European Journal of Education, Vol. 29, No. 4, 1994
Human Rights Education in Schools in the
Post-Communist Context
FELISA TIBBITTS
Events in Central and Eastern Europe have confirmed the unique struggle each county is undergoing in forging paths towards civil society, democracy and market economies. This transition period offers a historically rare opportunity for establishing new political practices and ideological principles, but it is also a time of marked confusion and frustration. As US President Abraham Lincoln said: 'The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present . . . As our case is new, so we must think anew and act anew.'
In this situation, educationalists face particular challenges in the schools. As new legal frameworks evolve, individuals need to learn explicitly about their rights and responsibilities as citizens of both their country and the world, and this knowledge needs to be conveyed in such a way that individuals are also given the personal tools for acting upon these rights. Schooling is one mechanism for promoting the knowledge and practice of these democratic principles, and knowledge of human rights themes is part of the undergirding of democratic practice.
I plan to present the imperatives and complexities of introducing human rights principles at the primary and secondary levels of schooling in post-communist societies. The lessons learned to date shed general light on the challenges endemic to planning for change in political education during a period of political transition. Three questions form the core of this paper.
(1) How can the concepts of individualism, democracy and human rights best be presented in textbooks when such concepts are ill-defined and understood in popular culture, and when they are just beginning to be evidenced in social and political practice? How can such principles avoid being interpreted through the 'old lenses' conditioned to see a unitary ideological perspective?
(2) How can teaching practices that reinforce 'learner-centred' approaches rather than lecture-driven modes of teacher-student interactions be introduced in schools?
(3) How can human rights education programmes be designed so as to take into account an overall national context of political uncertainty, centralised policymaking traditions, and severe resource shortages in planning for such changes?
My primary source of experience is as project director of a three-year national effort in human rights education in Romania, which is supported by the Dutch government and carried out through the Netherlands Helsinki Committee. This project, now at the end of its first year, has subsidised the development of alternative civics materials for the 7th and 8th grades, as well as human rights -related supplementary materials for the 3rd and 4th grades, through the cooperation of a semi-governmental agency called the Institute of Educational Sciences. The project is also supporting the educational programme of a non-governmental human rights organisation, the Romanian Independent Society of Human Rights (SIRDO), which is sponsoring regional teacher training and developing supplementary teaching materials focusing exclusively on human rights themes. This primary experience is complemented by my involvement in smaller-scale projects in human rights education in Albania and Estonia, as well as numerous study visits and missions over the last four years to devise programmes in the remaining countries of Central and Eastern Europe.
Aspects of Human Rights Education at the Primary and Secondary Levels
Before proceeding further, it seems appropriate to discuss explicitly what I mean by human rights education and how I see its link with democratic culture. In a sense, all countries organise schools to conduct political education, which may be defined as the development of competencies in thinking and acting in political arenas (both governmental and non-governmental in nature) (Gillespie, 1981). A nearly synonymous term is citizenship education, although political education is potentially broader since the reference communities may be international, as well as national or local.
A useful framework for mapping the core aims of political education has been developed by Derek Heater and Judith Gillespie. This is a useful starting point for understanding the potential dimensions for human rights education.
The valuing dimension is concerned with the development of values as well as loyalties to groups. Socialisation is incorporated in some form into every political education programme, and often involves indoctrination and ceremony. The information dimension focuses on the student's knowledge base, such as the structures and functions of government and how political processes work. This approach is also common to most political education programmes.
The inquiry dimension involves the development of analytical tools or skills, whose ends may be specific to the educational programme. Inquiry may be practised in order to clarify and understand differing perspectives (including one's own), to train for decision-making processes and/or for taking a critical perspective on political life. Finally, the participation dimension prepares students to carry out the basic tasks associated with citizenship. The goal is to give students participatory experiences in their schools or communities so that these may be transferred into 'active citizenship' in their adult lives (Gillespie, 1981).
