Inequality in the CIS countries: regional aspect

Regional differentiation in the CIS: methodological approaches

In the post-Soviet period, social problems in the CIS countries intensified, regional differences within these countries intensified, however, as an analysis of the available literature shows, modern socio-economic differentiation in the CIS countries at the regional level has not been sufficiently studied.

Over the years, territorial development has been assessed primarily by economic indicators such as GDP, GDP per capita, industrial production indices, etc. However, the development of countries and regions includes another, no less important, and often more significant area - social. Moreover, these two spheres of life are closely related to each other, influence each other and are defined by interpenetrating concepts. At the same time, assessing the level of social development of countries and regions is complicated by many reasons, the main of which are: a huge number of indicators reflecting the level of social development, different dimensions of these characteristics, the lack of a unified data collection system and subjectivity in the selection of key indicators.

The most adequate picture of the social development of a region can be obtained by using as many indicators as possible, both statistical and obtained through sociological surveys.

Therefore, the Human Development Index (HDI) (or as it is also called the Human Development Index (HDI)), developed in the early 90s by the UN Development Program, was chosen as the main indicator for a comparative analysis of the level of social development. The index is calculated as the arithmetic mean between three components: indices of longevity, level of education (composed of the literacy level with a weight of 1/3 and the proportion of children aged 7-24 years studying in educational institutions of all levels, with a weight of 2/3) and per capita GDP (PPP in US dollars).

To analyze the uneven social development of the regions of the CIS countries, the largest states in terms of population, with a fractional grid of administrative-territorial divisions, were selected: Kazakhstan, Russia, Uzbekistan and Ukraine. UNDP offices in these countries annually publish reports on human development in a regional context, which allows the study to use only official statistical data from 1996 to 2000. However, in Ukraine, in the late 90s, a new methodology for calculating the index began to be used, which led to the impossibility of adequately comparing the regions of this country with the rest over the entire period of time.

Features of economic and social transformations in the CIS countries in the 1990s

Based on the depth of the economic crisis and the pace of subsequent economic recovery, the CIS countries can be divided into several types.

At the same time, the determining typological factor in the transition period was the availability of exportable natural resources and the sectoral structure of the economy that developed back in the Soviet period.

Russia and Kazakhstan had a significant decline in GDP and then relatively high rates of recovery to the pre-crisis level. These countries are better endowed with natural resources than others, and during the transition period their economies developed due to export extractive industries, such as the fuel and energy complex and metallurgy. The continued role of the state in the economies of Uzbekistan and Belarus was the main reason for the smaller economic decline.

Azerbaijan and Ukraine occupy an intermediate position, but the reasons for this are different. Azerbaijan experienced a severe economic crisis, which was overcome in the mid-1990s. due to the commissioning of new oil fields, which led to GDP growth and increased monospecialization of the republic while maintaining a serious lag in per capita GDP indicators. Among the reasons for Ukraine's most protracted economic recession among all CIS countries are the predominance of uncompetitive heavy industry and the energy crisis. And only thanks to an increase in the supply of energy resources, improved conditions on the global ferrous metals market, as well as structural changes in the mechanical engineering and food industries in the late 1990s. rapid economic growth began. The peculiarities of statistical accounting in Turkmenistan do not allow assessing the dynamics of development of this country.

In the foreign economic activity of the Commonwealth countries during the transition period, the provision of natural resources also acquired the greatest importance, which made it possible to increase export volumes and provide the necessary budget revenues. Kazakhstan, Russia, Azerbaijan and, to some extent, Ukraine have such resources. Belarus occupies a special position, having a negative balance of foreign trade with its maximum focus on Russia, which ensured high growth dynamics, per capita volumes of foreign trade and the share of export-import transactions in GDP. The southern CIS countries with a predominance of the agricultural sector find themselves in the most difficult situation, where the import of goods significantly exceeds the export from the country, but at the same time the per capita volume of foreign trade remains minimal.

The trends of the transition period were different. In the countries of Central Asia, degradation processes prevailed in the economy and social sphere against the backdrop of slow demographic modernization. The group of previously “middle” republics (Moldova, Transcaucasia and Kazakhstan) has become more heterogeneous in economic situation and demographic dynamics with the accelerated development of Kazakhstan. The most developed Slavic countries of the CIS, with general demographic degradation, began to differ more significantly in the level and factors of economic development.

In the CIS countries, changes occurred in the structure of the economy caused by the economic crisis of the early 1990s. The first and common to all is the structural shift towards extractive industries due to a stronger decline in the manufacturing industry, i.e. primitivization of the economy of the Commonwealth states. In the countries richest in fuel and energy resources (Russia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan), the share of fuel and energy sectors has grown the most. It was this sector of the economy that during the crisis period most quickly adapted to new conditions; the production and export of oil and gas provide the main income to the budgets of these countries. A similar situation is developing regionally; oil and other resource-producing regions have become the most successful and rich. Thus, in Kazakhstan, four regions with specialization in the oil industry or metallurgy account for about 60% of the country’s total exports; their per capita GRP is 2-4 times higher than the average. In the countries least rich in natural resources (Armenia, Georgia, as well as Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan), the economy has agrarianized; due to the industrial crisis, the share of the primary sector has increased.

Changes in the employment structure of the population differed from transformations in the sectoral structure of the economy. All CIS countries, with the exception of Turkmenistan, are characterized by a reduction in the share of people employed in industry and construction. Changes in employment in the primary sector do not correlate with the dynamics of the share of these industries in the structure of gross value added (GVA). Thus, if a reduction in employment is observed only in Belarus, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, then a decrease in the contribution of these industries to GVA is typical for most countries (except for Armenia, Kyrgyzstan and Turkmenistan). At the same time, in the most agricultural countries (Armenia, Georgia, Moldova, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan), the share of people employed in agriculture increased by 1.5-2 times in the 1990s and exceeded half of all people employed in the economy. A similar situation has developed in the service sector. The increase in the share of services in GVA, noted for all countries without exception, does not coincide with the increase in the number of employed, which is characteristic only for the most industrially developed Belarus, Kazakhstan, Russia, Ukraine, as well as for Uzbekistan.

The level of healthcare development is weakly related to population health indicators and life expectancy. The three states of Transcaucasia and Uzbekistan were distinguished by the highest life expectancy and, most importantly, its growth in the 1990s.

At the same time, it was in them that the provision of the population with both medical personnel and clinics and hospitals significantly decreased. And, conversely, in Russia, Belarus and Ukraine, where the provision of medical services is the highest among the CIS countries and has increased over 10 years due to population decline, life expectancy has decreased by 3 years. This is due to an increase in mortality from external causes, especially among the working-age male population, which explains the huge difference in life expectancy between men and women. A more logical and understandable picture emerged in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Moldova, where the characteristics of population health and health care development simultaneously deteriorated.

