,047 15,434 39,848 37,140 76,988 11.0 29.7 20.0 2.7

Total 34,347 65,860 100,207 446,748 419,604 866,352 7.7 15.7 11.6 2.0

Source: 2005 National Census, author tabulation

7

Based on the evidence of the third Lao Expenditure and Consumption Survey (LECS 3), King and van de

Valle (2005) found that language itself is not generally given by parents as a reason for their children never

attending school. More frequently given reasons were distance to school (lack of access) and lack of interest

(low perceived utility of schooling). Both of these factors, however, can be influenced by the ethno-linguistic

context. For example, antagonism between ethnic groups can sometimes make it impossible for children from

one community to attend a school nearby (‘If they are attending that school, then we are not!’). Low perceived

utility can be in part a result of lower performance levels by non-Lao speaking children. This is suggested by

Table 9.

Table 8: Age 11-16, 3ever attended school, by ethnicity – some examples of inter-group variation

7ever attended Total Age 11-16 % 7ever attended

Ethnicity Male Female Total Male Fem. Total %M %F %T GPR

Lao-Tai

Lao 8,326 18,589 26,915 247,608 229,375 476,983 3.4 8.1 5.6 2.4

Tai 494 967 1,461 19,194 18,091 37,285 2.6 5.3 3.9 2.1

Xaek 404 815 1,219 2,126 2,140 4,266 19.0 38.1 28.6 2.0

Mon-Khmer

Kmhmou 3,697 7,712 11,409 47,196 45,546 92,742 7.8 16.9 12.3 2.2

Tri 991 1,216 2,207 1,625 1,565 3,190 61.0 77.7 69.2 1.3

Pacoh 407 657 1,064 1,003 1,066 2,069 40.6 61.6 51.4 1.5

Tibeto-Burman

Ahka 2,936 4,698 7,634 7,306 6,643 13,949 40.2 70.7 54.7 1.8

Singsily 189 305 494 3,049 3,103 6,152 6.2 9.8 8.0 1.6

Hmong Yao

Hmong 3,894 10,473 14,367 37,723 35,130 72,853 10.3 29.8 19.7 2.9

Yao-Mien 493 574 1,067 2,125 2,010 4,135 23.2 28.6 25.8 1.2

Source: 2005 National Census, author tabulation

These demographic changes

represent a challenge for the

education authorities. For

example, even among the Lao-Tai

category (‘Lao Loum’), 16% of

boys and girls aged 11-16 cannot

read and write Lao, as shown in

Table 9. Among the linguistically

quite diverse ‘Other’ category, which covers the Mon-Khmer and Tibeto-Burman groups (‘Lao Theung’) and

the Hmong-Yao groups (‘Lao Soung’), 36% of boys and 42% of girls between 11 and 16 years of age cannot

read and write Lao. No evidence is available on ability to read and write languages other than Lao. Of the

780,000 non Lao-Tai children in this age group, 39% (36% of boys and 42% of girls) reportedly cannot read

and write Lao. This has not only educational implications but also regional political implications: in 79 of the

142 districts in Laos, all children aged 11-16 belong to non-Lao Tai ethnic minority categories (non Lao-Tai),

according to the 2005 census.

Conclusion: Reaching the Unreached

Although the above findings indicate something of the scale of the problem, they cannot be used to suggest

specific solutions for particular remote schools, communities, districts, or provinces. There are four essential

points to consider:

Point 1: Different communities have different developmental needs based on the real conditions in the

community, including the level of development and economic integration with the larger economy;

Point 2: School children’s learning needs are different in different communities;

Point 3: Learning needs of the community change over time, as the real conditions of the community

change;

Table 9: 3umber of children aged 11-16 by literacy and ethnicity

Boys Girls

Literate

7ot

Literate

% 7ot

Lit. Literate

7ot

Literate

% 7ot

Lit.

Lao-Tai 321,623 62,388 16 311,703 59,353 16

Other 252,853 144,658 36 220,958 162,965 42

Source: National Census 2005 author tabulation.

8

Point 4: Schools help to change the real conditions of the community if, and only if, they are sufficiently

effective that children do not drop out of school, for example because they are not learning or

because they do not see the utility.