These aspects of political education may coexist and, in many cases, build upon the others. Educationalists can easily imagine the mechanisms through which these dimensions may be realised. First are the formal subjects, such as civics or social studies. Political education might also be identified within subjects for which this content is not presumably the main focus, such as literature or the arts. Similarly, this education may take place in schools through less formal (though no less deliberate) means, through school events and celebrations. Finally, since a core issue revolves around authority and power, 'appropriate roles' for young people are conveyed in the organisation of teaching and learning practices themselves, as well as in the culture of the school in general.
As a subfield within political education, human rights education can similarly be experienced quite broadly and in diverse ways by children in the school setting. Although human rights education must first be concerned with the public understanding of human rights as contained in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international conventions, and therefore incorporates the valuing and information dimensions, it cannot be considered effective unless it promotes inquiry and, ideally, action. How can human rights themes be manifest within these varying approaches?
Knowledge about human rights can be conveyed through lessons in a variety of subject areas, such as history, civics, literature, religion, or ethics/moral education. Such lessons may be incorporated into formal text and curricular guidelines, or may be brought up at the discretion of the teacher in weekly 'open hours'. Special projects may be organised with students, so that theatre productions or artistic competitions with human rights themes take place. Teachers and students mav work together to create classroom or school 'constitutions' and special programmes to convey conflict resolution skills may be organised. All these varieties of human rights education programme may be seen across the spectrum of Central and East European countries, especially in Poland, Romania and Slovakia.
In terms of information, human rights education implies learning age-appropriate content knowledge in the areas of rights and responsibilities, forms of injustice, the history of movements to fight inequality and discrimination, and international instruments for the assurance of human rights. Such topics can be introduced from the upper primary school level. On the inquiry dimension, human rights education involves the development of skills for making critical judgments, listening to and expressing views, the acceptance of personal differences, and participation in group decision making. Such skills, central to the development of a civic-minded, democratic culture in the classroom, are building blocks for society itself, and could begin to be introduced in schools as early as the pre-primary levels.
Human rights education has benefited from the moral development field. initiated by the American cognitive psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg in the 1960s. This conceptual framework continues to evolve and, likewise, the research continues to reveal clues about the conditions under which children become reinforced in their ability both to recognise and to act in just and caring ways. Distinctions have now been made between moral sensitivity, moral judgment, moral decision making and moral action. Research has linked empathy with pro-social behaviour and ethical decision making and substantiated the importance of 'moral communities' in the classroom for the reinforcement of such norms (Scott, 1991). Earlier this century, the 'pedagogy of democracy' advanced by American educationalist John Dewey emphasised the importance of the school community in the development of moral character, and the need for the classroom culture to promote dialogue, communication and care (Giroux, 1988).
These varied aspects of human rights education obviously overlap with an enlightened form of democratic education which promotes respect for rights as well as social responsibility. However, unlike the premise of political education, which is based on the notion of 'the citizen', human rights education takes as its sole premise the individual as a member of the human race. Human rights education has as its moral authority not the legitimacy of any particular state, but the inherent dignity and potential of each person as a physical, emotional, thoughtful and spiritual being. From this beginning, more practical aspects of citizenship education can be folded in. One argument, for example, would be that 'the better and more fully any citizen can implement his rights for his personal development, the better and more fully he can contribute to the development of the whole society' (Blahoz, 1990). Because human rights education specifically calls for a transcendence of national politics and values, in the modern context it is perhaps the strongest ally of educators who wish to combat intolerance and nationalism.
In practice, human rights education is no less complicated or challenging than other forms of political education. Although the philosophical foundations of human rights education suggest that it may not be as complex to move up the ladder from a 'values-information' approach to a more 'inquiry-participatory' one, the fact that such training takes place in a specific national setting and is itself part of a socialising agenda for the schools, makes this problematic. A conference report sponsored by the Council of Europe directly referred to this tension:
Civics has always been torn between the normative transmission of imposed principles and critical training for freedom. The paradox is enormous for, on the one hand, human rights presuppose free acceptance resulting from the exercise of critical reason and therefore cannot be imposed, while on the other, as the foundation of our democratic societies, they are in fact imposed on everyone as the moral and legal norm on the basis of which they think about the community and how conflicts can be resolved (Audigier & Lagelee, 1993).
The remainder of this paper is devoted to the complexities and challenges of promoting human rights education in the post-communist context.
