“… Schools and texts are one of the important ways that contemporary societies transmit their ideas of citizenship, both the idealized past and the promised future of the community. They tell us who is part of the important shared story-and who is not- and which aspects of their life experiences are central to the national experience and which are not. Textbooks in most societies present an ‘official’ story highlighting narratives that shape contemporary patriotism. ( Hein & Seldon, 2000, p. 21) ….”

Introduction

Identity is something constructed in a socialization process rather than being inherited. As being an identity type, national identity is also mostly an outcome of a socialization process. In the meantime, education is one of the most significant social agents in this context.  According to Parker, the rulers of the society “deploy most basic of educational means in attempt to develop young people into the kind of citizens required by the norms and ideals of overreaching political community” (Parker, 2001; 6). Education system is seen as a means of social reproduction (Spinner-Halev, Jeff., 2005; 142). Every state proposes its own ideology to its citizens through its education policy.

On the other hand, significant transitions take place in the education systems when important social changes occur. Educational instruction is regarded as a fundamental instrument of change in societies in transition. The changes in education policies in former Soviet countries are highly interesting at this point. These countries are in a process of reconstructing their identities after gaining their independence.  Analyzing the (national) identity construction process is the focus of this paper. Nevertheless the practical problems, being encountered in this process are also widely discussed since the main relevant contemporary articles give a wide space for these aspects. 

            Main Issues

The rapid social and political transformations between 1989 and 1991 are thoroughly handled in the articles which deal with the educational policies of the ex-Communist countries (Roper, 2005; 504). Almost all the scholars working on this field indicate a two-wave reform process in those transition societies. A hasty and rather an undirected reform process has taken place in the initial years of independence. These reforms can be seen as reactions against the totalitarian past rather than being based on an empirical and problem oriented understanding. Time pressure added extra tension on the shoulders of politicians since shift to market economy had already taken place and society was undergoing a dramatic change.  Hastiness and lack of vision considerably hampered the education system indeed. On the first hand, transformation occurred in an inspirational and spontaneous manner. A more pragmatic and economically grounded reform understanding evolved in later years and reforms were made by paying more emphasis on quality, quantity and content in late 1990’s and early 2000’s (Roper, 503). On the other hand, integration into the EU evoked more founded changes to this developing version of transition.

Despite starting from similar points, the Soviet type of education system, those countries eventually moved towards different educational models. Different approaches were taking place among different Central and Eastern European countries and those increased by the end of the decade(Rimantas, 2004, 560).  All the same time, the EU perspective also made a positive contribution in this respect. A common EU membership perspective led to a convergence among those in the later years. The full EU-membership of eight post-communist countries helped in maintaining a certain convergence in education patterns.

Unsurprisingly, nation building initiatives were very popular in the post-socialization transition and development on national identities, which are based on ethnic identities were highly influential. (Kissane, 2005; 45, 52). History education was naturally seen crucial in founding such and identity. Not the general approach changed in the history instruction but also the total hours of the history classes increased. “An ideological house cleaning” took place against all the “Russification” and “Sovietization” attempts, particularly in history education, of the regime before (Kissane, 64).

The presentation of the history was also changed considerably. A fundamental change took place in social sciences, particularly in history classes. History education is regarded as  a target for reform and potentially powerful instrument of change in revolutionary societies. 1990 can be seen as the crossroads in this sense. A huge gap exists between the instruction given before and after the independence. The presentation of contentious events has shifted from a Soviet- Russian oriented perspective to a nation oriented one. The history had been taught by giving only the positive aspects of Soviet colonization and industrialization and these instruction changed immediately and students began to learn such things highly different from the earlier generations. The progressive and voluntary explanation of the Soviet rule gave its place to forced and violent manners. 

            Nevertheless, it will not be correct to say that the independence was the origin of the transition process. Despite all the unifying attempts and the strict dominance of the Soviet Union, initial transitions had began before and 1986. Gorbacov’s “predoika”,  can be regarded as a turning point in this respect.

In addition to these, a liberal understanding began to prevail in education policies as well. The total state control of education was decreased immediately after the independence and a greater diversity, autonomy, and choice were promoted contrary to the unified and strictly controlled approach of the SU.

            Problems in Educational Transformation

            The Western world has given been substantially supporting the educational transition since its beginning. Nevertheless, significant problems hamper a fruitful interaction in many respects. Perry claims that a high quality exists in the Czech education system and assures that this is highly ignored by the Western counterparts. She accuses the Western approach as being under the influence of the social construction of the “Eastern Europe”. The author perceives the relationships as a one-way transmission of expertise from western advisors to Czech educators rather than a collaboration between peers. Main themes of the two perspectives differ a lot according to the scholar. The Czech sight underlines the inadequacy in funding and stresses the curriculum and instructor issues while the Western counterparts insistence on a convergence towards Westernizing the education system. Western aid takes place but the lack of a thorough understanding of the Czech people hinders these. A better understanding could help both sides in this respect and will lead a more productive relationship and facilitate more comprehensive education reforms. ( Laura, 2005; 265)

Organisations like the OECD play important roles in this context. Nevertheless, it is not always very adequate or helpful. Most of the observations of such organisations just reveal the shortcomings of which the reformers in those countries are already aware themselves. The recommended developments are most of the time under way but not implemented due to inadequacies. However, such organizations fulfill a significant role in making an additional impetus to these reforms (Perry, 2005; 276 )