Based on demographic indicators, the CIS countries are clearly divided into three groups. The Slavic states (Russia, Ukraine, Belarus), as well as Moldova, are distinguished by a completed demographic transition, a higher proportion of the elderly population and a decrease in the proportion of children in the age structure of the population, as well as low life expectancy, especially among the male population. The countries of Central Asia have maintained the maximum natural increase, a higher proportion of children (over 35%), the lowest proportion of the elderly population (4-6%) and average life expectancy rates with a smaller difference between men and women, and the minimum level of urbanization for the CIS countries.

In the countries of Transcaucasia and Kazakhstan, natural growth in the 1990s. has decreased significantly, although it remains positive, the transition to simple reproduction of the population has already occurred in Georgia.

At the same time, all the countries of Transcaucasia are distinguished by the highest life expectancy rates among the Commonwealth states, apparently due to favorable climatic conditions.

Regional differentiation of socio-economic development

An analysis of changes in regional differentiation of socio-economic status for the period 1996-2002 showed that the polarization of the HDI and its individual components as a whole is very different from each other (see Table 1).			Table 1. Differences between the most and least developed regions by HDI components (in percentage points)			life expectancy index

education index income index The maximum spread between the highest and lowest indicators is observed for

income index , between 1996 and 2002 the differences between the richest and poorest regions widened even further. At the same time, for the regions of Russia during the period of crisis stagnation (1996-99), a smoothing of differences was observed, and after 1999, with the beginning of active economic growth, the difference began to increase, because

Incomes in more developed regions grew faster. The polarization value has remained virtually unchanged

longevity index , it has several times less dispersion of indicators across regions than the income index. Availability of education

The leading regions and the outsider regions in individual private indices generally do not coincide, and their geography has hardly changed in the second half of the 90s. According to the longevity index The regions of Uzbekistan and the republics of the North Caucasus have the highest rates; the lowest life expectancy is typical for the most problematic territories in economic, climatic or environmental terms. In Russia, these are underdeveloped regions with an unfavorable climate - the Republic of Tyva and the northern autonomous districts, and in Kazakhstan - the Karaganda region, where the share of employees in industries with hazardous working conditions is high.

Although all regions of the countries studied show quite high the level of education , but still a group of capital and largest cities stands out (Moscow, St. Petersburg, Almaty, Kyiv, Kharkov, Tashkent). They are followed by a relatively large margin by industrialized territories, then by mining regions. The lowest rates of access to education are typical for agricultural regions, where the system of universities is not developed, and vocational education is only of local importance. In the metropolitan regions, the formally low education index is explained by the lack of their own city centers (Moscow, Leningrad, Almaty regions).

The most significant regional differentiation is in income level . During the transition period, the economic advantages of the capitals of the states under consideration, as well as the territories richest in export (primarily fuel) resources (Atyrau, Mangistau regions of Kazakhstan, Tyumen region), increased.

Next in the ranking are the industrially developed centers of Kazakhstan and Russia, and the outsiders in economic development are the agricultural regions of all countries. Considering intercountry regional differentiation, it can be noted that almost all regions of Uzbekistan and the agricultural regions of Ukraine and Kazakhstan, as well as the republics of the North Caucasus, are the least economically developed. In general, the ranking of regions by have the same trends as the income index, since it is it that has the maximum impact. The highest indicators are primarily in the capitals, in which power, capital, scientific, educational and cultural potential are concentrated, the headquarters of the largest companies are located, etc. High positions in terms of social development are occupied by regions richest in oil and gas. The next level includes regions with a developed processing industry - ferrous and non-ferrous metallurgy, some branches of mechanical engineering, and petrochemicals. Regions with the lowest level of economic development tend to have the most pronounced agricultural specialization. Only in Russia is a group of depressed industrial regions more clearly identified . Thus, at the stage of the transition period of the second half of the 90s, the social development of the region is determined almost entirely by the economic component, which once again confirms the impossibility of considering the social and economic components of development separately.

Imbalances and imbalances between the social and economic components of the HDI

Global trends indicate synchronous development and equal influence of each component of the human development index (longevity, level of education and income) on the final HDI value, however, a different situation has been revealed in the CIS countries and their regions (see Table 2).

Table 2. Correlation coefficients between HDI and its components

HDI correlation coefficient	Life expectancy index		Education level index		Income Index
	countries of the world	CIS regions	countries of the world	CIS regions	countries of the world	CIS regions

Today, this problem is very acute in the territory. The transition from one system to another turned out to be painful for almost all areas of life: economic, political, medical, and, including educational. Some reforms were undertaken by the authorities of these states, however, most of them turned out to be ineffective. This happened because educational problems were formed under the influence of many factors, and in order to improve the state of this area, an integrated approach is needed, which few people are ready to take seriously for various reasons: from lack of interest to basic inability.

The problems of modern education currently concern mainly only a layer of intellectuals and researchers who work directly in this area and feel very acutely all its shortcomings. There is also a small part of students, graduates, and an even smaller part of applicants, who have already been affected by educational reforms and the quality of teaching that are far from ideal. As you know, only those for whom it is a real problem can solve any problem (even the most complex one), and since the interested parties do not have a number of powers, and those who by and large do not need it do, the educational sphere has been abandoned. Indeed, sometimes minimal attempts are made to change something in it, but their quality and general superficial approach suggest that only the appearance of a desire to change something is created.

Problems of education: narrow specialization

Here we encounter a contradiction between narrow specialization and a wide range of industries in each profession. Universities offer a number of specialties that are, in fact, very vague: psychologists, managers, lawyers, economists, and so on. The labor market focuses on narrower specializations, but young specialists are not prepared for specific sectors and are rather vaguely familiar with them due to the predominance of general education subjects in the list of disciplines studied. So, it turns out that the whole world is striving to live in a modern Western manner (the need for specialists of a narrow profile), and educational services are morally outdated, people with a wide profile of skills are being graduated.

This can also include professions: there is a catastrophic shortage of people in working professions, at a time when crowds of lawyers and economists, of whom there is already a surplus, are annually released onto the streets. And few people make efforts to balance this flow.

Problems of education: economic component

Financing is one of the most painful topics, certainly not only in the educational sphere. This shows the low quality of education that, unfortunately, many universities can offer. In capitals and large cities this is not a big concern, but in smaller centers there is a regular outflow of specialists due to poor funding. Basically, the problem lies precisely in low salaries, which force talented people to stop teaching and scientific activities and devote themselves to another field.

However, some of them still remain, and they are very valuable employees who produce good specialists.

Educational Issues: Cultural Trends

There is also currently a problem of cultural development of society. Under the influence of various factors, most young people are not interested in getting an education; they need tangible evidence that they have mastered a certain profession, more than knowledge and skills. This also does not improve the overall educational picture; some kind of propaganda of the value of knowledge and skills that are useful to the whole society is probably necessary. The media made a big contribution to this: the systematic broadcast of base values ​​and stupid examples of behavior, as well as an infantile attitude to life, realized its educational function in a negative way.