Context for Change: educational practice in Central and Eastern Europe
With the fall of the Berlin Wall and the successful revolutions that ensued, schools within Central and Eastern Europe were left with a special legacy in the field of political education. Schools had been overly used as the main instrument for converting children to the communist cause (Fischer-Galati, 1952) and those teachers specialising in the social sciences (who were still in the schools) had self-selected into an area that was highly ideologised. Although the degree of wholehearted compliance with the official curriculum tended to decrease over time and varied from country to country--there is anecdotal evidence from Poland, in particular, that suggests that some teachers took liberties in their classrooms to distinguish for students the 'truths' contained in the history books from those commonly known by their parents (Tibbitts, 1991)--the educational systems largely conformed to the socialising aims of the communists.
Referring to the Heater and Gillespie analytical framework, political education was anchored in the valuing and information dimensions. Marxist-Leninism pervaded the outlook in texts, and new vocabularies were introduced to reinforce this; for example, in Romania, 'popular democracies' was substituted by 'triumph of popular-democratic and socialist revolutions' (Capita, 1992). School assemblies celebrated Soviet and communist anniversaries and 'Pioneer' organisations prepared youth to eventually join the communist party. Although in terms of the participation dimension, young people were prepared to take part in their society as proper comrades, or citizens, these roles were highly prescribed. In concert with the Marxist-Leninist outlook, membership in the collective was a key organising principle.
Russian philosophy and pedagogy have regarded individualism as a negative phenomenon, opposed to humanism. According to such views, collectivism is the only possible system for interpersonal relations, the only system useful for education. (Golovatenko, 1994)
The approach that was absent was that of inquiry, since student self-expression, a plurality of perspectives and critical analysis directly threatened an ideologically homogenous and collectivised world view. This had direct implications for the ways that classrooms were organised. Students and teachers alike were rewarded for assent to the 'correct view', a general didactic orientation that was reinforced, no doubt, by a historically traditional, teacher-centred approach in the classroom. Open-ended discussions, experimental content and instructional practices were all impeded within a highly centralised curriculum controlled by the ministry of education, in conjunction with the communist party.
Since 1990, several streams of reform with direct implications for the field of political education have been initiated unevenly, but throughout the region. In the area of curriculum, there has been a formal policy of de-ideologisation, with the elimination to references to Marxist-Leninism, the communist party and the former Soviet Union. Mandates for new civics, ethics or sociopolitical classes have been called for to replace the former Marxist-Leninist subjects. At all levels of the educational communities, there seems to be broad, general acceptance in principle that classes that address democratic education and human rights themes need to be developed.
Across subject areas, there is an interest in reclaiming 'individualism' as the operating educational paradigm, rather than the notion of the individual whose identity is wrapped up in group membership. This movement, which is called 'humanism' in some countries, recognises the unique personality and potential of each student, and that individuals have opportunities to influence society's development (Golovatenko, 1994). This philosophical reclamation of individuality has dovetailed with a surge of interest in adapting certain Western pedagogical methods that employ activity-based, cooperatively oriented and constructivist instructional techniques.
The areas for reform in political education, therefore, are multifarious, including ideological and content changes in reaction to the Marxist-Leninist world view, as well as broader impulses in Central and Eastern Europe to 'humanise' the schools and introduce new, student-centred ways to organise leaming. The development of new educational programmes in political, and specifically human, rights education can take advantage of this generalised openness to change; however, there are also special challenges to reform in the sobering post-communist context.
Challenge 1: Curriculum, and clarifying content and philosophical principles
How can principles of individualism, democracy and human rights best be presented in textbooks when such concepts are ill-defined and understood in popular culture, and when they are just beginning to be evidenced in social and political practice? How can such principles avoid being interpreted through the 'old lenses' conditioned to see a unitary ideological perspective?
Curriculum developers at the Institute of Educational Sciences in Bucharest, Romania, who are developing the 7th and 8th grade civics text, which places a special emphasis on human rights, have wrestled over the content and format of lessons concerning the individual, human rights and the state. These struggles are continuing, since the text will be pre-tested and revised through 1996.
