Language barrier:. Russia’s strict new law targeting migrant children in education system

The Russian State Duma has swiftly passed a bill that bans the enrollment of migrant children who do not speak Russian in Russian schools. POLITIK Central Asia has examined the reasons behind the government’s decision to adopt such a radical approach after extensive discussions and debates.

Command from the top

On December 11, the Russian parliament approved a document requiring migrant children to be tested for their knowledge of the Russian language as a prerequisite for enrolling in schools. This initiative was put forward by 15 deputies, including State Duma Chairman Vyacheslav Volodin and Deputy Speaker Irina Yarovaya, who also leads the migration policy commission, along with heads of all five Duma factions. The involvement of such prominent figures suggests that the bill was likely prearranged with the support of the Presidential Administration.

This decision comes on the heels of concerns raised by Ekaterina Smoroda, the children’s rights ombudsman for the Ulyanovsk region. She brought to President Vladimir Putin’s attention the challenges faced by migrant children in Russia. Smoroda pointed out that the workload for teachers has significantly increased, while funding has not been provided for additional classes tailored to migrant children. Consequently, academic performance in classes with these students has declined, negatively impacting schools’ departmental ratings and funding. This discussion took place in December 2023, and by January 2024, Putin had instructed officials to develop proposals to address the issue.

It’s crucial to note that Smoroda did not advocate for any bans during her conversation with the President. Instead, she stressed the necessity for migrant children to receive various supports, including benefits, trained teachers, specialized programs, tailored adaptation classes, and adjustments to Federal State Educational Standards (FSES). Unfortunately, her calls for support have been overshadowed by the enaction of a new “prohibitory” law set to take effect on April 1, 2025, coinciding with the registration period for first-grade students. As a result, some migrant children may find themselves unable to enroll.

The bill’s explanatory note asserts that “the fundamental requirement for studying in the Russian Federation is proficiency in Russian as the state language.” Mandatory language testing is being introduced to “ensure that foreign citizens can successfully master educational programs.” However, the government’s response indicates that the methodology for assessing Russian language proficiency is still a work in progress and needs further development.

Triumph of the hardliner

The initiative brought forward by the official from Ulyanovsk became a defining moment for State Duma deputy Mikhail Matveev, known for his nationalist rhetoric (though his name is listed last among the bill’s sponsors). After hearing about the president’s directive, Matveev promptly submitted his own proposals to the Russian government in February, citing France—a country often mentioned in Russia as an example of failed migration policies.

Matveyev proposed, “The only viable solution is to introduce an entrance exam for all applicants to general educational institutions in Russia—primarily schools—to assess their knowledge of the Russian language. We should have the option to refuse acceptance of a child who does not speak it sufficiently.” He emphasized that teaching the Russian language should be the responsibility of migrant parents, not Russian taxpayers, and suggested that the state could only assist by supporting a network of paid and free language courses.

Throughout 2024, Matveyev maintained active communication with Russian government agencies, regularly updating his followers on Telegram after each development. Whenever he was unhappy with the officials’ replies, he didn’t hold back in confronting them. He expressed particular dissatisfaction with Minister of Education Sergei Kravtsov, who initially claimed that “foreign citizens and stateless persons have the same rights as Russian citizens to receive preschool and general education on a generally accessible and free basis.” However, Kravtsov also recognized the need for “language diagnostics,” which would permit curriculum adjustments, including additional lessons focused on the Russian language.

In response to the minister’s stance, Matveyev remarked, “Essentially, children who don’t speak Russian will still be accepted, but teachers will face the added burden of ‘extra modules’ while trying to teach them the language.” He noted that even with potential extra funding to address this challenge, there remains a significant shortage of qualified specialists to teach Russian to foreigners.

The paper trail

The finalized bill faced little opposition. The government commission only urged the bill’s authors to align it with international treaties and clarify the legal status of children who cannot attend school due to insufficient Russian knowledge. However, the deputies ignored these recommendations, and by the third reading, the document remained unchanged.

While presenting the bill in the State Duma, Deputy Speaker Irina Yarovaya stated, “Testing will be conducted in the most comfortable environment, specifically at the school where the application is submitted.” She mentioned that if a child fails the test, they will have unlimited chances to retake it. Additionally, the law will not be applied retroactively, meaning that those already enrolled in school will not face testing. “This is not a ban on entering school; rather, it signifies that the child needs to be ready for school,” she emphasized.

Despite this, there were opposing voices in the State Duma. Konstantin Zatulin, First Deputy Chairman of the Committee on CIS Affairs, Eurasian Integration, and Relations with Compatriots, and Oleg Smolin, First Deputy Chairman of the Committee on Science and Higher Education, both publicly criticized the bill and suggested amendments. Smolin proposed creating “leveling” classes for migrant children, referring to those who might be denied entry to schools due to their poor command of Russian as a “potential base for crime.” Nevertheless, before the second reading, he deemed his amendment “excessive,” resulting in its swift rejection. 

