Education Reform Challenges in Bosnia and Herzegovina
Valery Perry, 24.08.2009, (0)
Discussing the three different patterns of discrimination in education in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Valery Perry argues for, and draws the contours of, new educational models based on multiculturalism and inclusion which would replace the current respective practices of separation or quiet assimilation in this area.
Discussing the three different patterns of discrimination in education in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Valery Perry1 argues for, and draws the contours of, new educational models based on multiculturalism and inclusion which would replace the current respective practices of separation or quiet assimilation in this area.
Introduction
A tour of schools throughout Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) quickly reveals that the education sector is in need of reform and investment at many levels. Outside of the larger population centers, schools often lack basic teaching supplies, many of the schools lucky enough to have science or IT laboratories have outdated and broken equipment, and neglect of the basic infrastructure of school buildings has resulted in the country’s children sitting in crumbling buildings with leaky roofs and inadequate heating. Such a situation is common in countries suffering from economic stagnation, as well as political and economic transition, and it often takes time for sufficient resources to be invested in this basic source of future human capital.
However, in terms of the long-term stability and security of this post-war and still largely divided country, and its prospects for future democratic consolidation and European integration, the single biggest challenge facing schools in BiH is the divisive nature of the content children learn, and the fragmented school communities in which they sit. This is a reflection of the distinctly post-war environment that affects BiH and other countries in the western Balkans as they struggle to deal simultaneously with post-war and pre-accession transition and reform challenges. While transition-focused reforms may focus on technical aspects of systems, structures, investment and public administration, the post-war elements of reform must in addition tackle the hearts and minds aspect of social change. It is possible for observers sceptical of ongoing reform efforts to note that in terms of education, there is no single European model or standard; they may also note seemingly divisive educational practices in places such as Belgium or Spain. However, in a fragile democracy with lingering wartime social and political cleavages still lacking a shared sense among citizens and politicians about the legitimacy of the state itself, such divisions serve to prepare the ground for continued conflict. In this context, the shape and content of ongoing education reform efforts in BiH schools could either further reify the wartime divisions, or plant potential seeds for greater social inclusion, and future lasting peace.
Background
The impact of the war on the country’s schools was recognized even as the violence raged, and even the earliest reports on the issue pointed out the legacies of division and the language of ethnic hostility and distrust2. However, the Dayton Accords that ended the war and provided a loose blueprint for the peace did not explicitly note the need for education reform the way it did outline post-war plans in sectors such as the police, return, elections or military stabilization. This is unfortunate, but not surprising, as education has not traditionally been included in the peace and conflict management toolbox used by the peace negotiators or implementers3.
In spite of this, a number of efforts were initiated in the years following the signing of the Accords, as the gaping holes in the country’s education system were painfully clear. Schools were reconstructed or newly built with donations from organizations and individuals, aid provided to children and families to enable them to attend school, and various activities made an immediate impact on the lives of targeted school communities. While necessary and welcome, these initial (primarily humanitarian) efforts were piecemeal in their approach, and lacked the systemic approach necessary to begin to address the uniquely post-war problems of division and segregation.
The political, ideological and ethnonational aspects of the post-war educational systems became more clear as efforts to support sustainable return increased. As families successfully asserted their property rights, gaining legal claim to their pre-war homes, they were faced with the difficult decision of physically returning to their pre-war community to rebuild their lives, or of perhaps selling their home to continue with their lives elsewhere in BiH, or perhaps abroad. Just as the availability of work and basic means of social and community support influenced this decision-making process, so did the availability and accessibility of schools.
The country’s constitutional structure placed education at the level of the entities, and in turn, in the Federation at the level of the ten cantons. There was no state-level Ministry of Education, nor any state-level body that could provide any oversight or human rights framework related to the country’s schools. As a result, the schools in any community more or less reflected the demographics that had been in place when the war ended, and the majority ethnic group in any community put their own specific and often exclusive stamp of territorial ownership on “their” schools. The ramifications of this approach quickly became clear, and presented a real obstacle to meaningful return. Returnees determined they could not send their children to a school dominated by the educational content and symbols of the opposing majority group, while the community receiving returnees became increasingly protective of the system they had put in place for their own children.