The initial challenge related to the definition of the individual in Romanian society. The goal was to introduce to teachers and students a new possibility in the post-communist context, one that did not deny the collective values of the past: 'A new combination between individuality and solidarity', explained the project director (Lanescu, 1994). Instead of defining individuals in terms of their identity as Romanian citizens, Institute staff emphasised the unique identity of each person. The lead curricular developer elaborated on her philosophical rationale:
In Romania there was a mass society. The individual was not taught he was an individual with rights and responsibilities . . . Everybody was taught they were part of a collective, with collective rights. In Chapter One, I want to bring home the individuality of the person . . . I started from the perspective of human rights and man seen as a 'person'. The emerging perspective is the person in the first Article of the Declaration of Human Rights, which is inspired from the Kantian perspective. What is a human being? The human being is an end and not a means . . . A person is a person, with reason and consciousness.... We all look for our own identity, and from here we look to others, and try to understand differences in people. (Georgescu, 1994)
In the text, students are asked questions about slavery, and the ways in which this social phenomenon is consistent or inconsistent with Kant's view of the human being. This philosophical starting point enables the curriculum developers, through discussion questions, to raise a variety of socialising values pertaining to human rights. These values include respect for self and others, the multidimensional nature of personhood, and tolerance. Potentially, classroom-based activities could move into a more inquiry-oriented dimension by providing practice in discussion and listening techniques, self-expression, empathetic behaviour and conflict management.
In the text, the articles of the UN Declaration of Human Rights are presented. Human rights principles can present special difficulties for teachers in Central and Eastern Europe. Although residents of the region may understand better than many West Europeans the importance of limiting the power of the authorities in ways that help guarantee respect for individual human rights, there is little practical experience and confidence in such mechanisms, although this experience is growing. Public ignorance of the substance of human rights abounds, and apathy persists in countries where the notion of 'human rights' has been narrowly defined and wielded as a weapon by opposition parties. In Romania, human rights education proponents were accused of political activity when they first entered schools in 1992; some Romanian teachers still wonder if it is another sort of political propaganda, part of a new 'wooden language' (Neacsu, 1994).
The mistrust and cynicism apparent in Romania may reflect a general reluctance on the part of teachers elsewhere to tackle sensitive political issues. Research from different countries has shown that educators avoid discussing political conflicts. 'Teachers are well aware of their vulnerability and draw their consequences in their lessons' (Langeveld, 1981).
Another aspect of human rights that is confusing to many educators springs from the traumatic movement from a collectivist towards an individualistic outlook. To put it crudely, Central and East Europeans recognise that the dimension of human rights that relates to civil and political liberties has been strongly promoted in the West and is associated with individualism and liberal democracy. The development of a free press and other individual freedoms are gradually being established in the region and are welcomed; however, these political changes have coincided with extraordinary economic distress. In many countries, a negative correlation seems to exist between civil liberties and guarantees for an adequate living standard. In addition, many with practical-minded views reinforced by uncertainty about the future wonder aloud about the validity of accepting the economic and social rights promoted in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights when these were better guaranteed during the communist period.
The Romanian curriculum developers find themselves unable to address in the text what might be viewed as competition among human rights principles. This is because this ideological crisis runs deep and is far from resolved. A Hungarian social philosopher offered the following observations in 1990:
If the communist societies seem to be compelled to accept the Western interpretation of basic human rights, this means that they are compelled simultaneously to give up the principles of social organisation which these societies were based upon . . . As long as in Eastern Europe there is a deep crisis of principle and chaos, as long as Eastern Europe does not want any kind of collectivism any more, but nevertheless seems to be totally unable to realise a really modem dynamic society, there is no guarantee that the Western interpretation of basic human rights can establish itself in our part of the world. (Vajda, 1990, pp. 92-3)
Similar dilemmas are faced by the Romanian Institute staff as they attempt to present the relationship between the individual and the state in an emerging democratic context. Although one can present theoretical topics such as legitimacy in a political system, the rule of law, the nature of power and authority, and individual rights and responsibilities (including human rights), the reference points would ideally be local. How should the Romanian Constitution be presented in the civics text when the entire document was Passed on a 'yeah or nay' vote (as opposed to voting on individual articles)? The project director addressed a core dilemma around the role of education and social construction in the following statement: 'The problem of this civic education programme--the greatest one--is that it faces many everyday contradictions in the environment, which children live through or see. It's very necessary to prevent disillusionment outside the classroom' (Laneseu, 1994).