Thus, the problems of education have been grouped into one global problem, which is difficult to eliminate, but possible. At the same time, shifting all responsibility to government managers is too naive: the problems of society should be solved by the same society, or at least with its participation, and not by individual elite groups. Everyone must take the first step by forming a conscious attitude towards what surrounds them.

It is no good to forget about the republics of the former USSR: the territory of silence between Russian and “completely Western” education does not contribute to an objective view of either global higher education or specific Russian applicants. So what is the connection between universities in Moscow and Kyiv, Chisinau and Tbilisi - and what does it have to do with you personally?

Is the red flag broken?

Do we have a unified educational space today? Yes. It is united at least to the extent that a single cultural and historical space is preserved.

Once upon a time we all had a common poet number one - and today Moldova, as if nothing had happened, is holding a Pushkin festival, and the universities of Tallinn and Tartu are celebrating the birthday of the great Pushkinist of the 20th century, Yuri Lotman.

Once upon a time we had a common war number two - and now not only Kyiv, but for some reason Moscow, Minsk, Chisinau and Yerevan are watching and listening via video link as the name “Great Patriotic War”, removed from the Ukrainian history books, returns from there under the former Minister of Education of Ukraine.

The USSR no longer exists, of course. However, an Azerbaijani school accidentally opens in Izhevsk, Russia. Transnistrian University (Moldova) named after Taras Shevchenko (Ukraine) holds its presentation in our State Duma (Russia, Moscow). MGIMO creates fraternities - Azerbaijani, Armenian, Belarusian, Georgian, Kazakh, Kyrgyz, Latvian, Moldavian, Tajik, Uzbek and Ukrainian. The Russian State University for the Humanities publishes a textbook of the Ukrainian language for the Ukrainian diasporas of Russia and the CIS. SFedU, together with universities in Ukraine and Belarus, takes part in a certain MIGO program - according to it, a “techie” student can, at the same time as the main one, also receive a liberal arts education. About 100 students from neighboring countries (citizens of Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia, Russia, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Ukraine) study at the regional Cisco Networking Academy at Gomel State University (Belarus). The Moscow mayor's office sends manuals to Crimea (for school classrooms of the Russian language) and professors to conduct training for local teachers. About 200 Azerbaijanis are enrolling in Georgian universities. The French Sorbonne is launching a special course “Classics of CIS Literatures” - and here are several republics again nearby, on adjacent pages. Bloggers-teachers from Russia and Belarus share their teaching experience in an informal Internet environment. There are branches of Russian universities in the near abroad. Russian-national universities have been opened in Armenia, Belarus, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan. The exchange of educational services between countries is supported by the work of comparing similar educational documents and academic degrees. In the field of education, multilateral international agreements are signed between the countries of the former USSR. Ministers of Education of the CIS countries meet and communicate...

So, does the USSR really no longer exist? Then where does this, as they would say in Odessa, “oil painting” come from?

To be honest, it is not always nostalgia for the former Union that is the source of joint projects or simply similar decisions. The reasons may vary. Then global trends will intervene - and then the Ukrainians will compare their independent testing with American tests, but it is painfully similar to our Unified State Exam. Then more local communities will raise their heads - and then the Kiev Slavic University will organize an Olympiad for schoolchildren from Slavic countries, in which Russians find themselves side by side with Ukrainians. The same can be said about the SCO network university, which unites Asian universities, among which there are also “once Soviet” ones.

But when in May 2010, Russian President Medvedev gives lectures to Kyiv students, and in September he becomes an honorary doctor of Baku University, this is not perceived as 100% international actions. We, consumers of this news, simply cannot help but remember the times of a united country.

The general educational space of the USSR has split, torn, cracked, but it is like a book that makes sense to carefully glue it and read it. After all, any kind of connections are possible between schools and universities in separate countries, it’s just that this is not always visible from Moscow and is not always controlled by it.

The educational space exists no matter how many people notice it. It shares some common characteristics. One of the main ones is the language of interethnic communication in this space. Not English, like all over the world, but Russian.

Russian language

Many former Soviet republics about 20 years ago started a movement away from the Russian language. How are things today?

The Baltic states take the toughest position. The director of the State Language Center of Latvia is categorically against talk about the possibility of allowing teaching in Russian in the country's state universities. It is possible to teach students only in the official languages ​​of the EU, and the fact that Russian is actually the language of the UN is not a decree for Latvia. In neighboring Estonia, the number of students wishing to receive education in Russian continues to decline. Parents send their children to Estonian schools for the sake of their children’s future careers, and Russian schools are closed, although not all of them.

A similar situation occurred in Ukraine. (By the way, both in Latvia and Ukraine textbooks of the Russian language were published, to put it mildly, with not the best examples of our speech. For what? Nothing other than to belittle the cultural significance of the great and mighty.) However, after the recent change of power among the residents of Ukraine the right to take tests at universities, including in Russian, appeared. This will help the Russian-speaking youth of Ukraine not to confuse the terms, which are still very different in the languages ​​of the fraternal Slavic peoples.

In Asian countries there has also been a movement towards the Russian language. In the summer, an interuniversity round table dedicated to teaching the Russian language was held at the National University of Uzbekistan in Tashkent. Perhaps the goals of this event are actually quite prosaic - to ultimately expand the access of local youth to Russian universities, but the round table diplomatically spoke about language as a means of humanization. At the same time, the Armenian parliament decided that it was time to reopen Russian schools: previously they were closed (with the exception of two throughout the country - for non-Armenians by nationality and non-citizens of Armenia). As a result, the population of Yerevan staged a protest, seeing this “expansion” as a threat to the Armenian language - and even demanded the resignation of the Armenian Minister of Education. Needless to say, returning the Russian language to its lost positions will not be easy.

Nevertheless, our language can even infringe on the language of a particular republic, without itself being its official state language. This is what happened in the Gagauz autonomy in Moldova: they study in Russian, which is to the detriment of the Gagauz language, one of the local languages.

Like in the mirror

Is it correct to consider a large competition for admission to a modern university to be a direct descendant of the Soviet era? Hardly. In general, the presence of common issues and trends in the educational systems of the countries of the former USSR can be explained in different ways - although Soviet habits may well be cited among other reasons. For example, Ukrainian applicants, not sensing the capitalistically serious competition, are just as delaying submitting original documents to universities as the Russians. However, it would be necessary to start talking about this topic with the fact that in both countries there is a manner of delaying information about the rules for admission to the next year.

Both Russia and Georgia impose sanctions against tutors. In Russia, because “you can prepare for the Unified State Exam without tutors,” and in Georgia, tutors are of keen interest to tax authorities. Both of these reasons can be reduced to the idea of ​​social justice, and it gained the greatest weight precisely during the Soviet era. Everything fits: tutoring itself flourished under tsarism! Although among poor students.

