17. Histories of Education
Paper
Diversity and Homogeneity, Harmony and Conflict as Components of Pedagogical Science in Socialist Czechoslovakia
Tomáš Kasper, Dana Kasperová
Technical University Liberec, Czech Republic
Presenting Author: Kasper, Tomáš;
Kasperová, Dana
The "new science" of communist Czechoslovakia after 1948 was supposed to be a party, state, directed and controlled (ideologically and power-wise) means of forming a "new society". In particular, pedagogical science was given the "historical task" of educating the "new communist man". (Tenorth 2017, Kestere 2013, 2018) Pedagogical science thus found itself after 1948 in a space of very active ideologization (Marxism-Leninism), instrumentalization for socio-political goals. The role of pedagogical science in the formation of the "new society" affected both the field of pedagogical theory and questions of methodology, as well as the institutional transformation of science. Czechoslovak pedagogy lost much after 1948 - scientific independence, thematic diversity, methodological pluralism and overall international orientation (Kasper 2020). Thus, in the "story" of Sovietization and ideological transformation of Czechoslovak pedagogical science, there was a significant "unification", i.e. the establishment of artificial poverty and homogeneity in theoretical approaches, methodological procedures, personnel "changes", as well as in the research topics themselves. Science has become a space of intense political control and a space of "service" for the realisation of political goals. One of them was the construction of an aesthetic image of a harmonious communist society, where all social, cultural and political differences were overcome and the concept of unity and harmony triumphed. That this was an artificial, imposed and very unfree concept is self-evident.
The paper deals with the analysis of pedagogical science in the time of "crisis and reform of society". After the period of the so-called 1950s, when the "disintegration" and discontinuity of Czechoslovak pedagogical thought and scientific life was actively worked on during the Stalinist period, Czechoslovak society found itself in a crisis after 1960 - economic, but especially political and legitimizing. This "crisis" was to result in a "positive" programme for the renewal of society and science, without leaving the roots of Marxist pedagogy behind. During the period of social "thaw" (1960-1967), many voices were heard in the Czechoslovak pedagogical, as well as in the wider cultural and political debate, calling for the rejection of the "logic" of uniformity and social and cultural homogeneity, and calling ( carefully, but nevertheless) for approaches that took into account individuality, personality, independence, and the activity of children and adolescents in the processes of education and training. Although 1968 was not the year of the "youth revolt" in Czechoslovakia (as will be pointed out in the analysis of the actors of the Czechoslovak year of 1968 in pedagogy themselves), it was a cultural and social milestone in time and space, when efforts to respect difference and diversity in education and upbringing resulted. How the voices calling for the "breaking" of the power unity of Marxism-Leninism in pedagogical theory, science and methodology were structured, what practices were promoted, how they were presented, how they were justified and who were the actors - these are the topics of the analysis of the "diversity stream of pedagogical thinking" in the period of the "pre-war" and the Prague Spring in our paper.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedWe view the theme of homogeneity and diversity in the Czechoslovak pedagogical debate of the 1960s in the space of reconstructing and interpreting the construction of a corpus of knowledge (Behm/Drope/Glaser/Reh 2017). In doing so, these are specific processes of shaping the state of knowledge under the conditions of a totalitarian unfree society. Thus, knowledge is the result not of free scientific research, but of processes of political instrumentalization and considerable ideological indoctrination, as well as of intense efforts to overcome the continuity of scientific thought and to sever the links and identities linked to the previous "culture" of science in interwar Czechoslovakia. Thus, in comparative approaches (Schriewer 2003) we are interested in questions of continuity and discontinuity of scientific thinking (Caruso et all 2013, Kocka 1998), pedagogical theory as well as scientific life itself, the emergence of the "new elite" and later the so-called "reform wave (group)" and its domination of the practices of the power of science. An important empirical basis for our analysis are the texts of the representative scientific journal Pedagogika, which was published with the support (and under the control) of the Ministry of Education and the Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences, respectively by the staff of the Pedagogical Institute of the J.A. Comenius Academy of Sciences. Another part of the analysed documents are representative publications and monographs of the actors of the "new reformed" pedagogical science published in 1960-1968. Last but not least, we make use of the rich collection of the Pedagogical Institute of the Academy of Sciences itself, its records, analyses, forecasts, reports, programmes on the development of pedagogical science in the period under review. We make use of both sociology of knowledge and discursive analytical approaches (Sarasin 2017, Keller/ Hornidge/Schünemann 2018).