The curriculum developers recognise the importance of supporting national democratic efforts and of valuing these principles in some kind of unqualified way, even if the principles are imperfectly expressed in society. At the same time, the staff feel compelled to promote a critical, inquiry perspective that will encourage the development of the kind of Romanian citizen who will help support long-term social construction towards a democratic ideal.
It has become obvious to the Romanian curricular developers that a whole new theoretical foundation for civics is necessary. This new foundation begins by clarifying and concretising the core concepts of citizenship in a democracy. However, it is understood that the existence, interpretation and realisation of these core concepts are open for discussion. Fundamental sociopolitical principles are presented in historical contexts and as subject to conflicting points of view. In practice thus far, this has meant that topics such as the state, the identity of the person, citizenship and human rights have been elaborated on in such a way that discussion and a plurality of views and, to some degree, personalised approaches can be employed. In this manner, the de-ideologisation of civics in the alternative texts under development in Romania reflects a movement away from both a Marxist-Leninist ideology and a unitary ideological perspective in general.
This commitment to a more pluralistic approach is not always apparent these days in post-communist societies. There is evidence of a new substitution of ideology in some contexts, as curricular policy has been adjusted to fit predominant political forces. Not surprisingly, national agendas are particularly apparent in the field of civics education. Hungary has seen a return to strong traditionalism, with an emphasis on national symbols, whereas Poland has incorporated knowledge of the market economy into civics. Nationalism and religious education have become central discussion points throughout Central and Eastern Europe (Tibbitts, 1994b).
This temptation to simply substitute new ideology for the old Marxist-Leninist one reflects to some degree a generalised identity crisis that exists in each of the countries. This ideological confusion spills over into schools, where teachers and students alike have been conditioned to accept unitary ideological perspectives.
Even the most radical process of political change and economic progress could not in the short term erase the traces which the authoritarian legacy has left in the political mentality. It must therefore be accepted that many people will come to terms with current and future problems using a mechanism which we have identified and presented as an authoritarian substitute solution (Fritzsehe, 1992).
These conditions lead naturally to another solution, and to the next challenge in the post-communist context, that of pedagogy.
Challenge 2: Promoting democratic culture in the classroom
How can teaching practices that reinforce 'learner-centred ' approaches rather than lecture-driven modes of teacher-student interactions be introduced in schools?
Although political values and information can be imparted to some degree through didactic instructional methods, education for critical citizenship requires that political education incorporate the inquiry dimension. Research has substantiated this common sense notion. The most comprehensive international study on civics instruction showed that the sole school-based variable positively related to the development of students who were knowledgeable, less authoritarian and participatory was a classroom climate where students were encouraged to express their own opinions (Buergenthal & Torney, 1976). The ideal democratic classroom would be characterised not only by more discussion, but also study-generated questions and inquiry, habits of critical thinking and reflection, and skills related to shared decision making, problem solving and possibly conflict management.
In Romania, as with most Central and East Europe countries touched formatively by the Prussian educational model, teaching has been primarily content--driven and traditional in format. In the past, lessons usually entailed the reading of text by teachers and the use of questioning in order to ensure that students had memorised the 'proper answer'. Such long-standing practices have reinforced the primacy of the text, the teacher as the sole source of authority in the classroom, and a passive, rote-oriented and non-differentiated style of learning.
The curriculum developers at the Institute have recognised the necessity of introducing 'more learner-centred' instructional techniques in the civics texts they are developing.