And on the contrary, there is a temptation to say: if only the Union with its strong education system had not collapsed, there would not have been so many “D” grades among newly minted students! The last academic year “gave” Moscow the infamous dictation with the amazing neologisms “potsient” and “cherez-chur”, and Kyiv - 64% of unsatisfactory grades for Polytechnic first-year students in physics and 53% in mathematics. And the Union really collapsed, but it’s too late to blame it.

Simple facts similar to Russian realities cannot be called either anti-Soviet or pro-Soviet: those entering Lithuanian universities can indicate up to 12 universities in their application, up to 5 universities in Ukraine, in Uzbekistan they are admitted based on points, and in Azerbaijan there are preferences for recipients of benefits. The famous Azerbaijani beneficiary Safura Alizadeh took fifth place at Eurovision 2010 - but it is completely unclear how bourgeois Eurovision is.

In this context, much is not obvious at all. The school medal, the significance of which was canceled by both Russia and Ukraine upon admission, is something like a medal for the hard work of a worker - or is it a badge of honor for future white-collar workers? Who are the same Russia and Ukraine praising, raising today the status of bachelors, working people (socialism) - or mid-level professionals (capitalism)? Most likely, the common Soviet past of the two republics will have absolutely nothing to do with the answers to these questions. But the present in all its complexity - of course, yes. So let's look for some instructive differences.

Learning from the “younger”

Russia is traditionally “for the elders,” but this does not mean that it is automatically a teacher for the younger ones. She herself has something to learn, either from Belarus - a European outcast, or from Georgia - a recent ardent enemy; and not only from them. At the very least, this will give a chance to reflect on other people's experiences and not perceive your practice as the only possible one. In general, arrogance is at least unscientific.

In all schools of Georgia, on the initiative of its president, teachers from English-speaking countries have been working as English teachers since September 1. It is obvious that thanks to this, children will speak English earlier. Whereas Russia, until recently, limited the opportunity for foreign teachers to work in our universities - accordingly, the period when students could begin to speak the “language” of world science was postponed to the future.

In Belarus, non-state universities operated for less than 10 years, they were closed or pushed out of the country: for example, the European Humanities University, which previously taught students in Minsk, is now forced to do so in neighboring Vilnius. Stifling the initiative of enthusiastic teachers with their own vision of education is, of course, not good. However, Belarus, which behaves harshly, is not concerned today, like Russia, with the large-scale problem of closing “pseudo-universities”; applicants from Vitebsk and Mogilev can be afraid of anything - but not that “their university will be closed.”

While Russia is developing a college system - which is generally not in line with the idea of ​​complete general secondary education - Tajikistan is gradually moving to 12-year secondary education, and in Lithuania the issue of introducing a 13-year secondary education system is being actively discussed. But we see that we should not perceive any trend as the only one that is precisely justified and the main one.

Not being the center of the world is sometimes useful. Given the well-known dislike for Moscow, most Russians expect Moscow universities to conquer world rankings, but in fact, universities in the “periphery” should not relax: they have every chance. After all, in the same Lithuania, it was not Vilnius university that got into the international Webometrix ranking, but Kaunas University of Technology.

And again Lithuania: this year for the first time they applied to universities over the Internet, there was a computer failure - this is exactly the case when we need to learn from other people’s mistakes in order to avoid our own: having gone wrong, the system did not remain idle, but sent out SMS messages to applicants - ki that they didn’t arrive anywhere. The Vice Minister of Education even apologized for this later.

And it’s especially interesting to watch Ukraine: its differences with Russia always give rise to reflection. Ukraine teaches students to choose history and mathematics rather than social studies at the final test; she will make math tests multi-level; she organizes testing for night owls - at 11 am; she restored the benefit to graduates of preparatory departments; she plans to put the issue of increasing enrollment in the specialty or opening a new faculty at least to a vote of the regional councils; it provides a more humanitarian set of disciplines required for admission than ours; its applicants are massively interested in the specialty “Transport Technologies”. Ukraine also reminds us of tricks from the general Soviet past: it was then that the so-called “average score for the certificate” was in effect, and now in Russia this has been forgotten, but in the fraternal republic it is just relevant. As a result, the guys are forced to pick up “extra” items, and they report that sales of cool magazine forms have strangely increased: do you need spare ones? But it is possible that the level of knowledge of the average applicant will also increase.

The world didn't converge like a wedge

Having observed the educational migration of the descendants of Soviet people, you will be convinced that it is no less entertaining than, raising your eyes to the sky, studying the rather complex topic of bird migration in zoology. Birds do not have to fly to warmer climes! Birds are different - synanthropes, sedentary, semi-sedentary, nomadic and migratory... In the same way, the idea that Russians are eager to study in Moscow or at universities in the UK, France, Germany or the USA, and willingly take their student places in Russia, Let's say, Ukrainians, rather superficially.

There is no doubt that, due to the demographic decline, our country will expand the admission of children from the CIS to state-funded places, and almost on the same basis as Russian graduates (almost - because sometimes your competitors from neighboring countries, in addition to the application, also need to write a motivation letter) . It is already becoming a trend that under these conditions, young Estonians, for example, often choose Moscow student cards and St. Petersburg student records. The route they “fly” is also known (each republic has its own): our northwestern neighbors act through the Tallinn Pushkin Institute as an intermediary of the Russian Embassy.

But Ukrainians, despite the fact that even the bilateral practice of mutual provision of budget places is being established, go not only to Russia, but also, like us, look at the UK and Canada. And, of course, it should be mentioned that Ukrainian students, just like ours, are selected to study in Europe as part of the Erasmus Mundus program.

In general, options are possible here: Azerbaijanis, not wanting to exchange blooming, sunny Baku with pomegranate trees on its streets for the fogs of Albion, nevertheless receive a double diploma - Azerbaijani-British. This opportunity opens up for them as a result of an agreement between the Azerbaijan University of Languages ​​and the University of Essex.

And Moldovans generally behave in the least standard way. They even go to China to get diplomas: this country invites Moldovans to study and gives scholarships. Everything is serious: first, the scholarship holder undergoes a preparatory course in studying the Chinese language for a year, students are selected through a competition.

The post-Soviet educational space exists. It comes into contact with the educational space of the whole world - and can no longer be a terra incognita for us.

STATES (CEE/CIS) Every child – health, education, equal opportunities and protection

ON THE WAY TO A HUMANE WORLD

The views expressed herein reflect the views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the policies or views of UNICEF.

The designations employed in this publication and the presentation of the material do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNICEF concerning the legal status of any country or territory or of its authorities, or the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.

Free quotation of excerpts from this publication is possible provided the following reference to the source is indicated: UNICEF, 2007, Education for Some More than Others? Geneva: UNICEF Regional Office for Central and Eastern Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States.

For more information and to download this or any other publication, see the UNICEF Regional Office for CEE/CIS website: www.unicef.org/ceecis.

