EUROPEAN INTEGRATION AND TRANSITION

„15 Years On: Educational Transitions inCentral and Eastern Europe”

Oxford, United Kingdom, 8-10 July 2005

Gábor HALÁSZNational Institute for Public Education, Budapest

The scope and perspective of this presentation

• Education seen as an area of public policy

• Focus on the macro (system) level

• A systemic perspective (education as a subsystem in the broader social system)

• Focus on the relationship between education other subsystems/public policy areas

• Education seen as a changing system in a continuously changing environment

Thesis 1/3.

• For the last 15 years countries in CEE have been going through two kinds of transitions – Transition 1.: from state-socialism to

parliamentary democracy, market economy and pluralism

– Transition 2.: from independent nation-state to membership in a wider political and economic community

• The second transition is being superimposed on the first one

Thesis 2/3.• Transitions have transformed (1) the

relationship between education and other public policy areas, and (2) representations and structures within education in two phases

emergence of a new dynamic, coping with complexity

education re-attached to other policy areas (inter-dependence)

Phase 2

simplistic views (back to the past/idealised picture of democracy)

education detached from other policy areas (independence)

Phase 1

Thesis 3/3.

• None of the two transitions have a clear destination– parliamentary democracies and market

economies are continuously challenged

– Europe is an evolving political entity in an open-end process

• Although transition remains a necessary notion (e.g. for the explanation of social anomalies) it might be more appropriate to talk about open futures and continuous change

The way to parliamentary democracy and market economy

• In many CEE countries the restructuring of the economy is still going on, and economic recovery is not yet accomplished

• The culture of parliamentary democracy and market economy is not yet deeply rooted (see the existence of populist and etatist movements)

• After years of simplistic representations views about democracy and market economy became realistic

Democracy and market economy is something different than originally thought

• Democracy and market economy (D+M) require an effective state that protects the rule of law and the rules of free competition

• D+M do not solve immediately the inherited problems of low efficiency/productivity or that of the „culture of dependence”

• There is a complex inter-dependence between education and society/economy in both D+M and planned economy (structural determinations)

• New challenges and problems arise continuously in D+M

Education facing new challenges

• Transition has not only leaved old problems unsolved but created new ones

• Quality and relevance: What kind of quality and how to improve it?

• Equity: A forgotten and re-discovered policy goal.

• Efficiency: The most difficult legacy of the past that is not yet fully recognized.

• Governance: How to manage an open system?

„Discovering” the EU

• The European Union is… – a problem-community continuously facing new

challenges

– a community competing on the global scene

– a community struggling with internal divisions

– a community in transition („a moving target”)

• The „surprise”: education has become an important area of common policy in the EU – a decade of growth (since Maastricht)– a further step ahead: the Lisbon Process

What do the new members states face in the European education scene?

• Although no legal harmonisation is demanded (the easy closure of negotiation chapters)…,

• …there is an increasing community activity related with education– LLL policy in the framework of the employment

strategy of the EU– The educational aspects of other, highly europeanised

policy areas (social policy, environment, consumer protection etc.)

– OMC (benchmarks, indicators, reporting, peer control) – Control on resources: development (structural) policy

External control of developmenal resources: the impact of EU structural policy

• The European Social Fund becomes the most important developmental resource

• ESF regulations determine developmental goals– The Lisbon Strategy (enhancing transition to the

knowledge economy)– The European Employment Strategy– European strategy for social inclusion– Common education policy goals (DWP)– New: the modernisation of European governance

External control of developmental resources: the impact of EU structural policy

• All new member countries have a human resource development chapter in their NDP

• 20-30% of resources is spent on HRD (table here)

• The development of education in a LLL perspective in HRD chapters in all countries (examples)

• Following 2007 this aspect will be reinforced as part of the Lisbon Strategy

• All development resources are used in the framework of the NDP – few alternatives

What kind of transition(s)?

• Transition 2. (EU integration) is superimposed on Transition 1 (Democracy and market economy ) and it is accelerating the shift from phase 1 to phase 2– Phase 1: high level uncertainty and unrealistic

representations; education detached from other social and economic areas

– Phase 2: familiarising with complexity, emergence of new dynamic; education re-attached to other social and economic areas

The changing position of the education sector

Dependence

Independence

Inter-dependence

The first phase of transition

The second phase of transition

The changing position of the education sector

Inter-dependence

(In the second phase of transition)

Independence(In the first phase of transition)

Dependence(before the changes)

Features:

Strengthening linkages with other sectors, and stronger exposition to social-economic demands

Features:

Enlarged professional freedom, relative detachment from external social-economic demands

Features:

Social-economic demands mediated by ruling party through coercion and ideological control

A transition from independence to inter-dependence/1

• Although placing education into the broader context of social-economic development and linking it with other areas of public policy is not new in the CEE countries…

• …thinking in a lifelong learning perspective and managing an open system of education require, however, mental adaptation (e.g. local leaders connecting school education with community development)

A transition from independence to inter-dependence/2

• Using the EU structural funds for educational development compels educational leaders and players in CEE countries to make a mental shift towards LLL

• Thinking about education in an integrated public policy framework is reinforced by the national planning framework of EU structural policies

The emergence of a new dynamic

Closed system

Openness, uncertainty

Emergence of new dynamic

The first phase of transition

The second phase of transition

The emergence of new dynamic

Emergence of a new dynamic

Uncertainty, openness

Closed system (before the changes)

Features:

Emerging new structures and representations, developing problem solving capacities

Features:

Unstable structures, low level problem solving capacities, uncertainty, ready made imported answers

Features:

Untouchable structures, rigid representations, no alternatives

The emergence of new dynamic

• Representations, attitudes: – Openness and uncertainty seen as inherent features

of the system

– Waning of the „complaining culture”

– Emergence of a new „project culture”

– Mental management of complexity (eg. thinking in alternative scenarios)

• Structures, organisational features– Designing and managing projects

– Organisational development and quality regimes

– Agencies, contractual relations

Summing up: two phases – two transitions

Daily working relationship with the EU, europeanisation of domestic education policy

Emergence of new structures and representations and improved problem solving capacity

Phase 2Phase 2

Idealised representations on EU, no direct implications on the daily management of the system

Destruction of old structures and idealised representations on parliamentary democracy and market economy

Phase 1Phase 1

Transition 2Transition 2Transition 1Transition 1

Is the notion of transition still appropriate? • Yes…, on the one hand:

– there is still a move from one point to another (e.g. from independence to inter-dependence)

– and this is reinforced by the superimposition of transition 2. to transition 1.

• No…, on the other:

– there is no fix point to reach on the way from the „old” to the „new”

– what used to be perceived as transition might be the normal state of things

Concluding questions

• Should the transition from independence to inter-dependence be enhanced? If yes, how?

• Should we expect the end of transition or should we accept to live in continuous change?

• If the answer is yes, how to improve the adaptive capacity of the system and that of the people?– How to enhance organisational learning and policy

experimentation in education?– How to develop skills and capacities needed for

organisational and policy learning?

Thank you for your attention!