Citizenship education in Ukraine and Russia: shifting discourses and diverging trends Germ Janmaat, IOE Nelli Piattoeva, Univ. of Tampere

Contents Introduction Problems of citizenship education Supranational trends in citizenship education Ukraine Russia Conclusion Discussion

Introduction A well-known dilemma in citizenship education is the opposition between questioning authority and loyalty How are Russia and Ukraine dealing with this controversy in citizenship education? Why compare Russia and Ukraine? New states prioritize nation-building (similarity) Communism destroyed civil society (similarity) Different starting points and different positions in the international arena (difference) Adding to the complexity is the involvement of the Council of Europe in citizenship education

Research questions 1. Which discourses have framed citizenship education in Russia and Ukraine since the late 1980s and have there been changes in the intensity of each of them? 2. To what extent can possible differences between Russia and Ukraine in the nature and timing of these discourses be attributed to differential points of departure and national political developments? 3. What do these responses tell us about the relative strength of international trends versus national politics in shaping citizenship education?

Problems of citizenship education Contested nature of citizenship shaped by the varying visions of the future society “obedient soldiers” vs. “critical transformers” Affiliation with the ideology of nationalism – the imagined community Questioning minds put the fate of the nations at danger? These questions are still unresolved in the “established” nation-states The situation is even more problematic for the new states who belongs to the nation what constitutes the state (territorial questions, the rules of the political game)

Supranational trends in citizenship education The Council of Europe (COE) promotes democracy, human rights and the rule of law in its 46 member-states The COE pursues new trends in citizenship education: EDC active participation tolerance critical evaluation of institutional arrangements The COE seeks to “to strengthen the capacity of member states to make the EDC a priority objective of educational policy-making and implement sustainable reform at all levels of the education system” Will Ukraine and Russia contest such a definition as they pursue the project of national reconstruction?

COE and globalisation Are the COE efforts a component of globalisation and a manifestation of declining powers of the nation-states? If so, the COE initiatives will face no major obstacles However, loss of autonomy does not necessarily imply loss of state sovereignty States retain control over immigration and the definition of citizenship States delegated power to supranational agencies and can withdraw their co-operation National identity is still in demand to unite increasingly heterogenic nations and mitigate growing disparities The next 2 sections examine how the critical thinking/enhancing loyalty controversy shapes the discourses of citizenship education found in the policy documents in Ukraine and Russia.

Ukraine ( ) Key processes: Democratization and nation-building Soviet pedagogy was discredited Anxiety about Russification and deeply felt need to promote Ukrainian language and culture (1989 Language Law) Calls for more school autonomy and pupil-centred pedagogy (1991 Education Act) After independence the tension between democratization and nation-building became apparent: Students were not allowed to vote on the language of instruction Imposition of a Ukrainian nationalist interpretation of history

Ukraine ( ) Key process: nation-building serving state consolidation State unity was the primary concern of the government Democratization was subordinated to this objective: The 1996 Education Act formalized recentralization in education Rationale underpinning the nation-building project changed from cultural survival to state unity (Ukrainian proclaimed as the “state language”)

Ukraine ( ) Key processes: Nation-building in retreat and effort to join international trends Installation of reformist government; new education minister stressing educational reform to improve Ukraine’s competitiveness Declining importance of nation-building Integration of COE recommendations on EDC in national policy documents Education minister could continue his reform agenda although Kuchma regime became increasingly authoritarian As of 2004 EDC not yet implemented in curricula and textbooks

Russia ( ) Education is used as a tool of reforming the Soviet society Democratisation of educational relations Ethnicalisation of the educational content Humanisation of the content and teacher-student relations De-ideologisation Revival of sub-national identities, but no effort to establish a Russia identity Democratisation did not enhance democratic citizenship education due to the previously over-politicised nature of Soviet education The emphasis on ethnic education was caused by the growing inter-ethnic tensions in the society Education was expected to soothe tensions, help building a federal state and the establishment of a democratic civil society

Russia ( ) Continuation of the perestroika reforms and a return to a discourse stressing unity and loyalty to the state The importance of a well-organised citizenship education emphasising human rights, Russian constitution and the electoral process is stressed The growth of legal education is linked to Boris Yeltsin’s argument that the legal state based on the rule of law requires proper education of citizens At the same time we witness a slow return to the national ideology questioning the existence of sub-national identifications The situation is linked to continuous ethnic rivals within the RF, as well the growing importance of national ideology on the agenda of political opponents The president urges Russians to search for the “Russian idea”

Russia ( ) State patriotism enters the citizenship education discourse Growing emphasis on vospitaniye aimed at the reconsolidation of the people The Programme of patriotic education emphasises the primacy of the national identity as opposed to the ethnic and sub- national identity of the end of the 1980s Patriotism, as conceived in the recent educational documents, contains dangerous developments: narrow understanding of the state, emphasis on servitude, militaristic character However, citizenship education (CE) has developed from bare legal studies to a multifaceted combination of interdisciplinary approach, democratic school ethos and active teaching methods CE perceives Russia as a multinational state and seeks to educate active citizens CE now taught as part of the regional component But the relative significance of the documents signifies where the government’s priorities lie (patriotism)

Conclusion Russia and Ukraine show similarities as well as differences: Similarity: stress on state unity from mid 1990s at the expense of democratization Differences: –Early nation-building in Ukraine vs. promotion of minority cultures in Russia –Declining nation-building in Ukraine vs. state consolidation in Russia from end of 1990s COE is aware of the difficulty of promoting democratic citizenship in post-Soviet states engaged in nation-building Overall conclusion: The adoption of democratic citizenship principles very much depends on domestic political developments and on government anxiety about the national loyalty of the citizenry

Points for discussion The promotion of critical thinking destroys national cohesion National identity and inclusiveness cannot be reconciled Ukraine and Russia should consolidate their states and nations before promoting an active and critical citizenry