, Volume 31, Issue 1, pp 73–86 | Cite as

New societies and economies: Changing demands for secondary education in Central and Eastern Europe

  • Albert Motivans
Secondary Education Reform


Changes in secondary education reflect the broader context of social and economic flux in Central and Eastern Europe. Despite budgetary constraints, large-scale changes in the legislative framework of secondary education have been made in many Central and Eastern European countries. However, the challenge is now to further define specific national needs, despite the fact that some issues, such as changing labour markets and growing informal sectors, may still provide only weak signals to planners. The change is also to implement changes: to refine new national curricula, occupational standards, and evaluation and examination systems; to widen pathways to continuing education; and to improve links to the labour market. This requires monitoring of the progress and impact of decentralizing management and funding responsibilities, and the development and institutionalization of social partnerships. Finally, in order to ensure the successful integration of new curricula and institutional structures and to promote positive learning outcomes, greater attention will need to be focused on improving the education infrastructure, and especially on training/retraining teaching personnel. The latter will be central to success in implementing new curricula at school level and in the evaluation and examination system.


Young People Secondary Education Vocational Training Comparative Education National Education System 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References and bibliography

  1. Barrow, M. 1997.Structure, governance and finance of education in Central Europe. Florence, UNICEF International Child Development Centre. (Mimeo.)Google Scholar
  2. Beaton, A.E., et al. 1996.Mathematics achievement in the middle school years: lEA’s Third International Mathematics and Science Study. Chestnut Hill, MA, Center for the Study of Testing, Evaluation and Educational Policy, Boston College.Google Scholar
  3. Bertrand, O.; Caillods, F. 1994.Management of vocational education and training in Central and Eastern Europe: outline of recent developments and major issues. Paris, International Institute for Educational Planning.Google Scholar
  4. Central Statistical Bureau of Latvia. 1997.Education in transition: Latvia. Report prepared for the MONEE 1997 education seminar. (Mimeo.)Google Scholar
  5. Coudouel, A.; Motivans, A. 1999.Changing access to education in Russia? Florence, UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre. (Mimeo.)Google Scholar
  6. Cusan, A.; Motivans, A. 1998.Fiscal adjustment and implications for equity in education. Florence, UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre. ( Mimeo.)Google Scholar
  7. European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD). 1999.Transition report 1999. London, EBRD.Google Scholar
  8. Heynemann, S. 1999.Russian vocational and technical education in the transition: tradition, adaptation, unresolved problems. ISRE newsletter, Scholar
  9. Klugman, J. 1997.Education and equity in the former Soviet republics: disruption and opportunities in financing and governance. Florence, UNICEF, International Child Development Centre. (Mimeo.)Google Scholar
  10. Kowalska, L; Wójcik, D. 1999.Young people in transition in Poland. (Mimeo.)Google Scholar
  11. Micklewright, J. 1999.Education, inequality and transition. Economics of transition (London), vol. 7, no. 2.Google Scholar
  12. Micklewright, J.; Motivans, A. 2000. Education for all? Not in Central and Eastern Europe,Development (London), vol. 43, no. 1.Google Scholar
  13. Ministry of Education, Slovenia.Young people in transition in Slovenia. Ljubljana. (Mimeo.)Google Scholar
  14. Ministry of Education and Science, Republic of Moldova. 1999.National report: education for all. Kishinev. (Mimeo.)Google Scholar
  15. Ministry of National Education, Romania.Romania: education for all. Bucharest. (Mimeo.)Google Scholar
  16. Motivans, A. 2000.Education for all synthesis report: Central and Eastern Europe. Paris, UNESCO, Education for All Forum.Google Scholar
  17. Mullis, I.M., et al. 1998. Mathematics and science achievement in the final year of secondary school. In: Martin, M.O., ed.Third International Mathematics and Science Study, p. 55–6. Chestnut Hill, MA, International Study Center, Lynch School of Education, Boston College.Google Scholar
  18. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). 1998.Towards life-long learning in Hungary. Paris, OECD.Google Scholar
  19. ——. 2000.Literacy for the information age. Paris, OECD.Google Scholar
  20. Ryabov, G. 2000.Education reform in Russia: principal guidelines. (Mimeo.)Google Scholar
  21. UNICEF. 1998.Education for all? Florence, UNICEF International Child Development Centre. (Regional monitoring report no. 5.)Google Scholar
  22. ——. 1999.After the fall: the human impact of ten years of transition. Florence, UMCEF International Child Development Centre.Google Scholar
  23. ——. 2000.Young people in changing societies. Florence, UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre. (Regional monitoring report no. 7.)Google Scholar
  24. Vari, P., ed. 1997.Are we similar in math and science? A study of Grade 8 in nine Central and Eastern European countries. Boston, International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© UNESCO 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Albert Motivans
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Latvia
  2. 2.the UNESCO Institute for StatisticsUnited States of America

Personalised recommendations