All correspondence should be sent to:

UNICEF Regional Office for CEE/CIS Education Section Palais des Nations CH 1211 Geneva Switzerland Copyright: © 2007 United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) ISBN: 978-92-806-4162-2

Design and layout:

Translation and layout: Interdialect+, Moscow Printing: ATAR ROTO PRESSE SA Cover photo: UNICEF/SWZK00149/GIACOMO PIROZZI

EDUCATION:

ONE MORE,

LESS FOR OTHERS?

REGIONAL STUDY

IN THE FIELD OF EDUCATION

IN CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE

AND THE COMMONWEALTH OF INDEPENDENTS

STATES (CEE/CIS)

UNICEF REGIONAL OFFICE FOR CEE/CIS

2007

PREFACE

The report examines the extent to which the trend towards increasing inequality in education still persists in countries of Central and Eastern Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States. This study was undertaken to complement and update the Regional Monitoring Report on Education issued by the Innocenti Research Centre. Assessing progress in this area is both important and timely, as we are now halfway from the start date to the end date of the Millennium Development Goals.

Since the late 1990s, the socio-economic situation in the region has undergone significant changes.

According to the Innocenti Research Center's 2006 Social Monitor, the absolute number of children living in income poverty in the Commonwealth of Independent States and South-Eastern Europe has decreased. This is largely due to the increase in many countries in national income, which is distributed among populations whose numbers are declining or remaining stable.

Despite this, one in four children still lives in poverty, children are more likely to be poor than adults, and inequalities in well-being, both material and non-material, are widening. Children living in large and non-nuclear families, in rural and economically disadvantaged areas, and in the Caucasus and Central Asia are particularly vulnerable and at risk of poverty.

Although public spending on education and reform programs are increasing in many countries, education systems are creating increasing inequalities in access, particularly in pre-primary enrollment and attendance, and completion of basic education.

In 2004, it is estimated that almost 2.4 million primary school-age children and almost 12 million middle and high school-age children were not in school. Demand for education is falling due to poor quality of educational services and insufficient tangible benefits from schooling. Other factors contributing to early school leaving and low basic education completion rates include socioeconomic disadvantage, ethnicity, disability, school violence and child labour.

While recognizing the urgent need to achieve the Millennium Development Goals, this study proposes a range of strategies to achieve greater equality in access to quality education to promote human rights, social cohesion and economic competitiveness. Some countries are already prioritizing policy efforts and funding to improve quality and equity in education through the Education for All Acceleration Initiative, the Millennium Development Goals, poverty reduction strategies and accession processes to the European Union. While the focus of these initiatives on underserved children varies, there is a general need to raise awareness among governments and stakeholders of the importance of providing quality education for all, which in turn will enable individual, social and economic development.

It is hoped that this report will contribute to these efforts.

–  –  –

EDUCATION: ONE MORE, OTHERS LESS?

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The study, entitled “Education: More for some, less for others?” was carried out on behalf of the UNICEF Regional Office for Central and Eastern Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States. It was accomplished through the cooperation of many people, and each of them deserves thanks.

Martin Godfrey, the lead author, was responsible for preparing chapters 1, 3, 5 and 6. He also brought together the contributions of all the authors. Joanna Crichton wrote Chapter 2. Lani Florian contributed material for Chapters 2 and 3, which focus on children with disabilities and children with special needs. Georgina Brown wrote the section on learning outcomes, and Andrew Newell contributed to the section of Chapter 4 on labor market opportunities. Selim Iltus made field visits and conducted focus group discussions, thanks to which the report was confirmed by field testing and was prepared taking into account the opinions of respondents. The children and adults with whom he spoke deserve special thanks. Esther Juche assisted in the provision of reference materials, including the collection of data and documents, along with the control of content, style and correctness of wording.

Philippe Testot-Ferry was responsible for the overall development and coordination of this project. Petronilla Muriti provided administrative assistance.

The advice and comments of the following independent experts were very useful for this study:

Gaspar Fatha, Igor Kitaev, Stavri Lyambiri, Michael Murtagh, Sheldon Schaeffer and Ian Whitman.

Valuable comments were also received from the UNICEF Regional Office for CEE/CIS, in particular from Maria Kalyvis, Shahnaz Kiyanian-Firuzgar, Deepa Grover, Anna Nordenmark Severinsson and Petra Hölscher.

In addition, the exchange of views with participants in the Internal Review Meeting (28 August 2006, Geneva) and the Regional Management Group (7 November 2006, Lausanne) was also useful.

Much data was obtained from the UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre, as well as from UNICEF regional and country offices, international organizations, NGOs, as well as from national ministries, research institutes and statistical authorities in the CEE/CIS region. They do not accept any responsibility for the nature of the use or presentation of this data.

Design and layout prepared by Services Concept, Geneva. The translation and layout of the report in Russian was carried out by Interdialect+, Moscow, with the participation and support of Evgeny Stanislavov and Maria Avakova.

Abbreviations

Chapter 1: Introduction and Context

Chapter 2. Education reform: what are its results to date?

Chapter 3: Access and Equity

Chapter 4. Learning outcomes and labor market prospects

Chapter 5. Costs, financing and management

Appendix: Methodology for working with focus groups and conducting interviews

Notes

Bibliography

EDUCATION: ONE MORE, OTHERS LESS?

REGIONAL STUDY ON EDUCATION IN CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE AND THE COMMONWEALTH OF INDEPENDENT STATES

–  –  –

GROUPING COUNTRIES BY CATEGORIES USED

IN THIS STUDY

Countries covered by this study: Azerbaijan, Albania, Armenia, Belarus, Bulgaria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Hungary, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Poland, Russian Federation, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Turkey, Uzbekistan, Ukraine, Croatia, Montenegro, Czech Republic, Estonia.

Montenegro became an independent state after a referendum in May 2006. However, for the purposes of this study, Serbia and Montenegro are generally treated as one country, unless separate data are available for them.

For the purposes of this study, the CEE/CIS region (often referred to as the “region”) is divided into the following groups of countries: Albania, the Baltic States, Bulgaria and Romania, the Transcaucasus, the western part of the Commonwealth of Independent States, the countries of the former Yugoslavia (for short called the “former Yugoslavia”) , Turkey, Central Asia, Central and Eastern Europe.

Subregions and their composition are defined as follows:

Baltic states: Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia;

Transcaucasia: Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia;

western part of the Commonwealth of Independent States: Belarus, Moldova, Russian Federation, Ukraine.

Central Asia: Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan;

Central and Eastern Europe: Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia, Czech Republic;

countries of the former Yugoslavia: Bosnia and Herzegovina, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Serbia, Croatia, Montenegro;

The study mentions other groups of countries, namely:

Commonwealth of Independent States: Azerbaijan, Armenia, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Russian Federation, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Ukraine;

8 member countries of the European Union (EU): Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia, Czech Republic, Estonia;

15 EU countries: Austria, Belgium, Germany, Greece, Denmark, Ireland, Spain, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, United Kingdom, Finland, France, Sweden;

Southeastern Europe: Albania, Bulgaria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Romania, Serbia, Croatia, Montenegro;

countries included in the focus group: Azerbaijan, Albania, Moldova, Tajikistan, Türkiye.