I think that in civics education, not just information is important but attitudes and critical thinking, reflection . . . Now [the teacher3 needs to think about what capacities and skills need to be developed by the children . . . communication skills, social skills. To achieve these it is not enough to recite a lesson and ask children to give a 'proper response'. Children need to work in groups, to say what they have to say . . . to offer many ways for children to communicate with each other and with the teacher. (Georgescu, 1994)
In some ways, working with teachers and students during weekly 'open hours', ungraded subjects or out-of-classroom activities is less troublesome, since it sidesteps issues of accountability and content coverage, and may allow for more experimentation. Some human rights educationalists have focused on such strategies, by offering short activity-based lessons that include simulations, conflict resolution and storytelling; drama and other artistic activities have also been encouraged.
However, the challenge is greater when one is attempting to work from inside a system through text development of mainstream subjects. In Romania, for example, curriculum developers at the Institute have envisioned the ideal civics and human rights education classroom, but are striving for relevance in the current educational context. They see themselves as imperfect liaisons between the classroom traditions of the past and the progressive, activity-based civics curriculum ideals that have been introduced by the West.
The curricular developers feel that text-driven, rather than activity-driven, lessons remain appropriate for Romanian classrooms, since these are so strongly rooted in the system; however, Institute staff are offering some changes in the didactic approaches and formating of the text. These changes include a listing of specific attitudinal and skill-related goals for students, a reduction in the amount of text, examples from other countries, and questions that promote critical and independent thinking. At the moment, the most viable textbook format will probably include explicit lesson goals for the teacher and various activity 'screens' for the lesson from which teachers can choose. One of these screens would include group work for children, which is rare in the Romanian classroom. Institute curricular developers will also include suggestions for further activities with children.
Throughout Central and Eastern Europe, teacher trainers and text developers in the area of civics and human rights education have observed a genuine eagerness on the part of classroom teachers to become familiar with activity-based Western methods. However, even for those willing to try new 'learner-centred' instructional methods, efforts have been impeded on the personal level by a lack of skill, experience and sustained support, and on the bureaucratic level by a system whose logic, culture and accountability measures usually serve to reinforce content-driven instruction. The Romanian curricular developers are concerned that some teachers will baulk at the decision making that will be required in their new text, let along the instructional practices that are presented.
The legacy of a highly ideologised approach, traditional teaching methods, contamination of political terminology, economic distress and other features already mentioned in this chapter are significant defining characteristics of political educational reform in Central and Eastern Europe. Nonetheless, many of the confounding challenges for changing instructional practice are not unique to the subject or region. Disguise the language and the subject matter, and you will hear familiar rationales: teachers are underpaid and undervalued; the system rewards conformity; teachers are under pressure to cover content; the first priority is to prepare students to pass their exams; the headmaster and parents would not understand; few teachers have the energy and experience necessary to try new activity-based instructional methods; there are not enough materials; there is not enough training; there is not enough time.
These concerns are real and require serious attention. They suggest that both long-term, classroom-based supports and system-based efforts will be necessary. Given the emerging democratic and human rights political realities of the region, change programmes must take into account that the learning process for all-- teachers, curriculum developers, politicians and the barber around the corner--is ongoing. In the final section, I briefly address designing national programmes to promote classroom change.
Challenge 3: Designing programmes at national level
How can human rights education programmes be designed so as to take into account an overall national context of political uncertainty, centralised policymaking traditions and severe resource shortages in planning for such change?
Designing effective national programmes in citizenship or human rights education is a formidable challenge, even under more stable political and economic conditions than those now apparent in Central and Eastern Europe. Yet, the very organisational, political and ideological fluidity that can cloud one's vision also presents the prospect of developing new educational directions.
Educational reformers of all persuasions struggle with the core questions of how to create long-term conditions for personal as well as system change. The Netherlands Helsinki Committee (NHC) creates national human rights education programmes in concert with local partners so as to have multiple strategies for outreach and support, and to promote the possibilities of a 'multiplier effect' and capacity building at many levels.