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsOur analysis presents a reconstruction of the main programmatic points of the "renewal" of pedagogical science in socialist Czechoslovakia within the framework of the political and social liberation of 1960-1968. We also interpret the role of pedagogical science in the overall belief of the then Czechoslovak (but also Soviet) communist authorities that only science could guarantee the victory of the East over the West, the victory of communism over the Western capitalist world. Taking into account the conclusions of the 22nd Congress of the CPSU on the role of science in communist society, we show what possibilities pedagogical science had to thematise diversity and at the same time to support a unified communist picture of the functioning of society. We also discuss the careful "critique" of formalism and dogmatism of Marxism-Leninism and point out what other theoretical approaches and scientific themes began to be opened up, thematized, analyzed, and with what results or "impacts" on scientific as well as political life in the scientific debate of socialist Czechoslovakia in the 1960s. In this regard, we also point to the emergence of other diverse scientific societies, interdisciplinary academic teams and platforms in the field, which, among other things, took on the role of a "critical" actor calling for the "reform of pedagogical science". We analyze the program of education of a "harmonious developed socialist personality" in a society balancing the challenges of the scientific-technical revolution, the modern bureaucratization of society and the demands of total, all-round and ultimately harmonious personality development. Of course, we cannot sidestep the question as to how far this programme was more a utopian wish, a political "theatre", and how far it was a real scientific programme of "reformed science" in the period of the so-called Prague Spring and Spring of the 1960s.
ReferencesCaruso, M., Koinzer, T., Mayer, Ch., & Priem, K. (Eds.) (2013). Zirkulation und Transformation. Böhlau.
Behm, B., Drope, T., Glaser, E., & Reh, S. (2017). Wissen machen. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik. Beiheft; 63, 7-15. https://www.pedocs.de/volltexte/2020/20794/pdf/Behm_et_al_2017_Einleitung.pdf
Kasper, T. (2020). „Alles muss man umschreiben“. In H. Schluss, H. Holzapfel, & H. Ganser, (Eds.)
Fall des Eisernen Vorhangs 1989 und die Folgen (s. 99-111). Litt Verlag.
https://www.pedocs.de/volltexte/2020/20804/pdf/Tenorth_2017_Die_Erziehung_gebildeter_Kommunisten.pdf
Keller, R. Hornidge K.,Schünemann J.W.(2018). The sociology of knowledge approach to discourse. Routledge.
Kestere, I., Kalke B. (2018). Controlling the image of the teacher’s body under authoritarianism: the case of Soviet Latvia (1953–1984). Paedagogica Historica 54(1-2), 184-203.
Kestere, I., Kruze, A. (Eds.) (2013). History of Pedagogy and Educational Sciences in the Baltic
Countries from 1940 to 1990: an Overview. RaKa.
Knoblauch, H. (2016). Diskurstheorie als Sozialtheorie? In R. Keller, & S. Bosančič, S., Perspektiven wissenssoziologischer Diskursforschung (11-28). Springer.
Kocka, J. (1998). Wissenschaft und Politik in der DDR 435-460. In. J. Kocka, & R. Mayntz, R. (Eds.) Wissenschaft und Wiedervereinigung (435-460). Akademieverlag.
Sarasin, P. (2017). Diskursanalyse. In M. Sommer, S. Müller-Wille, & C. Reinhardt. Handbuch Wissensgeschichte (45-55). Metzler Verlag.
Schriewer, J. (2003). Problemdimensionen sozialwissenschaftlicher Komparatistik. In. H. Kaelble, & J. Schriewer. (Eds.) Vergleich und Transfer (9-53) Campus.
Somogyvári, L. (2019). Political decision-making in socialist education: a Hungarian case study (1958–1960). History of Education 48(5), 664-681.
Tenorth, H. E. (2017). Die "Erziehung gebildeter Kommunisten"... Zeitschrift für Pädagogik. Beiheft; 63, 207-275.
17. Histories of Education
Paper
Diversity in Hungarian Socialist Education Science (1945-1965): Kiss Árpád ‘s Recollection of his Life and Work
Tibor Darvai
ELTE Bárczi Gusztáv Faculty of Special Needs Education, Hungary
Presenting Author: Darvai, Tibor
In the Hungarian socialist education science several people suffered discrimination in the beginning of the 1950s (loss of job, refusal to obtain a scientific degree), but it was only Árpád Kiss that was sent to the internment camp at Kistarcsa. Kiss' sin, which led to his three-year imprisonment, was also related to scientific diversity and interdisciplinarity since Kiss represented an interdisciplinary-multidisciplinary approach within the Hungarian socialist educational science in contrast to the Soviet-Stalinist model - which denied all diversity. This meant that he cultivated sciences with Western roots, such as sociology and psychology, at least the branches of those related to education science. In the Cold War situation of the early 1950s, this interdisciplinary-multidisciplinary diversity approach, which was also a political stance - in contrast to the Soviet-Stalinist model, siding with the Western model - was equivalent to the most serious crime of the era, the charge of anti-Marxism, which in any case led to exclusion and discreditation.