In 2002, mirroring state-strengthening initiatives in other sectors, the international community began to focus more attention on the issue of systemic education reform, with the aim of reducing the role of politics in education, minimising the ethnic segregation that was beginning to congeal and ensuring minority rights and access to education. The OSCE Mission to BiH began dedicated work on education to address the political roots of many of the problems, and organizations such as CIVITAS and Education for Peace intensified their efforts. BiH’s membership in the Council of Europe, accompanied by numerous post-accession requirements, held out further hope that the tough nut of education reform would be finally cracked4.
The Challenge of Education
BiH has its share of reform hurdles. Police reform continues to stymie policing experts, technocrats and political advisors alike. Defense reform has made great strides, but much remains to be achieved to ensure real state security. Constitutional reform remains a holy grail many seek, and a hot potato few want to touch. However, amidst all of these very challenges, education remains perhaps the most vexing, for a number of reasons.
One explanation is the accessibility of the issue. While not everyone understands the intricacy of tax and financial reform, or has had personal experience with the judicial system, virtually every citizen has gone to school, has a child in school, or has a friend or family member with a child in school. Everyone knows what its like to be a student in a school building; to meet a teacher; to take part in school activities. In every community – and particularly in small communities – a school can be the lifeblood of the town or village, and can serve as a physical and metaphorical meeting place for people, ideas and communication. As education so directly touches so many people, almost everyone (in every country) has an opinion on it. In many ways, this can be good. People often get their first taste of civic involvement through involvement in student or parent councils – they then move on to do broader volunteer work, as individuals or through NGOs or other bodies. The school provides the entrance pass. However, the intimacy of the issue can also lead to very emotional or polarized debates and discussions, particularly when fed and influenced by a political system driven by the politics of difference rather than accommodation5
Another reason concerns the close link between identity and education. Identity issues became a core element in the dissolution of the former Yugoslavia and of the war in BiH, as issues such as ethno-national affiliation and religion were used by political leaders as powerful mobilizing factors when territorial and military lines were drawn. A region with a centuries-old tradition of convivencia was unravelled as issues were re-drawn in zero-sum terms of “them” and “us,” with no room for power-sharing among equals, and no room for complex or layered identities. After fighting, suffering and dying due to one’s (real or perceived) identity, the cultivation of identity took on new and complicated dynamics. The nationalist parties that emerged in the early 1990s consolidated power bases and images among targeted identity groups. Religious institutions (often enjoying ties with nationalist political parties) that had been barred from involvement in schools in the socialist era began to assert a right to time in public school classrooms. Nationality became the core social organization factor, with collective rights of groups taking precedence over the rights of individual citizens.
Schools became the next logical ideological battleground. Subjects such as math, and the natural and hard sciences were less relevant in this respect6. However, social science subjects with close links to identity were very useful in creating shared and monoethnic post-war communities. Courses like language, history, geography, art, music and religion provided a means to telescope ideological markers into curricula. In some cases bias was blatant; fortunately the open hate speech that existed in some textbooks and schools was largely eliminated as a result of international pressure some years ago7. Other examples of ethnic preference are more nuanced: an imbalance of materials related to neighboring countries (Serbia and Croatia); presentation of only one historical viewpoint or set of sources; active efforts to create a sense of love and attachment for one’s constituent group and language over (and often at the expense of) the others; a lack of any sense of benefit to be gained from diversity and heterogeneity; and a general lack of cultivation of the notion of civic citizenship versus ethno-national group belonging.
Third, and closely related to the points noted above, the country’s complicated and in many ways convoluted constitutional structure reified the constructed or inflated differences among people that underpinned the war. A country that confers benefits on members of a certain constituent peoples’ group while relegating “others” to second class status creates a system of ethnic preference8. A constitution that is more attuned to the rights of a group rather than the rights of an individual can be considered to be an electoral democracy, yet still fall short of being a constitutionally liberal democracy9. And a system that makes it nearly impossible for any kind of “fourth voice” to gain power vis a vis the three entrenched and privileged constituent peoples creates a situation in which even those citizens who come from mixed families, or who simply would prefer to not declare their “status,” are forced to pigeon-hole themselves in order to find a place in society. These politics of identity are at the heart of the controversies concerning education reform, as students learn from the earliest of ages that there exist an “us” and a “them,” but not necessarily an “all of us.”