Operationally speaking, this means that the projects are spread over several years. Various partners within a single country are selected for the activities that form the heart of the programme: materials development and teacher training. The materials can range widely from text development in required and optional subjects in the national curriculum (usually civics or moral education) to the development of supplementary instructional materials that can be used in an integrated fashion throughout a school curriculum. Such materials, which can also be used to support out-of-classroom experiences, can employ lessons, simulations, literature, drama or visual arts as vehicles for inquiry- and participation-oriented education. Teacher training programmes would ideally work at both the pre-service and in-service levels, and be designed in such a way that an ever-increasing cadre of trainers and resource people were available to offer support to teachers at the local level. The ultimate test of a human rights education programme would be that human rights serves as a philosophical basis that permeates all disciplines and teaching along at least the valuing and information dimensions; in addition, the inquiry-oriented and participatory aspects of such programmes would be evidenced through individual reflection, expression and moral choice, and a democratic culture that pervades the classroom environment, if not an entire school.
The NHC selects as local partners those organisations that demonstrate both a commitment to human rights themes (both in terms of content and pedagogical outlook) and a competency for realising project goals. Partners are sought from among non-governmental agencies and professional teacher associations as well as from within a ministry of education, pedagogical research institutes and teacher training institutions. There are several practical reasons for cultivating partners in the 'centre' as well as on the 'outside'.
First, the streams for progressive educational change vary by locality. In one country, the ministry of education may have had a single, high turnover in staff following the revolution and employ many reformers whose impulses are 'humanistic' and decentralised in outlook. In other countries, ministry partnerships may be more problematic, either because there have been few changes in staff or because these happen quite regularly due to shifting national politics. Different channels for promoting reform, particularly ones that are non-governmental in nature and localised, help to offset the instability of the national scene.
Although some human rights groups have a policy not to work with govern-ment agencies, the Netherlands Helsinki Committee has found this to be necessary in the area of primary and secondary education. Among the rare opportunities during this transition period is the chance to integrate human rights and democratic themes into the reformed mainstream curricula. Some kind of formal authorisation is necessary for texts or policies that will be institutionalised. Relationships with the limited number of pre-service training institutions are also desirable, since these high schools and colleges are the natural link to prospective teachers who, as a group, are often more open to progressive instructional methods and themes than their older colleagues.
Having a variety of educational partners, even within the same general activity area (such as materials development), helps to maximise outreach to teachers. Teachers may take their cues for reform quite deliberately from different sources. Some, conditioned by centralised, textbook-driven instruction, are simply looking for replacement texts from the ministry; others remain skeptical about centre-sponsored curricula and look to teacher unions and non-governmental organisations for the personal tools to organise their classes differently.
In principle, the NHC seeks partnership with non-governmental human rights and educational organisations in order to promote civil society and grassroots mechanisms that can provide an increasing array of choices in the area of educational reform. Common knowledge within the education field suggests that the ideal is to have local resource people available on an ongoing basis to visit schools, work with teachers to develop in- and out-of-school programmes that suit their needs and interests, and conduct in-service teacher training. Local non-governmental organisations, trade unions and professional associations are often in the best position to support local change efforts. Because the changes envisioned in the human rights education programmes are neither simple nor superficial, and require ongoing experimentation and adaptation to the local environment, it is crucial that national efforts focus on local capabilities.
A final reason for cultivating multiple partners within each country is so that the Western expertise brought in reaches different segments of a country's educational community. The NHC works with local agencies from project conception through to implementation; this interaction is critical for diagnosing local needs and encouraging competencies, creativity and widespread ownership. The specialists brought in are explicitly charged with the task of local empowerment and capacity building, whether this is in the area of text formatting, teacher training or organisation building. It goes without saying that inputs, delivered at critical moments, can have remarkably positive results in the programme evolution.
Western partners such as the NHC can also bring material resources to countries where shortages and struggles over human and material resources continue to make educational reform an arduous, uphill battle. These investments are critical, but they need to be well placed. In periods of such need and vulnerability, it is particularly important that Western funders turn sensitive ears to Central and East European partners so that the programmes developed are consistent with the realistic conditions, prospects and desirability for change in the schools. There is a palpable tension between what 'has been' and what 'could be' within each country, and it is the task of the NHC and its partners to develop the compass that will traverse the field of human rights and political education.
Democratic political reform in post-communist societies is a long-term prospect, one that requires considerable vision and patience. This is a learning process for all, educators, policy makers and funders alike. As Central and East European countries roll unevenly forward, the hope is that there will be ever-increasing evidence of democracy, the rule of law and respect for human rights, and that educational reform efforts will enable classrooms to reflect this. Perhaps in the long run, such successes will provide classrooms lying further West with fresh insight about education for democracy and human rights.