In connection with this, in one of the directions of our research - on macro level - we examine to what extent diversity, or its opposite, was present in the Hungarian socialist education science between 1945 and 1965. In another line of our research, we also examine how the diversity between educational science and its border sciences appeared in the work and recollections of a member of the Hungarian socialist education science, Árpád Kiss (on micro level).
According to our hypothesis, regardless of the stages of political history within the Hungarian socialist education, let it be the Rákosi era (1950-1956) or the Kádár era (1957-), Árpád Kiss always represented the interdisciplinary-multidisciplinary approach in contrast to the Hungarian socialist educational science, which was only open to interdisciplinarity when it was legitimate in its various phases of political history.
Our main sources for examining the diversity (or lack thereof) of the education sector are the educational policy decrees of the Socialist-Communist Party at the time (Kardos-Kornidesz 1990). In the other line of our research, which analyses Árpád Kiss's relationship to scientific diversity within socialist education science, we use Árpád Kiss's works published between 1945 and 1965 as a source. Also, our relevant source is the Pedagogical Review (Pedagógiai Szemle), the dominant pedagogical journal of the era, since in the mid-1960s, the recollection of Árpád Kiss (1964) were published here together with those of several other Hungarian socialist education scientists (György Ágoston, Sándor Nagy, Béla Jausz, etc.). In order to get to know the Hungarian socialist education science and the life of Árpád Kiss better, we use the pedagogical lexicons (Báthory-Falus1997, Nagy 1976-1979).
Overall, what we can say is that during our study we are interested in how interdisciplinarity-multidisciplinarity appeared in the different and not at all homogeneous stages of the political history of Hungarian socialism. We are also interested in how these macrostructural changes in relation to interdisciplinarity-multidisciplinarity appeared in the life-work of a relevant member of Hungarian socialist education science, Árpád Kiss.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedNowadays, scientific diversity has a puzzling number of meanings, however, in the present study diversity is understood as the interdisciplinary-multidisciplinary approach appearing in educational and pedagogical research (Biesta 2011, Biró-Nagy 2018; Terhart 2016).
We analyse the issue of scientific diversity - that is, inter- and multidisciplinarity - and the recollection of Árpád Kiss using the political science approach (Darvai 2021, Sáska 2018). This is also evident in the fact that we analyse the problem of scientific diversity using the following stages of the Hungarian political history (Gyarmati 2011): 1. The period of the establishment of the socialist-communist system (1945-1950), 2. The Rákosi-era (1950-1956); 3. The early Kádár-era (1957-1965).
We interpret Árpád Kiss's recollection in the Pedagogic Review as a narrative, so we also use the narrative approach during our research. In our present analysis, we consider all texts that report on events and have temporal and causal coherence as narratives (Hoshmand 2005, László 2008). Among the narrative approaches, we also use the narrative historical perspective (Tamura 2011).
Since we examine the history of Hungarian socialist education from the perspective of interdisciplinarity-multidisciplinarity, our analysis also has a sociological science reading (Bourdieu 2005).
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsAccording to our results, the attitude of the Hungarian socialist education science to the interdisciplinary-multidisciplinary approach was determined not by the professional-pedagogical logic, but by the image of science of each era of political history. Because in the Stalinist phases (1950-1953; 1955-1956) of the so-called Rákosi era (1950-1956), the interdisciplinary-multidisciplinary approach was illegitimate, while in the de-Stalinization periods (1953-1955; 1956) it became legitimate. Then, in the Kádár era, interdisciplinarity became legitimate once again, even if only through the filter of socialist ideology. Furthermore, the interdisciplinary approach was interpreted not only as a professional-pedagogical issue, but also as a political one, since the appearance of the interdisciplinary approach also meant the acceptance of the Western pattern in contrast to the Soviet-Stalinist model.
Throughout the entire socialist era, Árpád Kiss represented the interdisciplinary-multidisciplinary approach in his education scientific-pedagogical attitude, unlike the majority of the Hungarian socialist education science. Because of this, Kiss became discredited from the science of education during the Stalinist era. Árpád Kiss’ interdisciplinary approach only became legitimate during the period of de-Stalinization, which is why he could only be a legitimate participant in Hungarian socialist education science after 1957. However, he had always been an odd one out with his "western" approach within the profession of education science, even if his professional achievements were recognized. We see the main characteristic of the educational science of the Kádár era in the latter phase, that is, in the fact that the founders of the Hungarian socialist educational science in the early 1950s had to work together with those who suffered discreditation at the time, but who were rehabilitated at the end of the fifties and were therefore able to return to the field of educational science – Árpád Kiss’s case is a good sample for that.