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

This study was undertaken to complement and update the 1998 UNICEF Innocenti Research Center (IRC) report “Education for All?” about the situation in Central and Eastern Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States. That report indicated that since the beginning of the transition, there has been a marked increase in inequality in the quantity and quality of education throughout the region. To address these problems, the report proposed Twelve Steps towards Education for All.

This study examines two main questions, with a particular focus on poorer countries, including this time Turkey: 1) To what extent does the trend of increasing educational inequality continue, with some more than others less? 2) Have the Twelve Steps to Education for All been implemented and what additional steps need to be taken today?

These are the Twelve Steps:

1. Teaching methods that promote participation and personal development.

6. Research on child labor and its relationship with school attendance and learning.

7. Paying more attention to access to education and quality of education for children from low-income families.

Changes in education systems, methods and learning outcomes occur in the following context:

Inclusion and implementation by international institutions of Education for All (EFA), the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), European Union national action plans and programs of the Asian Development Bank, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the World Bank.

Economic recovery in all countries since 1998 and in Turkey since 1989.

Financial difficulties faced by countries with weak economies, in particular Armenia, Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova and Tajikistan.

Average living standards are rising, but with considerable variation, from Slovenia (where it approaches the European Union average) to Tajikistan (where it is comparable to Rwanda).

Income inequality is rising in all countries except Turkey.

Unemployment rates are rising, and they are higher among young people than among adults.

Poverty rates have fallen, with poverty becoming chronic in some countries.

The use of child labor, with the percentage of working children in some countries comparable to that in developing countries.

Life expectancy is recovering, but life expectancy levels for men remain low, especially in the Russian Federation.

EDUCATION: ONE MORE, OTHERS LESS?

REGIONAL STUDY ON EDUCATION IN CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE AND THE COMMONWEALTH OF INDEPENDENT STATES

A downward trend in the number of school-aged children is expected to continue in all countries except Tajikistan and Turkey.

The complex structure of international migration and the increase in the number of refugees and internally displaced persons caused by armed conflicts.

Against this background, education reform took place in the usual sequence and began with 1) a period of euphoria and experimentation with models from outside in an atmosphere of newfound freedom, followed by 2) a stage of careful re-evaluation of models from outside and 3) as fatigue set in, an attempt to give the reforms a more national character . Reform fatigue is common. As one Russian teacher wrote back in 1923, “My school has no glass windows and no roof. But thanks to the integrated teaching method, my teaching is going well.” Despite the above, significant progress has been made, including the adoption of education standards rather than a focus on costs, the introduction of alternative choice systems for parents and children (at least for the middle class), and the recognition of free education for at least in principle, as a human right.

The lessons learned from the attempts to implement the bulk of the reform can be summarized as follows:

Teaching reform has focused primarily on in-service teacher training, while the pre-service training system has remained largely unrestructured. Teachers should be more involved in the reform process and receive more decent wages. Meanwhile, the only practical option is often the traditional method of conducting classes with the whole class.

In many countries, curriculum standards remain inconsistent and there is a need for greater teacher and community involvement (and greater collaboration between central and local governments). The danger of excessive teaching load due to the overload of the training program remains everywhere.

For those who cannot afford to buy books and teaching materials, they should be subsidized, but textbook lending programs are only effective if they are carefully designed. Free textbooks for everyone is an option that is unlikely to be financially feasible.

A qualified and independent institution is required to establish a national student assessment system. Although this assessment has been widely used, its effectiveness is questionable. There is also the danger of increasing the academic burden on students, which is reflected in the rise of private tutoring.

Thanks to innovative approaches, the quality of education in preschool institutions has improved. However, the coverage of such training remains low, and it does not extend to the poor.

There are arguments for making pre-school education compulsory in the year immediately preceding entry into primary school.

Separate education for children with special needs still prevails, and broader reforms could help exclude such children from mainstream education. In poorer countries and localities there is little evidence that these children are included in mainstream schools.

The old model of vocational education (which produced highly skilled young workers ready for industry) no longer works.

The outcome of school reform depends on ensuring adequate and equal access to education. Generally:

Pre-primary enrollment rates have increased but remain low in the Caucasus, Central Asia, South-East Europe and Turkey.

SUMMARY

Most countries are on track to achieve MDG 2 (to achieve universal primary education by 2015), but seven countries (Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Romania, Tajikistan, Ukraine and Croatia) are at risk, with three countries (Georgia, Moldova and Tajikistan) are unlikely to achieve this goal. In 2004, there were an estimated 2.4 million primary school-age children in the region who were not in school.

Upper secondary education enrollment rates are still below 50 percent in eight countries (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan), and in 2004 there were an estimated 12 million secondary school children in the region. and senior school age (lower and upper secondary education) did not attend school.

In some countries, particularly in the new EU members, there has been a move towards mass higher education at the expense of quality, but coverage remains low in Central Asia.

The expansion of the private sector is taking place mainly in tertiary and post-secondary further education, and in a few countries at the upper secondary level.

As for equal access:

Gender inequality exists both across countries and at different levels of education, with Tajikistan and Turkey being the only countries that have serious difficulties in achieving MDG 3 (eliminating gender inequality at all levels of education by 2015).

Social origin has a significant impact on access to pre-primary education, to a lesser extent on access to basic education, to a greater extent on access to upper secondary education (with children from low-income families being overrepresented in vocational schools) and has the greatest impact on on access to higher education. Children from low-income families or from families in other difficult circumstances have less access to education at all levels.

Inequalities in access to secondary education between urban and rural areas almost always result in disadvantages for students from rural areas.

Ethnic minorities are often disadvantaged in terms of access to education, with the most glaring disparity observed in the case of Roma, who are a growing percentage of the total youth population in a number of countries.

Children with special needs have limited opportunities outside of institutions, and many children with disabilities do not attend school.

To what extent do inequalities in access to education, exacerbated by inequalities in attainment, affect labor market prospects? International testing results from the Project International Reading and Comprehension Study (PIRLS), the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), and the International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) measure results in terms of assimilation. As for the average results:

The countries that participated in all six international tests can be ranked in a hierarchy, with the eight new members of the European Union near the top, with the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Turkey at the bottom.

Spending more money on each person's education produces better results—up to a point. Among the countries surveyed in the region, only Slovenia appears to have increased its per capita government spending on education, beyond the point at which such increases begin to have a beneficial effect on average scores on these tests.

Trends in average test scores over time are mixed. In some countries (Latvia, Lithuania and Poland) indicators have improved, in others (Bulgaria, Slovakia) they have worsened.