During the meeting, Zatulin voiced his concerns, suggesting the introduction of additional training for foreign children to help them pass the test. He cautioned, “School is not merely a place for education but also upbringing. If we deny them entry, we leave them on the streets.” His remarks drew criticism.

In response to Zatulin’s perspective, Vyacheslav Volodin emphasized, “Konstantin Fedorovich’s suggestions imply that newcomers to our country should not be required to prepare for or learn the Russian language before their arrival, shifting some of the responsibility toward us. Our view differs; families choosing to relocate to our country should learn the language. This not only aids in language acquisition but also fosters understanding of our culture, traditions, and legal frameworks, ultimately helping them integrate more effectively.” His remarks received encouragement from many in the assembly.

In the third and final reading, the bill was favorably supported by 409 deputies, with no abstentions reported. The lone dissenting vote came unexpectedly from one of the authors, Oleg Nilov, who later clarified that his vote was an error. “This is a most peculiar situation. I intended to vote ‘for,’ without reservation. Please ensure this clarification is recorded in the official minutes,” he conveyed.

Threats from the ‘right’

The discussion surrounding the sensitive bill has been marked by intense backlash against critics and anyone who dared to express doubts. For example, during his address in the State Duma, Konstantin Zatulin revealed that he had been threatened with being “killed” while alarming messages circulated online, offering rewards for raping his wife and children. In response, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Investigative Committee of Russia announced they would look into these disturbing threats.

Outside government circles, the discourse was equally polarized. One notable voice on the matter is Vadim Trukhachev, a political scientist and associate professor at the Russian State University for the Humanities. In an interview with POLITIK Central Asia, he argued that children of migrants who do not speak Russian should not be in Russia at all.

“Even if these children learn the language, many will struggle to fit into society. They and their parents often position themselves against Russia,” he stated. “They harbor animosity toward it and the Russian populace that forms the state. At best, they wish to maintain their national identity, which sets them back from successfully integrating into a society largely defined by ethnic Russians in most areas.”

Supporters of stricter migrant regulations often point to the United Arab Emirates as a model to emulate and advocate for prohibiting foreign workers from bringing their families to Russia. They argue that these workers should only come at the invitation of specific employers and return home immediately once their contracts expire. However, Russian political scientist Alexander Kynev challenged this perspective in an interview with POLITIK Central Asia, asserting that such an approach is impractical.

“Russia is part of European civilization and its demographic trends. It’s unreasonable to use the Emirates or China as benchmarks for our situation,” he noted. “We face a worker shortage, and forcibly separating families for years is inhumane.”

Proponents of the bill further argue that the increasing number of non-Russian-speaking children in schools disrupts the educational experience for others. However, the explanatory note accompanying the legislation needed more statistical evidence to back this claim, though that doesn’t imply such data is unavailable.

He pointed out that when a husband and wife migrate together for work, they usually try to bring their children along. Sometimes, a man may start off alone, and after securing a good job and income, he may eventually bring his family to join him. Despite this, these parents frequently face hurdles when attempting to enroll their children in kindergartens or schools, often being told they need to complete registration first or that there are no available spots.

No admission to schools anyway

Human rights activist and lawyer Zarnigor Omonillaeva, who has been active in Moscow since 2016, highlights that migrant families have been grappling with significant challenges related to school enrollment for several years.

“In my experience, the peak of migrant arrivals was in 2021 and early 2022,” she told POLITIK Central Asia. “Subsequently, Russia introduced electronic document submission for school enrollment, complicating the process considerably. Certain documents are rejected, while others fail to meet the requirements. For instance, when we submit our passports electronically, we must also provide translations. Additionally, seals on Uzbek birth certificates must be translated separately, which can easily be mistaken for ordinary inscriptions during submission. Overall, there are numerous bureaucratic hurdles stemming from misunderstandings.”

Omonillaeva further noted that schools often require medical insurance for children and proof of permanent residency, which many migrants lack. Generally, migrants receive permits that are only valid for one year, restricting their ability to register long-term.

This issue predominantly affects Moscow. This year has been especially tough, as many children with Tajik and Uzbek documents who speak foreign languages have been denied school admission. Anna Orlova, curator of the “Migrant Children” project, explained to POLITIK Central Asia that around 270 children are currently enrolled in a welcoming organization, with 170 being first-graders. “They are proficient in Russian and would have successfully passed all assessments, yet they weren’t tested at all; they were simply turned away due to their foreign passports, with schools citing a lack of available spots. This is the only loophole in the law that allows schools to refuse admission. However, if there are truly no places, municipal education authorities are required to find alternatives, as the law on education is universally applicable. Parents are fighting, but their children are still not accepted into schools, and that’s where the lawlessness lies,” Orlova expressed indignantly.

The practical implementation of the new law remains uncertain. A possible outcome could be the emergence of a market for services aimed at preparing for language testing, focusing on standardized tasks. However, this may not accurately reflect the true proficiency of migrant children in Russian.