ReferencesBáthory, Z.– Falus, I. (1997) (eds.). Pedagógiai Lexikon. [Pedagogical Lexicon I-III.] Budapest: Keraban.
Biesta, G. (2011). Disciplines and theory in the academic study of education: a comparative analysis of the Anglo-American and Continental construction of the field, Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 19:2, 175-192, DOI: 10.1080/14681366.2011.582255
Biró Zs. H. & Nagy P. T. (2018). Az oktatáskutatás inter- és multidiszciplináris jellege [Interdisciplinar and multidisciplinary nature of the educational researches]. Educatio. 27:1. 84-100.
Bourdieu, P. (2005). A tudomány tudománya és a reflexivitás [Science of Science and Reflexivity]. Budapest, Gondolat.
Darvai, T. (2021). Makarenko-értelmezések Magyarországon a hosszú 1950-es években [Makarenko-interpretations in Hungary in the long 1950s]. Iskolakultúra, 31(5), 27–40.
Hoshmand, L. T. (2005). Narratology, cultural psychology, and counseling research. Journal of Counseling Psychology. 2005/ 2. szám. 178–186. p.
Kardos, J. & Kornidesz, M. (1990) (eds.). Dokumentumok a magyar oktatáspolitika történetéből. [Documents from the History of Hungarian Education Policy. 1954-1972.] Tankönyvkiadó, Budapest.
Kiss Árpád (1964): Életemről, munkámról [About my life and my work]. Pedagógiai Szemle. 3. 295-305.
László J. (2008): Narratív pszichológia. [Narrative Psychology]. Pszichológia, 28, 4. 301-317.
Nagy, S. (1976-1979, eds.). Pedagógiai Lexikon.[Pedagogical Lexicon.] Budapest, Akadémiai Kiadó.
Sáska, G. (2018). Igény az igazság monopóliumára. A politikai és világnézeti marxizmus-leninizmus a sztálini kor pedagógia tudományában.[Demand for the monopoly of truth – Political and Ideological Marxism–Leninism in Pedagogical Sciences of the Stalin Era].
Gyarmati, Gy. (2011): A Rákosi-korszak: Rendszerváltó fordulatok évtizede Magyarországon, 1945-1956. ÁBTL-Rubicon, Budapest.
Tamura, Eileen: (2011). Narrative History and Theory. History of Education Quarterly. 2011/2. 150-157. p.
Terhart, E. (2017). Interdisciplinary research on education and its disciplines: Processes of change and lines of conflict in unstable academic expert cultures: Germany as an example. European Educational Research Journal, 16(6), 921–936. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904116681798
17. Histories of Education
Paper
The Challenges Of Cultural Diversity Contexts At School From The Perspective Of The Comparatist Wolfgang Mitter
Maiza de Albuquerque Trigo1, Rooney Figueiredo Pinto2
1University of Luxembourg, Luxembourg; 2University of Coimbra, Portugal
Presenting Author: de Albuquerque Trigo, Maiza;
Figueiredo Pinto, Rooney
In historical terms, cultural diversity was and still is a reality present in different societies, and Multicultural education is a crucial component in fostering social and cultural awareness and is essential for creating a respectful and inclusive society. But what is the impact of this reality on social dynamics at school and in the educational policies? To answer this question, we turn to the works published by the comparatist Wolfgang Mitter (1927-2014).
Renowned researcher and expert in the field of comparative education, with focus on multiculturalism and national educational policies, his studies invite us to reflect on cultural diversity and inclusivity in educational settings. Mitter believes that multicultural education is a crucial component in fostering social and cultural awareness and is essential for creating a respectful and inclusive society.
The childhood of Wolfgang Mitter was in the former Czechoslovakia, in the predominantly German-speaking part of Bavaria, and is later drafted into military service in Germany. After the war, he is transferred to the U.S. zone where he is engaged in language and literature studies. In his scientific career he explores the topic of educational policies in multicultural contexts, at the same time as he assumes teaching and research functions and Chair of General and Comparative Education at the Paedagogische Hochschule.