If different communities have different needs, then it would be a serious error to attempt to impose standardised

solutions. Because of the complexity of the demographic and linguistic context, solutions can only emerge from

local communities in cooperation with the local and district education authorities, based on an understanding of

the concrete situation in each community. This understanding must include comprehension of the informed

aims and objectives of the community, and of the alternatives available.

Provision of Qualified Teachers

The most difficult problem for the education authorities to solve has been the provision of qualified teachers to

remote schools. For many ethnic group communities, the ideal solution would be to have qualified teachers

from their own community, or a neighbouring community, or at least teachers who know the language and

culture of the local children. This would be completely consistent with overall education policy, but in practice

a chain of policies and practices related to selection and financing of teacher training candidates, to

employment, and to deployment of trained teachers hinders this approach (Noonan and Xaiyasensouk, 2007).

Policy development and institutional development related to teacher education and training is needed to support

the penetration of primary education into all communities across the Lao PDR.

Of course, it should not be assumed that all non-Lao speaking communities would prefer to have primary

school teachers from their own ethnic group. Some do and some do not, depending on the particular situation in

the community. Factors affecting this include the degree of linguistic homogeneity of the community, the use of

a local lingua franca other than Lao, and other variables which can influence school participation and learning

outcomes. Community preferences and the learning needs of the children in a community cannot be determined

from outside that community. The informed views of the people involved need to be consulted.

Ethnic Group Boarding Schools

Across the country there are fifteen provincial and three central ‘ethnic group boarding schools’. Each province

is are served by either its own boarding school or by one school in a neighbouring province. Recruits to these

ethnic boarding schools are primary school and lower secondary school graduates from poor and remote

communities. For general reference, because the data is not widely published, enrolment figures for primary

ethnic boarding schools are shown in Table 10, and figures for secondary ethnic boarding schools are given in

Table 11.

Table 10: Primary ethnic minority boarding schools enrolment, 2005-06

Students by grade

Grade 1 Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Total

Province Tot Fem Tot Fem Tot Fem Tot Fem Tot Fem Tot Fem

Phongsaly 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Luang Namtha 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Oudomxay 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Bokeo 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 8 24 7 64 15

Luang Prabang 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Houaphan 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 11 40 11

Xayaboury 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Xieng Khouang 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Vientiane 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Bolikhamxay 0 0 1 1 3 0 9 0 6 1 19 2

Khammouane 35 9 11 3 33 7 46 11 59 18 184 48

Savannakhet 0 0 0 0 33 2 33 6 33 9 99 17

Saravane 0 0 62 15 58 4 60 14 98 22 278 55

Sekong 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Champassak 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Attapeu 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 8 27 8

Total 35 9 74 19 127 13 188 39 287 76 711 156

Source: MOE, Department of General Education, Division of Ethnic Minorities

9

Quality primary education should be delivered in the community. As a general solution, a boarding school

approach would not be feasible or sustainable, although it could be a solution in some limited circumstances.

For example, secondary ethnic group boarding schools could serve as a recruitment base for teacher training.

Many of the students in ethnic group boarding schools want to become teachers and to return to their

communities to teach. In 2000, a pilot teacher training programme was introduced to the ethnic group boarding

school in Luang Prabang, but the programme was not continued after the pilot. A study should be conducted of

the feasibility of employing ethnic group boarding schools for recruiting and possibly training teachers.

Language of Instruction

In light of the present and emergent ethno-linguistic composition of the school-age population and the strong

commitment of GOL to the EFA goal 2 and MDG 2, it would be prudent to carefully consider the most

effective ways of meeting the learning needs of children from non-Lao speaking home backgrounds, including

the need for learning to speak, read, and write Lao and understand spoken Lao. UNESCO supports mother

tongue instruction as a means of improving educational quality by building upon the knowledge and experience of the learners and teachers (UNESCO, 2003). With such an approach, children initially learn to read and write

in the language they know best, and then use their literacy skills as a tool for learning the national language.

Literacy in any language, of course, can only be maintained if there is an adequate supply of reading material,

not only for school children but also for adolescents and adults, and for entertainment as well as for study.

As a matter of economic reality, it is not possible with conventional methods to produce instructional materials

in all fifty or more languages spoken in Laos. More cost-effective methods should be considered. Nor is it

possible to provide qualified teachers in all the local languages spread throughout the country. Neither is it

necessary, however: it is possible to meet the language learning needs of the large majority of non-Lao

speaking children with much more modest aims and judicious allocation of resources (Noonan, 2005).