Three Faces of Separation
The ethnic coloring of the country’s education systems results in three kinds of social stratification. The first is blatant and physical separation of children into different, ethnically homogenous schools. The most frequently cited cases of such separation - BiH’s infamous “two schools under one roof” – are actually the most rare. These 2-in-1s are a result of interim return-oriented efforts aimed at ensuring that minority returnee children were able to study in the town’s school buildings. In some of the country’s most bitterly divided communities10, returnee students had been forced to study in alternative schools founded in garages, café bars or other unsuitable places, so strong was opposition to any mixing of children, or to the curriculum and ethos of a different constituent group. As a first step towards aiding return, agreements were reached to ensure that returnee children could use the school building – either on separate floors, wings or during different time shifts. This was seen as a temporary solution aimed at allowing children to learn while broader political compromises and solutions were negotiated. Unfortunately, these schools continue to exist, as lasting political solutions have been either ignored or otherwise bogged down in a broader inter-party and inter-group impasse.
The image of these schools is striking in their real and symbolic commitment to separation. Bosniak and Croat children go to the same school building, but learn different curricular content with different teachers; often use different entrances; and often do not have the opportunity to interact, meet or socialize. The schools both reflect and enshrine difference. However, while these blatant examples of segregation receive much media attention, they are relatively few in number. There are approximately 5011 such schools in the Federation, out of a total of approximately 630 primary schools in BiH12. There are many more situations in which branch schools – often rural, small and poorly equipped – become de facto locations for children of one ethnicity, while children of another ethnicity happen to go to the accompanying main school building. Similarly, there are many cases in which children are bussed or otherwise transported to schools outside of their catchment area (school district) so that they can sit in a classroom solely with “their own kind13.”
A second kind of separation can be termed “quiet assimilation”. In places where there is a minimal amount of population diversity, children from the minority group find themselves to be small fish in a big pond dominated by the majority. In places where there are sufficient minority students to make a request, the group can study their own national group of subjects separately from the majority children. However, outside certain key return areas, returnee numbers are never sufficient to allow for this option. In such cases, children have no choice but to quietly learn according to the preference of the dominant group – to study their language variant, their textbooks, and their curriculum without regard to their rights as citizens of the country. Rather than cause trouble by asking for a more diverse approach to classroom teaching and school life, these children quietly assimilate.
A third kind of separation is directly linked to the demographic impact of the war and the associated campaigns of ethnic cleansing. Homogenous communities have homogenous schools. In such cases, in the frequent absence of curricular materials that strive to teach about the country’s present and historical diversity, and without concerted efforts by school officials to ensure that students have extracurricular opportunities to see other parts of the country and meet with students from different backgrounds, students have little chance to expand their academic or social boundaries, or to benefit from the enrichment of a broad and heterogeneous curriculum and school environment.
Today’s status quo is a mix of these three phenomena. Children are learning – and learning to become citizens – in three different and ethnically distinct schools, with different books and curricula. Reform efforts to date have been mixed, and greatly affected by the broader political reform climate. While several very important legislative, political and practical steps forward were made in the years immediately following the intensified international effort in this sector14, reforms have in many ways stagnated due to the broader political stalemate that has hampered reform since both the failure of constitutional reform talks in spring 2006, and the subsequent souring of relations among key political leaders and parties. In some respects, and as a result of the passing of time and the virtual end of return, schools are more segregated today than they were a few years ago15. Divisive practices have fossilized. However, constant criticisms of the country’s educational systems and practices suggest that there is still an interest in change.
The Brčko Experience
While the combination of political and practical challenges can seem daunting, BiH itself offers a good practice model that can provide a glimpse of an alternative. The District of Brčko, in the north-east corner of the country, has had integrated schools since 200116. Children go to schools together, spend time together both in the classroom and in extra-curricular activities, and do not have to choose one school building over another to ensure they can study “their” curriculum. Children learn according to the same primary school curriculum, with identity-focused national subjects (history, language and literature, geography, nature and society, religion) studied in part together, and part separate. Students use their language in the classroom, with the teacher responding in that language, and with linguistic variants taught so children recognize the differences, similarities and nuances. Latin and Cyrillic scripts are used alternately to ensure full functional literacy. School names and the symbols inside of school buildings ensure an inclusive environment. In all, children can spend up to 90% of their school day with their peers without regard to their national, ethnic or religious affiliation.