REFERENCES
AUDIGIER, F. & LAGELEE, G. (1993) 57th European Teachers' Seminar on Civic Education: Teaching About Society, Passing on Values, Donaueschingen, 12-17 October 1992 (Paris, Council of Europe), pp. 3, 7.
BLAHOZ, J. (1990) Human rights and the concept of the legal state in socialist countries: in: N. BARFOED & H. HOLTERMANN (Eds) Human Rights in Eastern and Western Europe (Copenhagen, The Danish Centre for Human Rights), p. 21.
BUERGENTHAL, THOMAS & TORNEY, JUDITH V. (1976) International Human Rights and International Education (Washington DC, US National Commission for UNESCO), p. 115.
CAPITA, LAURA (1992) Post-War History and Unification of Europe in Textbooks: The Romanian Experience. Paper presented at the European seminar, Post-War History and Unification of Europe in Textbooks: Prospects After the End of the Cold War, Berlin, June, p. 7.
DONELLY, JACK (1993) International Human Rights (Boulder, Colorado, Westview Press) pp. 21-2.
FISCHER-GALATI, STEPHEN, A. (1952) Communist Indoctrination in Romanian Elementary Schools, Harvard Educational Review, Vol. XXII, No. 3, p. 193.
FRITZSCHE, K. PETER (1992) Human Rights Education after the Collapse of Communism. Paper presented at the conference, Human Rights and Human Rights Education in the Process of Transition to Democracy, Prague, November 2-6, p. 2.
GEORGESCU, DAKMARA (1994) Curriculum Development Department, Institute of Educational Sciences. Interview conducted by the author in March in Bucharest, Romania.
GILLESPIE, J.A. (1981) Introduction, in: D. HEATER & J. A. GILLESPIE (Eds) Political Education in Flux (London & Beverly Hills, Sage Publications), pp. 4, 6-8.
GIROUX, HENRY A. (1988) Schooling and the Struggle for Public Life (Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press), pp. 83-4.
GOLOVATENKO, A. (1994) Education for democracy, social responsibility and creative activity in Russia today, in: B. REARDON & E. NORDLAND (Eds) Learning Peace (Albany, State University of New York Press), pp. 159, 161-2.
LANESCU, SERBAN (1994) Planning and Forecasting Department, Institute of Educational Sciences. Interview conducted by the author in March in Bucharest, Romania.
LANGEVELD, W. (1981) Political education: pros and cons, in: D. HEATER & J. A. GILLESPIE (Eds) Political Education in Flux (London & Beverly Hills, Sage Publications), p. 33.
NEACSU, LIGIA (forthcoming) Brief analysis regarding the possibilities of implementing human rights education in Romania, Human Rights Quarterly.
SCOTT, K.P. (1991) Achieving social studies' affective aims: values, empathy and moral development, in: J. P. SHAVER (Ed.) Handbook of Research on Social Studies Teaching and Learning (New York, MacMillan Publishing), pp. 359, 364-5.
TIBBITTS, F. (1991) The Dance Towards Democratic Culture: A Stillshot of Educational Reform in Central East Europe. Paper presented at the 1991 Conference of the Comparative and International Education Society, Pitts-burgh, Pennsylvania, p. 18.
TIBBITTS, FELISA, (1994) Creating Civics Education in Romania in the Transition Period. Paper presented at the conference, Contemporary Central and East European, Russian and Eurasian Education: Common Legacies and the Struggle for Reform (Columbia University, New York), p. 48.
TIBBITTS, FELISA (1994) Education in the making: moral education in post-communist societies, Comparative International Education Society Newsletter, May, No. 106, p. 12.
VAJDA, M. (1990) Human rights in Eastern Europe: in: N. BARFOED & H. HOLTERMANN (Eds) Human Rights in Eastern and Western Europe (Copen-hagen, The Danish Centre for Human Rights), pp. 92-3.
© Reprinted with permission from the autor and the European Journal of Education