Table 11: Secondary ethnic minority boarding schools enrolments, 2005-06

Students by grade

Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grade 9 Grade 10 Grade 11 Total

Province Tot Fem Tot Fem Tot Fem Tot Fem Tot Fem Tot Fem Tot Fem

Phongsaly 30 14 30 12 30 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 90 31

Luang Namtha 43 13 57 19 52 20 43 12 43 7 0 0 238 71

Oudomxay 70 25 97 37 92 24 34 7 32 14 33 5 358 112

Bokeo 21 4 22 7 37 10 42 11 0 0 0 0 122 32

Luang Prabang 107 20 124 40 151 50 167 44 165 35 121 33 835 222

Houaphan 52 22 65 20 53 18 102 41 80 20 45 15 397 136

Xayaboury 101 31 115 25 89 38 147 50 184 74 114 47 750 265

Xieng Khouang 40 16 90 25 75 13 90 28 34 11 29 13 358 106

Vientiane 127 56 112 41 87 29 72 20 90 32 98 25 586 203

Bolikhamxay 20 2 5 2 8 2 12 2 2 0 4 2 51 10

Khammouane 29 10 28 3 35 6 43 7 26 6 20 3 181 35

Savannakhet 63 7 63 10 86 15 161 64 133 59 136 50 642 205

Saravane 104 25 79 17 65 11 43 11 90 18 76 12 457 94

Sekong 30 8 24 7 23 10 44 13 28 12 24 9 173 59

Champassak 68 35 69 28 41 15 42 16 67 30 67 26 354 150

Attapeu 98 33 84 21 84 28 61 25 63 23 53 12 443 142

Total 1,003 321 1,064 314 1,008 294 1,103 351 1,037 341 820 252 6,035 1,873

Source: MOE, Department of General Education, Division of Ethnic Minorities

Note: Includes both quota and non-quota students.

It may be time for a more progressive approach to the complex issues concerning language of instruction.

Before making any policy change in this area, however, it would be important to open the issues for informed

discussions supported by ethnographic, linguistic, and pedagogical research in the Lao context, plus

international research. Development cooperation agencies should also be involved in the discussion as a source

of both experience and financial support for research, study tours, seminars, workshops, and other related

activities.

10

About the Author

Richard Noonan (richard.noonan@yahoo.com) is an education economist who began working in Laos

on short-term missions in 1995, and served as Senior Advisor for Sector Investment at the MOE from

2002-2005. He has lived in Vientiane since 2002. The author is indebted to many colleagues in the

Ministry for generously sharing their information, understanding and ideas over the years, to the

National Statistical Centre for providing the voluminous census data subset, and to the Swedish

International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida) for financing the data set and the analysis in connection

with a study of alternative models for teacher training for remote areas. Complete breakdowns by district for

Tables 2 and 7 are available from the author on request.

References

GOL. 2006. Results from the Population and Housing Census 2005’. Vientiane: Steering Committee for Census of Population and Housing. Vientiane.

King, Elizabeth & van de Valle, Dominique. 2005. Schooling and Poverty in Lao PDR. Washington, DC: World Bank, Development Research Group.

MOE. 2000-2006. Annual Bulletins, 1999/2000–2005/06. Vientiane.

MOE, Unicef & Unesco. 2002. Lao National Literacy Survey, 2000’. Vientiane: MOE.

MOE. 2007. Education for All Mid-Decade Assessment and Fast Track Initiative. Vientiane: MOE.

MOIC (no date). ‘Ethnographic Data Bank of Laos’. Retrieved October 29, 2007 from <http://www.laosethnicculture.org/english/resources.html>

Noonan, R. 2005. “Language of Instruction: Economic Analysis of the Use of Minority Languages for Early Education”. Juth Pakai: Perspectives on Lao Development. 1:3..

Noonan, R. and V. Xaiyasensouk. 2007. Alternative Models of Teacher Training for Remote Areas. Final Report. Vientiane: Sida.

UNESCO. 2003. “Education in a Multilingual World”. Education Position Paper. Paris: UNESCO.