This system is not perfect. Students (and their parents) have a choice of three sets of textbooks (one each in the Bosnian, Croatian or Serbian language), leading to extra preparation time among teachers and the need for extra effort in class17. The separation of students for the national subjects reflects the difficulties faced even in the District, which has had far more direct international input into peacebuilding processes than has the rest of the country. The introduction of religious instruction is challenging educators to ensure quality instruction and appropriate alternative courses. However, steps are taken to ensure maximum flexibility in ensuring children spend more time together than apart. For example, the national group of subjects are universally available, without regard to numbers, which is unique in BiH18. Further, the national subjects are taught only partly separated, with children learning part of the subject in national group working groups, and the remainder together with the whole classroom19.
Improving the approach will take time, but the first steps taken since 2001 have been impressive, particularly in light of the slow pace of change elsewhere in the country. Most importantly, when given an informed choice, the experience of parents in Brčko suggests that they prefer their approach to integrated education than the complete separation or assimilation experienced in the rest of BiH. Further, public opinion polling comparing the views of respondents in Brčko and elsewhere in BiH illustrates a greater tolerance for diversity and integration in Brčko than in the rest of the state20. While zero-sum positions are often heard among politicians, average citizens appreciate common sense approaches.
Perhaps the most important lesson the Brčko experience can offer the rest of the country is the reminder that an inclusive school and education system does not happen of its own accord. Educational authorities must continually remind stakeholders of inclusive policies and ensure that parents are aware of choices. Teachers must be trained in methods of teaching in a diverse classroom and in cultivating a welcoming school environment. Educational strategies focused on multi-culturalism and inter-culturalism must be understood, embraced and implemented as policy and practice, in order to replace an environment of assimilation. School directors, teachers and education officials note that the approach is not always easy, and can demand much time and effort from professionals. However, they – as well as parents, teachers and students – point out that they prefer their system over the fragmented and divided approach they see in the rest of the country.
Options for the Future
Committed work, adherence to high standards and cooperative efforts among stakeholders reveals that reforms are possible at both the grassroots (micro) and higher political (macro) levels. Three broad efforts are needed if the education systems of this country are to be effectively managed at the local level according to inclusive state-level standards that contribute to a sense of shared belonging in a heterogeneous country.
First, issues of curricular content must be continually addressed. This issue goes to the core of what children are learning – through textbooks, teaching materials, from their teachers and in classroom discussions. A review of the curricula in use in primary schools throughout the country demonstrates that while the situation today is much better than it was five or ten years ago, there is still a strong ethnic flavor to certain curricula – and particularly to the identity-focussed subjects – that creates an exclusive an in-group vs. out-group environment, and severely hampers a sense of common citizenship in a European-minded state. It is important to note that curricular standards based on specific learning objectives for every subject and grade for every child in the state of BiH would not require a single or uniform curriculum (though some would admit to preferring such an approach). Standards can be introduced at the various entity or cantonal levels in BiH, and can allow room for flexibility (e.g., electives), while at the same time ensuring that every child can receive a quality and appropriate education in any school in any part of BiH.
Issues of multiperspectivity, critical thinking and diversity and multiculturalism as an asset must be increasingly, explicitly and actively integrated into curricula. Educators and policymakers determined to ensure that children learn in a manner that will help them to avoid the political mistakes or the recent violent past must make such an approach a key objective. Many conflict-affected societies share this challenge; Northern Ireland has a curricular framework that mainstreams these tenets into the broad learning goals set for each grade21. The benefits of such an approach should not be seen solely as an issue of values, but should be seen as a necessary requirement of a modern education.