“If such a framework develops, I don’t see it as harmful,” said Mikhail Matveyev, the bill’s initiator, in an interview with POLITIK Central Asia. “As long as it’s established through private courses rather than state funding, it would essentially involve Russian language testing—simply an examination. There will be a methodology, and state institutions, not private ones, will administer these tests. Therefore, it won’t be easy to deceive the “system.”

Matveyev also expressed a wish to tighten the bill’s provisions further. “I “think these regulations should apply to all parents sending their children to school, regardless of their nationality—Russian citizens or foreigners alike” he stated.”  “It shouldn’t matter whether they are Uzbeks, Tatars, Yakuts, or anyone else for whom Russian isn’t their first language. Every parent must ensure their child is prepared for school and understands the language of instruction. While national schools exist in various republics—like Yakut, Tatar, or Bashkir—I’m not entirely certain about their status. Ultimately, this should guarantee that all children should have rights, and no child should get a pass if they hold a Russian passport while neglecting to prepare for school in Russian. That wouldn’t be fair. However, I’ve been informed that this law doesn’t apply to Russians. Perhaps this will be revised once the law is in effect and these issues become “ore apparent.”

The adaptation of a healthy person

The charity project “Migrant Children,” in which Anna Orlova is involved, was launched nearly nine years ago to teach Russian to children of migrants and help them adapt. Currently, around 500 individuals from various cities in Russia and abroad participate in both offline and online groups within the project. In Krasnogorsk, near Moscow, “Migrant Children” conducts extra “Russian as a foreign language” lessons in three local schools.

In response to a recently adopted bill by the State Duma, Anna Orlova emphasized the need for support for children who cannot enroll in school due to their limited language skills, arguing that this education should be free.

“These children should attend Russian language courses for six months to a year, after which they should take an assessment,” she explains. “When a child doesn’t know the language but is placed in a classroom, it creates a very uncomfortable situation for them. They struggle to understand the teacher, can’t communicate with their classmates, and may act out—boys might get into fights, while girls might withdraw.”

In class, these children often resort to cheating, and by the time they begin to grasp the material—typically after six months—they face a sea of failing grades. “They start to believe this is the norm, but it’s far from it,” she adds. Orlova points out that securing a solid language foundation before entering school is common in many countries. “During our pre-COVID trips to France and Germany, we saw that it’s typical for children to spend a year, or even two if necessary, learning the language before smoothly transitioning into school. We also experienced this at ‘Kovcheg’—the ‘Kovcheg-XXI’ lyceum near Moscow—where the school welcomed two classes of non-Russian-speaking children, taught them the language, and then seamlessly integrated them into classes based on their grade levels,” she recalls.  

The concentrated challenge

The issue arises in classrooms where more than half of the children do not speak Russian, a situation made even more complex by the lack of awareness among many. According to a letter from Education Minister Kravtsov to Deputy Matveyev, “the number of foreign citizens does not exceed 10% of the total number in classes.” However, this statistic reflects only the average across Russia. For instance, at Secondary School No. 16 in Krasnoyarsk, migrant children account for nearly 70% of the student body, mainly due to the school’s proximity to large markets and affordable rental housing. Similarly, in Novosibirsk, School No. 66 near the Khiloksky Market has earned the reputation of being a “migrant school.” As of 2021, around 25% of its students were Russian, with the remainder coming from Central Asian nations. Yekaterinburg also sees many foreign children attending School No. 149 in the Novaya Sortirovka microdistrict, near the Tagansky Ryad market. Notably, in 2022, Volgograd’s School No. 33 in the Aeroport settlement opened the first class composed exclusively of children from labor migrant families. Helping these children adapt and learn the language has fallen squarely on teachers.

Political scientist Mikhail Vinogradov commented in an interview with POLITIK Central Asia that there’s no clear justification for implementing such drastic measures; instead, it appears to be a way to shift the agenda in response to the “objectively existing neurosis in society.” He pointed out that, akin to many issues, the focus tends to be on restrictions rather than on fostering socialization. Vinogradov also speculated that the Russian authorities might be trying to curb migration flows. However, considering a labor shortage, he believes the economic rationale for such actions is “not indisputable.”

In a related perspective, another Russian political analyst, Alexander Kynev, shared his views with POLITIK Central Asia.

“This obviously harmful bill has three primary groups of supporters,” he remarked. “First, there are the fringe nationalists who initiated it. Although this group is small, they are very active, and even officials find it hard to distance themselves from them. The second group consists of political strategists working for the authorities, who aim to divert public focus from pressing issues like the military operation and decreasing purchasing power. Finally, there are those who gain from illegal migration; the uncertain status of these workers benefits them, while efforts toward integration would jeopardize their advantage.”

Kynev also predicted that economic realities would eventually unravel such measures. “These initiatives are often announced with much fanfare but quietly retracted later. I distinctly remember how mandatory registration was implemented in Moscow during the ’90s,” he recalled. “Authorities would stop migrants on the street, and riot police would sometimes raid student dorms. Yet, before long, this measure faded away.”

Anna Zaharova

• #Politics
• #Popular