How Are Political and Social Influences Reflected in the British and Ukrainian Education Systems?
‘Education is teaching our children to desire the right things’.
– Plato
Education is key to the continuity of human society, bringing up future generations with the knowledge they need to participate in public life. As has been shown in the past few years in the United States, educational institutions can be highly politicised, as well as influenced by social norms. The educational system is a massive part of the government's apparatus to develop a self-aware generation of future citizens who would become a future workforce and develop the state. A conversation about what children should learn and how, as well as deciding the “right things” for them to know and believe, is happening around the globe, despite differing governing styles.
Different nations have different approaches to education. In the UK, a nation with a democratic and capitalist history, educational systems prioritise the development of critical thinking skills, adaptability, creativity, and other soft skills in education. Ukraine, in contrast, focuses on giving a comprehensive understanding and developing the hard skills of their students to let them be socially, productive workers. It does not matter that Great Britain is considered more democratic than Ukraine: there is still a certain agenda for educational institutions to emphasise. Traditions, social and cultural norms, environments, and one’s own background and all influence priorities and methods of education, greatly influencing not only how people interact within society, but also what they believe is ‘right’, resulting in different approaches to education.
Political ideologies and educational methods are closely linked. Comparing differing approaches to education in Ukraine and the UK allows for the demonstration of this link. teacher-centred education is common in post-Soviet countries like Ukraine, and is often associated with conservatism and authoritarianism, prioritising order and the transfer of knowledge. In contrast, student-centred education, the UK’s favoured method, is related to liberalism and progressive political ideologies, emphasising independent learning and critical thinking. The framework of student-centred pedagogy is built on the principles of constructivism which focus on the understanding of students’ thoughts and their further development, rather than the teacher-centred model, which puts the teacher as the main figure who should ‘introduce’ a pupil to the concepts of the world.
Another interesting aspect of teacher-centred philosophy is that it is mostly used in teaching including essentialism and perennialism approaches. Perennialism stresses the importance of learning directly from the works of history’s finest thinkers and writers to become new leaders as their ancestors. There are several advantages of teacher-centred pedagogy, like its efficiency, reliable structure, translatable expertise, and consistency. This model allows the deliverer of fundamental, often scientific information quickly and transparently, allowing students to save time on choosing resources and doing the necessary reading. Moreover, it ensures order and increases the chance of students paying attention by introducing different forms of benefits such as additional grades for visiting class, granting more structured learning time. The most important objective of such an education is to ensure that all students are treated equally after universities, and are assessed by the same standards which reduces inequality and makes it easier and quicker for students to adapt to new work environments, and to prevent a knowledge gap.
In the UK, where people are more open to independent, innovative, and competitive approaches, student-centred pedagogy is favoured. The Anglo-American concept of student-centred pedagogy is prevalent there, encouraging students to take more responsibility for their own learning. British education is influenced by existentialism, progressivism, and social reconstructionism, which focus on developing self-sufficient, decisive individuals. These approaches encourage students to form their own conclusions about morality and the significance of various issues, while also highlighting inequalities and social injustices, motivating them to collaborate in building a more just and equitable society. Despite the positive focus of student-centred education, it still exhibits a level of control over society, implying that even this system is not entirely free from regulation and social governance. As was said by Krista Kaput, ‘the learner is granted a measure of freedom, but the parameters of that freedom are often defined by external standards and societal norms’.
The Ukrainian case is quite different. Given its history as part of the Soviet Union and close cooperation with Russia to achieve significant scientific advancements, a teacher-centred approach was considered optimal. This approach ensured that most students graduated from universities as ready-made specialists equipped with all the necessary knowledge to contribute to scientific and technological progress. In contrast, in Britain, completing a bachelor's degree is seen as merely an ‘introduction’ that allows students to explore their interests and gain a rough understanding of what they would like to pursue in life. Due to a more stable political situation and the absence of a real threat of war, people's lives generally proceed at a slower pace. In Ukraine, under a state-controlled planned economy with a socialist, centralized government, individualism was condemned and replaced by collectivism. Education during this period reflected socialist social norms: it fostered obedience and a set of pre-defined skills that citizens were expected to acquire in order to fit in. Now, due to the global tendency to shift toward student-centred approaches, many educational reforms in Ukraine are focused on trying to prioritise active learning, creativity, and adaptability. Since gaining independence, and especially after 2014, the education system in Ukraine is steadily moving towards more modernized and democratized approach by participating in the Bologna Process to align with EU standards.
There are advantages and disadvantages to both systems. As was mentioned by Geraldine O’Neill and Tim McMahon, `students who value or have experienced more teacher–focused approaches may reject the student–centred approach as frightening or indeed not within their remit`, and the same goes the other way around. In Ukraine, teachers provide nearly all the material and information during lectures and seminars, so students don’t need to read much additional material afterward. In contrast, the British education system is built on the principles of self-directed learning, requiring students to teach themselves by reading extensively, preparing for classes in advance, and conducting independent research. However, a challenge of self-directed education is whether students can fully meet the program requirements by completing all assigned readings and preparation tasks. On the positive side, this system offers the freedom to learn according to individual interests, while a more structured system places the responsibility on the teacher to determine what to teach, limiting students' choices in topics and expertise. Despite this independence, there are concerns about whether students adequately fulfil the demands of self-study. Additionally, independent learning may lead to a lack of sociability among students. O’Neill and McMahon highlighted `the concern of students over being abandoned or isolated from others in a student–centred learning approach`.
Academic freedom is a sine qua non, or an essential condition and fundamental right to have freedom of thought and speech which serves the common good by fostering independent thinking. Ideally, the freer a country is, the more freedom students have in their education, the more freedom people enjoy, and the greater their potential for achievement. In the UK, communication with university representatives is generally easier than in Ukraine, thanks to structures such as office hours, various institutional services, and dedicated student support systems that help students adapt. These resources provide comprehensive support not only for educational needs but also for psychological, mental, and other issues. In contrast, Ukrainian universities have fewer dedicated resources for addressing such problems, as society has been conditioned to hide its difficulties to appear stable. This mentality is reflected in the structure of the universities.
In examining the relationship between political ideologies and educational pedagogies, it is evident that different approaches to education reflect the underlying values and norms of their societies. Political ideologies and social norms shape educational systems in various ways, as illustrated by the comparison of Ukraine's teacher-centred education and the UK's student-centred methodology. While Ukraine emphasizes order, efficiency, and uniformity through a traditional model, the UK focuses on individualism, critical thinking, and social awareness of current issues and potential threats. Both systems possess unique characteristics that have developed within their complex historical, political, and economic frameworks, addressing the needs of their citizens in different ways. Ultimately, even though they are fundamentally opposed and have different foundations, each approach aims to prepare individuals for their roles within society.
Image courtesy of the Vatican Museum via Wikimedia Commons. Some rights reserved.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the wider St. Andrews Foreign Affairs Review team.