Worryingly, countries in the region tend to perform better than OECD countries in PIRLS and TIMSS (which value the development of factual knowledge) than in PISA (which values ​​the development of application skills). knowledge in real life situations).

EDUCATION: ONE MORE, OTHERS LESS?

REGIONAL STUDY ON EDUCATION IN CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE AND THE COMMONWEALTH OF INDEPENDENT STATES

Within-country inequalities in learning outcomes are significant and are less dependent on a country's geographic location and average income level. There is no clear relationship between the average level of educational quality and equality; the most successful students often have the lowest variance in performance. Inequalities tend to reflect differences in socioeconomic background (with maternal education having a huge impact) as well as the quality of school teaching. Gender differences in educational outcomes vary: girls consistently perform better than boys in reading (arguably the most important skill needed to compete successfully in the job market), and in some countries they perform better in mathematics and science.

Over the long term, education has a dynamic effect on comparative advantage—the shift from economic growth based on cheap labor to growth based on skilled labor. From the Treasury Department's perspective, this is what justifies government spending on education equal to 5 percent or more of gross domestic product (GDP). In the near future, education will influence people’s prospects in the labor market.

This raises the question of whether under-enrollment and, in some cases, difficulties in achieving the Millennium Development Goals are a response to labor market developments. There appears to be a contradiction in this regard between labor market statistics and the views expressed in the focus groups conducted for the purposes of this report, but the contradiction is only apparent. Statistics on unemployment rates and average incomes indicate that young workers, even those working abroad, benefit from staying in the education system for as long as possible. The returns from higher education are especially significant. However, focus group discussions revealed that poor people in poor countries, for whom higher education is a pipe dream, are skeptical about benefiting from education, particularly for girls in Azerbaijan, Tajikistan and Turkey. Weak demand for education is also attributed to the hidden costs of schooling (such as school fees, textbooks and uniforms), corruption and private tutoring, school conditions and the use of child labour.

In terms of costs, financing and management, governments across the region are grappling with the challenge of redefining the core package of educational services that should be provided free of charge by the government. Should all levels of education be free or only compulsory education? What about school meals, textbooks, transportation for children, and extracurricular activities? The dominant idea in responses to such questions was that achieving equal outcomes requires an unequal investment of free resources, with more for those who need them and less for those who do not. This financial situation can be summarized as follows:

Government spending on education is a changing percentage of GDP;

Many countries' spending is above the OECD average, but some countries are running budget deficits.

The majority of government funding for education goes to basic education, in some countries a significant share of funding is allocated to pre-primary education, and the share allocated to higher education varies. Judging by the categories of expenses, most of them go to wages and a very small part to improving the quality of education.

Many countries provide additional funds for children with special needs; OECD countries in the region provide such funds for a relatively large proportion of children with disabilities of primary school age, but less for children from socio-economically disadvantaged families.

Low teacher salaries have a negative impact on teacher morale and commitment, leading to recruitment difficulties and corruption, all of which damage the quality of education.

The widespread use of private tutoring is a reaction to low wages and erosion of the quality of education. There is a clear risk of loss of professional ethics, and the losers are low-income families for whom quality private tutoring is not available.

The amount of government spending per student varies widely. There is a tendency to allocate a higher percentage of GDP to preschools than in OECD countries

SUMMARY

per capita, a higher share of spending on vocational training compared to spending on general education schools, which is below average spending in OECD countries on general primary and secondary education, and spending on higher education varies depending on the degree of cost recovery.

The number of students per teacher is declining everywhere, with the exception of Central Asia and Turkey. The “demographic dividend,” coupled with improved school networks, provides an opportunity to increase student-teacher ratios and class sizes in some countries.

The process of decentralization continues, and its pace varies, but is generally slow. This process consists mainly of transferring funds from the center. In terms of achieving equality, such slow progress is not necessarily a bad thing - “real” decentralization often results in weaker areas receiving less money.

An important new planning tool for education is the Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF), a framework for conducting analyzes to select between alternative objectives and specifying the costs involved.

Some relatively new elements are the “money follows the student” funding model and independent schools. In essence, this model can help improve the quality and efficiency of education, but steps must be taken to set standards, introduce monitoring and promote the interests of the poor.

Let us note in conclusion: it is quite obvious that the economic situation in the country matters for education. The five countries with the lowest GDP per capita, the highest poverty rates and the largest budget deficits are among those struggling to achieve MDG 2, with low pre-primary and secondary education enrollment rates and declining quality of education due to budget cuts . In each such country, the “some more, some less” model usually prevails in education. High-income families tend to have disproportionate access to preschool education, provide fairly good funding for their children’s basic education (finance it themselves if necessary), create a home environment conducive to learning and exam success, and encourage their children to continue education in secondary school (these should be the best schools, and general education, not vocational schools, and, if necessary, private ones) and hire good private tutors - all this is done to achieve the ultimate goal, namely obtaining a diploma higher education, which makes it easier to get a relatively well-paid job.

At the other end of the spectrum are poorer families who do not expect to benefit from schooling and are less able to afford the hidden costs that lead to absenteeism and school dropout. Disadvantage is exacerbated by ethnicity, special needs and, in some countries (notably Tajikistan and Turkey), gender. Public spending on education increases inequality rather than countering it. The decline in the number of school-age children increases the inefficiency of education systems, which is reflected in low student-teacher ratios, more so in some countries than others.

What about the Twelve Steps to Education for All? The successes are mixed:

1. Teaching methods have become more diverse, but new approaches that encourage participation and active learning are not widespread.

2. The practice of distributing students into different streams within the school itself and selecting students for admission to elite (mainly state) schools is more widely used.

3. External assessment of the level of knowledge acquisition has been introduced, but the effectiveness of its implementation is questionable.

4. Extracurricular activities are almost non-existent and there are no funds for them, since teachers and parents are forced to deal with problems associated with poverty.

5. School councils have been established in a number of places, but in poorer communities there is little parent involvement.

6. The goals of the movements against child labor and for education for all have not yet been fully embraced (they can be said to be like “ships sailing in the night”), but the introduction of conditional

EDUCATION: ONE MORE, OTHERS LESS?

REGIONAL STUDY ON EDUCATION IN CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE AND THE COMMONWEALTH OF INDEPENDENT STATES

cash transfers (to help children get out of work and stay in school) is a promising initiative.

7. Children from low-income families have less access to education and receive lower quality education.

8. Separate education for children with disabilities is still considered the rule.

9. There is little evidence of any improvement in the situation of ethnic minorities, in particular the Roma.

10. Preschool education is an area where there is the most innovation, but it does not reach those who need it.

11. There is a lack of synergy between top-down reform and grassroots innovation, leading to curriculum overload and fragmentation.

12. Central governments, especially in countries experiencing financial problems, tend to shift the burden of funding education to local communities.