Perhaps most importantly, ongoing curricular reforms must be accompanied by reforms in the teacher training available in the country, at the level of both teacher training faculties in universities (pre-service) as well as ongoing professional development opportunities (in-service). The transition from a system of teacher-centered (rote) learning to critical and active child-centered learning takes time, but requires renewed support by policy makers and those who control education budgets. The best curricular standards in the world will fail to impact schools and students if applied through teachers using outdated teaching methods.
Second, school environments must become places that are welcoming for every student, teacher and community member. This encompasses a broad range of factors: Are the school names and symbols ones that can be fully and embraced by every child and parent? Are wheelchair ramps or other accessibility mechanisms in place? Are Roma integrated into the school? Does the library have a range of books and authors, including the various linguistic variants and scripts? Do children learn about BiH’s 17 officially recognized national minorities? Are teachers using daily media and traditional teaching methods to encourage open and critical discussions about difference, diversity, prejudice and stereotypes22?
These issues are not just about education – they reflect the tone and spirit of a community. In the past two years, a spate of ethnically-tinged vandalism and incidents in schools and communities in various parts of the country have increased parental concerns about the safety of schools and communities, with the shared threat of juvenile delinquency beginning to link parents in even divided communities. The links between the political and ethnic cleavages in the country and incidents of youth violence and juvenile delinquency have begun to be increasingly acknowledged by parents, educators and officials alike. Such acknowledgement is a first step, but needs to be followed by concerted actions to address the root issues dividing schools and communities.
Third, the political debates that fuel antagonistic fires and halt all deep discussions of sectoral reform need to be separated from schools. In light of ongoing local and regional politics, this could easily be dismissed as a utopian pipedream. It can also be tempting to note that no substantive reforms will be possible until bigger constitutional reform issues are resolved. However, important educations reforms are possible in the current environment if the tenets of access, inclusion and critical thinking are at the center of the teaching process. Incremental reforms can lead to immediate changes, and a foundation for long-term processes of modernization and openness. The constitutional status of education may be maintained, but according to a strengthened set of shared standards. There is no reason why education cannot continue to be managed at the level of the entity, canton or even municipality, as long as it adheres throughout to rigorous shared standards that ensure the rights of every young citizen of the country. However, these shared standards, and a commitment to education that promotes inclusion, multiculturalism and shared citizenship must become a priority among all stakeholders at all levels if this is to occur.
Education has been low-hanging fruit for nationalist agendas. However, the constant refrain heard in media, policy and civic discussions is that without education reform, no other reform will be successful. Several years ago, if an observer would have suggested that BiH have one single state-level Ministry of Defence, they would have been greeted with derisive laughter. However, now this is a part of the country’s reality. Change is similarly possible in education, if only it is viewed as a critical part of the ongoing peace process, becomes a priority for domestic and external actors alike, and is placed at the center of the country’s “European perspective.”
1Valery Perry is the Deputy Director of the Education Department at the OSCE Mission to Bosnia and Herzegovina. All views expressed in this article are her own and do not necessarily reflect those of the OSCE.
2UNICEF issued reports on education in 1994 and 1996. See Reading, Writing and Reconciliation: Education Reform in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Valery Perry. European Centre for Minority Issues Working Paper #18, September 2003.
3There are signs that this could be changing, as practitioners throughout the world increasingly recognize the role of education in enabling lasting and sustainable peace and development in post-war societies. In 2009, an international conference in Sarajevo sponsored by Save the Children Norway focused on the importance of ensuring that educational needs are included in wartime humanitarian assistance strategies and addressed in peace talks. For more information on this effort, see http://www.savethechildren.net.
4BiH joined the Council of Europe in 2002, with post-accession requirements including, “Progress on elimination of all aspects of ethnic segregation within the education system.” See www.coe.int.
5To date, compromise has not been seen as a political asset, nor particularly rewarded or promoted by voters. A system dominated by ethnically-homogenous parties that distinguish themselves from one another by their targeted ethno-national constituency rather than by their stance on a range of issues, is not conducive to politicians seeking political accommodation on policy issues
6It is important, however, to note that the exclusive use of Croatian vocabulary throughout such classes is of national significance and helps justify separation. In cantons using the Croatian language curricula exclusively Croatian expressions for math terms etc. are used.