All in all, changing the educational system needs lots of efforts. New education policies need a support from society in general and some specific social partners. Inadequacies and economic problems further hinder the educational transition. Training instructors and providing school books, that are relevant to the new system is a crucial problem even if the politicians succeed in renewing the curriculum. Training instructors according to the new approach takes time, money, and needs expertise. Publishing new texts are also another issue, particularly when the economic situation of these countries are taken into consideration. These countries also have to train specialists in the ministry of education in making and implementing reforms. The severe financial constraints also give way to a problem of equity in education. The education qualities among schools are considerably high and attendance to different school types are largely determined by socio-economic situations of the families (Mateju, Peter and Strakova, Jana, 2005; )

Not the content, but also the instruction language is changed in many countries in relation to the nationalization attempts. The instruction language became the national languages in many countries in spite of the Russian one. However, when students graduate, this becomes a problem in employment since most of the official places are practically using Russian (Kissane, 62; Roper, 505).

In addition to these, national concerns overwhelm the fairness towards different ethnic groups within those societies. Although some of these countries have a multicultural demographical structure, discriminative practices are very prone to take place due to the overemphasizing the nationalistic feelings. Romanian language school closures in Transistra, a Roman populated area in Moldavia, is worth of notice in this context. (Roper, 509-510)

All in all, these countries still strive for finding a national orientation. Not only the peoples but also the politicians are confused most of the time and a concrete national consciousness is not fully established. Since an exact definition does not take place it is really hard to establish an education policy on the national identity. This leads to unending reforms which do not give fruitful results. For instance, Kissane argues that Kazakhs have still not decided on the nature of their states. Will it be inclusive, secular, and democratic? Multicultural or based on the supremacy of the Kazakh ethnicity, these are all unanswered questions at the moment (Kissane, 64).  Zelvys addresses the same issue in the article on Moldavia. Competing visions of national identities exist in those countries. For some, Moldavia is a EU country and “should embrace its Romanian ethnic minorities and integrate into the Western institutions. On the other hand, some others argue that they are much closer to Russia and Ukraine and want Russian language and Russian oriented instructors in education”(Zelvys, 570).

Conclusion

The former Soviet countries experienced significant transitions after the end of the communist rule. Particular attention ought to be paid on education system since formulation and later the implementation of the education policy is one way to achieve social, economic, political change. Education is a major symbolic and reconstructive issue in these social process for destroying the past and redefining the future. (Kissane, 62-63). The transition in general, and transition in education in particular is fundamental and very powerful in this context. People are redefining who they are and education policy plays a crucial role in teaching the newly developing social identity. However, the situation is very fragile and not simple at all. Education is not only an important agent in identity formation and socialization but also very influential in reinforcing stereotypes and making meaningful dialogue impossible. (Roper, 501).

Educational change in ex-communist regimes is inevitable since those societies have been undergoing substantial transitions. Nevertheless, unprofessional and visionless reforms do nothing but hinder a positive transition as well as destroying the old system. Further research can be done, focusing to the hindrances in this process. Researches in this field are mostly case studies, comparative studies can be done to be able to see which problems are general and which problems have specific reasons, rising from the nature of the system of the country. Central Asian countries would probably have a different transition process than the Eastern Europe due to their Islamic background. These countries also have non-Western ethnicities and less integrated to the Western world. However, this fact is not so much taken into consideration in researches in this field.  On the other hand, a historical comparative study can be also useful to see how the other countries, with similar experiences, encountered the process.

Literature:

Coenders Marcel and Scheepers Peer. The Effect of Education on Nationalism and Ethnic Exclusionism: An International Comparison, Political Psychology, Vol. 24 No. 2, 2003, pp. 313-343.

Hein, L. & Seldon, M. Censoring History: Citizenship and Memory, Japan, the United States and Germany, New York, M. E Sharpe, 2000.

Kissane, Carolyn. History Education in Transit: Where to for Kazakhstan? Comparative Education, Vol. 41, No. 1, 2005, pp. 45-69.

Mateju, Peter and Strakova, Jana. The Role of the Family and the School in the Reproduction of Educational Inequalities in the post- Communist Czech Republic, British Journal of Sociology of Education, Vol. 26, No. 1, 2005, pp. 17-40.

Parker, Walter C. Educating Democratic Citizens: A Broad View, Theory into Practice, Volume 40, N0. 1, 2001, pp. 6-13.

Perry, Laura B. The Seeing and the Seen: Contrasting Perspectives of Post- Communist Czech Schooling, Compare, Vol. 35, No. 3, 2005, pp. 265-283.

Roper, Steven D. The Politicization of Education: Identity Formation in Moldova and Transnistria, Communist and Post- Communist Studies, Vol. 38, 2005, pp. 501-514.

Spinner-Halev, Jeff. Teaching Identity and Autonomy (Article Review), Journal of Philosophy of Education, Vol. 39, No. 1, 2005, pp. 141-147.  

Zelvys, Rimantas, Development of Education Policy in Lithuania during the Years of Transformations, International Journal of Educational Development, Vol. 24, 2004, pp. 559-571.