In order to create an enabling environment for the effective implementation of the Twelve Steps and to move away from a “list of demands” approach to educational planning without specifying the amount of expenditure, in which each item is a priority, the SSPP method is recommended. It provides a framework within which alternative objectives can be analysed, recognizing, for example, that there is competition for resources between different levels of schooling. The most important indicator in the SSRR concept is the total amount of funds for education needs - a kind of “envelope” for planning education for a specified period. Accordingly, countries where public spending on education is less than 4 percent of GDP should spend more on this purpose.

Countries that spend less than 6 percent should resist pressure from the Treasury to cut spending on education because the number of school-age children is falling. The “demographic dividend” should be spent on increasing the number of educational institutions and improving the quality of education, and not be diverted to the needs of other sectors. This approach needs to distinguish between strategic changes that lead to increases in government spending and those that lead to cuts.

Desirable changes that increase government spending include:

Expanding coverage of pre-school, basic and secondary education to achieve MDG 2 and other goals;

increasing teachers' salaries;

increasing spending on school reform, with special attention to all disadvantaged children in one way or another;

integrating as many children with special needs as possible into regular schools while ensuring the necessary funding;

reforming the pre-service teacher training system, which requires more funding and a change in attitudes;

improving the physical condition of school buildings, which may not be the exclusive concern of the local community;

providing needy children with free textbooks (not all students);

abolition of fees for compulsory education, including the pre-school year immediately preceding primary school;

Introducing conditional cash transfers to encourage children from low-income families to attend school, especially girls in countries that are lagging behind MDG 3, as well as other children;

providing home-to-school transport in areas where the educational network has been improved by closing or merging schools with sub-optimal student numbers, where possible by renting rather than purchasing buses.

Desirable changes that will reduce government spending in order to compensate for excess costs when implementing the above measures:

changing the criteria for subsidies for pre-school (provided to everyone, but benefiting wealthier families the most) and higher education (provided based on academic performance, but also benefiting wealthier students) and providing them according to need;

promoting the combination of vocational and general education, which will lead to improved quality of education and greater equity while reducing overall costs;

increasing the student/teacher ratio and, moreover, the student/non-teaching staff ratio and improving the school network;

establishing a textbook loan program for a fee for all students except needy children, who should receive textbooks free of charge;

reducing the number of children with special needs placed in institutions and closing as many of these institutions as possible;

ensuring fair treatment of private educational institutions with constant monitoring by the state of their compliance with relevant standards;

Raising funds from the private sector, community, donors and other partners to help finance some of the measures that require increased spending.

Additional supportive measures include:

anti-discrimination legislation aimed, for example, at preventing the exclusion from regular public schools of children without birth certificates, non-citizens, refugees, internally displaced persons and other disadvantaged and disadvantaged groups;

an active campaign against corruption, which should be accompanied by a significant increase in teachers' salaries;

As part of any model of an independent school system funded according to predetermined principles, the adoption of pro-low-income funding plans that create an incentive for schools to admit and care for such students;

Strengthening the capacity needed to plan, manage, monitor and deliver education services to support reform at central, subnational, school and community levels.

Moving from the formula “Education: some more, some less” to the formula “Education for all” means breaking the vicious circle, which implies a lack of access to quality school education at different levels for children from various disadvantaged groups of the population. This means moving away from government spending practices that increase inequality to practices that counteract inequality. Responsibility for this cannot be shifted entirely to local authorities, the local community, schools and parents. Only the central government can create conditions that will ensure education for all.

–  –  –

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT

Methodology and structure of the report

Global context: international institutions' reform agenda.........

Transformations and economic recovery

Government spending

Standard of living

Inequality

Unemployment

Poverty

Life expectancy

School age population

International migration

Armed conflict

Child labour

Main conclusions

EDUCATION: ONE MORE, OTHERS LESS?

REGIONAL STUDY ON EDUCATION IN CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE AND THE COMMONWEALTH OF INDEPENDENT STATES

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT

In 1998, the UNICEF Innocenti Research Center published a regional monitoring report, Education for All?, which asked whether “education for all” was a reality in Central and Eastern Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States. The report asked:

Are all children receiving the kind of education to which they are entitled and which is so important for building the new society and economy in which they will live? 1 In addition to some positive educational reforms, the report also points to a number of worrying changes that have occurred since the beginning of the transition, including the following:

Expenditures from the family budget on children's education have increased, often quite sharply.

The quality of school education has deteriorated.

Educational enrollment and school attendance often declined, especially in less developed parts of the region.

Selectivity and competition have increased, as evidenced by the creation of elite, better-funded upper secondary schools and private schools.

War and ethnic conflict in some countries have ruthlessly deprived thousands of children of the opportunity to learn.

Many young people are at risk of unemployment upon leaving school or higher education, despite the fact that education has a positive impact on employment and income opportunities.

These changes reflect a marked increase in inequality in the quantity and quality of education provided.

Those most affected were children from some ethnic minorities, children from families caught in the maelstrom of war, and from low-income families in rural areas. Inequalities in education between countries have increased, with education systems in the Caucasus and Central Asia suffering much more than those in Central and Eastern Europe.

The purpose of this study is to examine the extent to which the tendency to provide “more education for some and less for others”, rather than striving for “education for all,” still persists and prevails. The study examines how inequalities in access to high-quality education, learning levels and labor market opportunities have increased within and between countries. Particular attention is paid to poorer countries in the region and Turkey. An important context for the study was the Millennium Development Goals related to education: three countries in the region (Georgia, Moldova and Tajikistan) are considered unlikely to achieve MDG 2 (achieving universal primary education) by 2015, and two countries (Tajikistan and Turkey) failed to meet the first major target of MDG 3 (eliminating gender inequality in primary and secondary education) by 2005.

On the policy side, this study revisits the Twelve Steps to Education for All (Box 1.1), which the 1998 report presented as “key policies for expanding the opportunities and quality of education for less advantaged children.” , and therefore to reduce disparities in access and attainment of education” 2. The study asks to what extent these Twelve Steps have been implemented and what additional measures are needed today.

EDUCATION: ONE MORE, OTHERS LESS?

REGIONAL STUDY ON EDUCATION IN CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE AND THE COMMONWEALTH OF INDEPENDENT STATES

Box 1.1. Twelve steps towards education for all

1. Teaching methods that encourage participation and personal development.

2. Review of the practice of assigning children to different streams and selecting children in schools.

3. Fair examination systems that allow every child to demonstrate their academic achievements.

4. Return to increased extracurricular support from schools.

5. Increased participation of parents and local communities in education.

6. Research on child labor and its relationship with school attendance and learning.

7. Paying more attention to access to education and quality of education for children from low-income families.

8. Integration of children with disabilities into regular schools.

9. Taking into account the needs of ethnic minorities.

10. Encouraging different pathways of early childhood development in the broadest sense.

11. Due control from the center over the management of local schools, including educational programs.

12. Necessary financial transfers to local governments with weak financial bases.