7See Divergent Stories, Convergent Attitudes. Pilvi Torsti. Doctoral Dissertation, Helsinki 2003, available at http://ethesis.helsinki.fi; and “20th Century History in the Textbooks of Bosnia and Herzegovina: An Analysis of Books Used in the Final Grades of Primary School.” Heike Karge. Georg Eckert Institute for International Textbook research: Braunschwesig, Germany, April 2008, available at http://www.gei.de.
8For a review of tendencies towards and concerns of democratic systems enshrining ethnic preferences, see The
Fate of Ethnic Democracy in Post-Communist Europe. Sammy Smooha and Priit Jarve (eds.). European Centre
for Minority Issues and Open Society Institute, 2005; David Collier and Steven Levitsky explored the notion of
prefixed democracies in their 1996 Kellogg Institute Working Paper, “Democracy ‘with Adjectives’: Conceptual
Innovation in Comparative Research.”
9Fareed Zakaria explored the issue of illiberal democracies in his 1997 article, “The Rise of Illiberal Democracy” (Foreign Affairs, Nov./Dec. vol. 76, no. 6, pp. 22 – 43.), in which he notes the distinction between the existence of elections, and the broader characteristics of constitutional liberalism. His use of the word “liberal” puts an emphasis on individual liberty (p. 26), and specifically notes the impact of elected nationalist, monoethnic agendas subsequently excluding other groups of citizens, in places such as the Balkans (p. 35),
10Two-in-one schools only exist in the Federation, reflecting the greater heterogeneity in some communities that make such a situation possible. Mostar, Bugojno, Stolac, and Gornji-Vakuf/Uskoplje are among some of the more “famous” divided town hosting these divided schools.
11This number of 2-in-1s is noted as approximate due to different situations and counting possibilities in terms of the organization of main and branch schools.
12The number 630 represents the overall number of schools. As many primary schools consist of multiple branch schools, there are almost 1300 branch schools, for a total of over 1900 primary school buildings.
13See Tailoring Catchment Areas: School Catchment Areas in Bosnia and Herzegovina. OSCE Mission to Bosnia and Herzegovina, September 2007. Available at www.oscebih.org.
14Successes of note include the passage of state level legislation in all areas of education, and the subsequent harmonization of lower level cantonal and entity legislation (though implementation continues to be imperfect); elimination of a large majority of school names and symbols deemed inappropriate for an inclusive and heterogeneous school environment; and great improvements in history textbooks.
15See “Discrimination of Children in Schools in Bosnia and Herzegovina.” Save the Children Norway, Regional Office for South East Europe, 2008.
16For a more detailed review of education reform in Brčko , see Lessons from Education Reform in Brčko. OSCE
Mission to BiH Education Department, October 2007, available at www.oscebih.org. For more information on
the Brčko post-war political and reform experience see “Shepherding Sovereignty: Slow Democratization in
Bosnia and Herzegovina.” Bologna Center Journal of International Affairs. Bologna, Italy: Johns Hopkins
University, May 2007, pp. 75-87, and “Democratic Ends, (un)Democratic Means? Reflections on
Democratization Strategies in Brčko and Bosnia-Herzegovina.” Bosnian Security After Dayton: New
Perspectives. Michael Innes (Ed.). Routledge, pp. 51–70, 2006.
17Initial steps have been taken to address this textbook issues in the District, with some textbooks harmonized and produced in the Bosnian and Serbian languages; however to date the Croats have elected to not participate.
18In the rest of the country, a certain minimum number of students must be present in a school to allow for the introduction of national subjects. In many places, there are simply not sufficient students to allow for this option.
19It is interesting to mention that in discussions with students in the District children will note that they dislike being separated out from one another, and would prefer staying together for all of their school work. This suggests that for them, integrated schools are normal.
20See Lessons from Education Reform in Brčko, pp. 9-10.
21One of the four strands of the curricular standards in Northern Ireland is focused on “Local and Global Citizenship,” and includes four key concepts: diversity and inclusion; human rights and social responsibility; equality and social justice; and democracy and active participation.
22Since 2008 the OSCE Mission to BiH together with Save the Children UK have supported an effort to introduce the Index for Inclusion into schools throughout the country. More information is available at www.oscebih.org.
