Page 37 - Igor Ž. Žagar in Ana Mlekuž, ur. Raziskovanje v vzgoji in izobraževanju: mednarodni vidiki vzgoje in izobraževanja. Ljubljana: Pedagoški inštitut, 2020. Digitalna knjižnica, Dissertationes 38
P. 37
inequality, poverty and education in the post-yugoslav space
lieve, include that one could not openly identify as ‘Croat’ (Tito did so fre-
quently, however); there was only one sort of yoghurt in the shops, bread
consumption was tightly controlled, hygienic products could not be ob-
tained and one word critical of the regime and you would be sent to Goli
Otok (Benačić, 2018).
The more I delve into aspects of the history of socialist Yugoslavia, the
more I come to identify with the title of Darko Suvin’s recent book, seeing
Yugoslavia as a roller coaster of ‘Splendour, Misery, and (Missed) Possibili-
ties’ (Suvin, 2016). I use the metaphor of a ‘roller coaster’ because it was far
from a linear process of optimism leading, inexorably, to despair. Never-
theless, and here I borrow from the work of Karin Doolan and others (cf.
Doolan et al, 2017), it is possible, albeit very crudely, to divide education and
mobility in Yugoslavia into three conjunctures. The first, and one could ar-
gue whether this predates the break with Stalin and expulsion from the
Cominform in 1948, was a period of rapid modernization and industriali-
zation, including the fight against illiteracy and the massive expansion of
higher education, both through universities and other third level institu-
tions such as two- and four-year High Schools. Access to higher education
was free and, at least theoretically, open to all; indeed, the children of peas-
ants and the working-class were encouraged to stay on longer at school.
Figures from Vojin MIlić suggest that in 1951/2 only around one third of
university students were from peasant or manual worker families; only six
years later, it had risen to 44 % (Milić, 1966). By 1961/2, children of peasants
had an Index of Representation of 0.33 (in a perfectly egalitarian society the
Index would be 1); that of workers’ children was 0.77; but for children of
employees the figure was 3.3, albeit a reduction in over-representation from
4.72 in 1953/4. (ibid.)
Although the shrinking of the peasantry was complex, with many of
the new industrial workers maintaining some contact with the land, there
were two kinds of occupational mobility – peasants moving to manual and
non-manual labour, albeit in a ratio of 2:1 to manual labour; and manu-
al workers moving into non-manual jobs, albeit mainly into the lower ech-
elons, with those already in non-manual jobs more or less keeping their
positions. There was educational mobility in the period, although it was
actually less than occupational mobility to meet the demands of industrial-
ization and the expansion of administrative and managerial positions. In-
tergenerational mobility was also greater than intragenerational mobility,
both in education and employment.
37
lieve, include that one could not openly identify as ‘Croat’ (Tito did so fre-
quently, however); there was only one sort of yoghurt in the shops, bread
consumption was tightly controlled, hygienic products could not be ob-
tained and one word critical of the regime and you would be sent to Goli
Otok (Benačić, 2018).
The more I delve into aspects of the history of socialist Yugoslavia, the
more I come to identify with the title of Darko Suvin’s recent book, seeing
Yugoslavia as a roller coaster of ‘Splendour, Misery, and (Missed) Possibili-
ties’ (Suvin, 2016). I use the metaphor of a ‘roller coaster’ because it was far
from a linear process of optimism leading, inexorably, to despair. Never-
theless, and here I borrow from the work of Karin Doolan and others (cf.
Doolan et al, 2017), it is possible, albeit very crudely, to divide education and
mobility in Yugoslavia into three conjunctures. The first, and one could ar-
gue whether this predates the break with Stalin and expulsion from the
Cominform in 1948, was a period of rapid modernization and industriali-
zation, including the fight against illiteracy and the massive expansion of
higher education, both through universities and other third level institu-
tions such as two- and four-year High Schools. Access to higher education
was free and, at least theoretically, open to all; indeed, the children of peas-
ants and the working-class were encouraged to stay on longer at school.
Figures from Vojin MIlić suggest that in 1951/2 only around one third of
university students were from peasant or manual worker families; only six
years later, it had risen to 44 % (Milić, 1966). By 1961/2, children of peasants
had an Index of Representation of 0.33 (in a perfectly egalitarian society the
Index would be 1); that of workers’ children was 0.77; but for children of
employees the figure was 3.3, albeit a reduction in over-representation from
4.72 in 1953/4. (ibid.)
Although the shrinking of the peasantry was complex, with many of
the new industrial workers maintaining some contact with the land, there
were two kinds of occupational mobility – peasants moving to manual and
non-manual labour, albeit in a ratio of 2:1 to manual labour; and manu-
al workers moving into non-manual jobs, albeit mainly into the lower ech-
elons, with those already in non-manual jobs more or less keeping their
positions. There was educational mobility in the period, although it was
actually less than occupational mobility to meet the demands of industrial-
ization and the expansion of administrative and managerial positions. In-
tergenerational mobility was also greater than intragenerational mobility,
both in education and employment.
37