In this exploratory study, we aim to verify how the subject of cultural diversity is explored in the investigations of Wolfgang Mitter and what reflections he points to on the relationship between multiculturalism, multilingualism, educational dynamics and national educational policies. We also intend to verify how his works about multiculturalism and multilingualism at school point out reflections about educational policies and teacher training.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedFrom a narrative literature review, conducted systematically on the international databases Web of Science (WoS), EBSCO Discovery Service (EDS), and Scopus, 46 works published between 1964 and 2017 were selected. Only articles, book chapters, books or reports written in English or German on the topic of multiculturalism in education were considered eligible. Based on this result, we proceeded with the analysis of the selected works.
The deductive analysis was performed based on the analytical framework structured according to the descriptors used in the research. Since some complementary information emerged from the data, the inductive analysis was also constituted with code categories that emerged from the results.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsCultural aspects are highlighted as the approaches reflect on education systems in a macro perspective of definitions of nation and culture (Mitter, 1988). In this sense, the characteristics of cultural, political and economic diversity in the Southern East European region should be observed in an analysis of the impact of multiculturalism on educational systems (Mitter, 2000).
Mitter’s approach to multiculturalism in education emphasizes the importance of valuing and respecting the cultural heritage of each individual and recognizes the positive impact of cultural diversity on learning and academic achievement. He believes that multicultural education should aim to develop students’ cultural literacy and help them understand the cultural practices and perspectives of people from different backgrounds.
Concerned not with presenting ready-made solutions but with comparing different educational contexts and realities, especially in the case of Eastern European countries, Mitter point that the national educational policies do not always balance the various aspects related to cultural diversities and changes in the international scenario.
Mitter examines the impact of cultural diversity on the school, comparing the challenges in Central and Eastern Europe and reflecting on similar problems in Asia and Africa. His research highlights the relevance of a social analysis of educational dynamics to respect cultural pluralism in a transnational perspective of education. He also highlights the importance of teacher training and professional development, to help educators, become culturally competent and effectively engage with the diversity of their students.
ReferencesMitter, W. (1955). Die Entwicklung der politischen Anschauungen Karamzins. In H. Jablonowski, & W. Philipp, Forschungen zur osteuropäischen Geschichte (Vol. Historische Veröffentlichungen. Bd 2., pp. 165-285). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz: Freie Universität Berlin Osteuropa-Institut.
Mitter, W. (1970). Das sowjetische Schulwesen. Frankfurt and Mainz: Akad.
Mitter, W. (1973). On the Efficiency of the Soviet School System. Comparative Education, 9(1), 34–47. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3097884
Mitter, W. (1974). Didaktische Probleme und Themen in der UdSSR. Hannover: Schrödel.
Mitter, W. (1987). Expectations of Schools and Teachers in the Context of Social and Economic Changes. International Review of Education, 33(3), 263–276. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00615298
Mitter, W. (1988). Erziehungsziele und Persönlichkeitsentwicklung. Bildung und Erziehung, 41(3), pp. 337–350. https://doi.org/10.7788/bue.1988.41.3.337
Mitter, W. (1992). Educational Issues in the Multicultural Society of Germany. In D. Ray, & D. Poonwassie, Education and Cultural Differences. New Perspectives (pp. 429-447). New York / London: Garland Publishing.
Mitter, W. (2000). Zusammenprall oder Interaktion von Kulturkreisen? Bildung und Erziehung, 56(4), 411–428. https://doi.org/10.7788/bue.2000.53.4.411
Mitter, W. (2004). Rise and decline of education systems: A contribution to the history of the modern state. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 34(4), 351–369. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305792042000294788
Mitter, W. (2007). Education in Europe. The way ahead. In W. Hörner, H. Döbert, B. Kopp, & W. Mitter, The Education Systems of Europe (pp. 852-866). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Mitter, W. (2010). Teacher Education in Europe: Problems, Challenges, Perspectives. British Journal of Educational Studies, 39(2), 138–152. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071005.1991.9973880
Mitter, W. (2014, May 05). Wolfgang Mitter - Short autobiography. Retrieved March 28, 2022, from Academia Europaea: https://www.ae-info.org/ae/Member/Mitter_Wolfgang/CV
Mitter, W., & Döbert, H. (2007). Introduction. In W. Hörner, H. Döbert, B. v. Kopp, & W. Mitter, The Education Systems of Europe (pp. 1-10). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Mitter, W., & Novikov, L. (1976). Sekundarabschlüsse mit Hochschulreife im internationalen Vergleich: Ergebnisse einer Untersuchung über Bildungssysteme sozialistischer Staaten. Weinheim, Basel: Beltz Verlag.
Mitter, W., & Novikov, L. (1978). Pädagogische Forschung und Bildungspolitik in derSowjetunion: Organisation, Gegenstand, Methoden. Weinheim: Beltz.
|
