Let the flower of the Ukrainian nation flourish
Almost 17 years have passed since Ukraine told “Holy Russia” (USSR) to shove it. On the winding and thorny road to national independence (we are still on it), Ukraine has experienced victories and defeats. We have chosen and then changed our priorities that we believe must secure our country’s happy future. Amid these turbulent events, the leaders of our nation, Ukrainian politicians, seem to have forgotten that the main path to a secure future is by rearing a new generation. Together with Ukraine, children of independence were born, whose fundamentally new post-Soviet views on current realities must serve as the foundation upon which we must build our country. The young people who were born at the same time as independent Ukraine are keeping pace with our young country, so their attitude to current events can be confidently regarded as a litmus test that shows the actual level of national self-awareness on the part of independence-minded Ukrainians.
One of the determining factors influencing the formation of the younger generation’s public stance is, of course, knowledge of our national history — not only what happened hundreds of years ago but primarily the events that paved the way for Ukrainian independence and those that are happening now. These facts allow us to form opinions with regard to the current chaos in Ukrainian society.
I recently took a poll of my peers, young people who were born when Ukraine became independent (Grade 11 students at Lesia Ukrainka Gymnasium no. 117). I instantly noticed a certain “historical abyss” that stretches from the proclamation of independence to the so-called Orange Revolution. The students’ impressions from this period boil down to the adoption of the Constitution of Ukraine and the presidential elections. But what about the 13 years of building an independent state, a process that was accompanied by a number of events that were of vital importance for Ukraine (e.g., membership in the Council of Europe, the national referendum of 2000, etc.)? The students’ knowledge of recent official acts also leaves much to be desired, because intensive study at school hardly leaves time for them even to watch the news on television.
Liudmyla Paiuk, a history teacher at the Lesia Ukrainka Gymnasium, told me: “It is impossible to teach history and keep pace with the times, and this impossibility is rooted in the very curriculum. The history course is designed so that the students have to study material according to certain periods, which appear to be unconnected from each other. In other words, when we study the Cossack period, it becomes engrained in the students’ memory as something that happened a long time ago and which has no bearing on current realities. To avoid such misunderstandings, it is necessary to link history to current events, to draw analogies and parallels. However, the history curriculum does not allow this because only 1.5 academic hours a week are allotted to the subject. How can I devote my lessons to discussions when my Grade 11 students will have to write their exams soon?
“Of course, there is a lack of knowledge about events relating to the course of Ukrainian independence, considering that these events took place when today’s 16-year-old students were small children. The curriculum allows us to fill this gap only in Grade 11, when the students are taught the newest Ukrainian history. That’s already too late because a student’s attitude to topical events and his/her formation as an individual begin much earlier. Another problem is the lack of information in textbooks about events that took place during the process of gaining our national independence. Textbooks for the lower grades devote just a couple of sentences to this topic and there are no illustrations, so it is hard to convey this information to children in a way that can attract their interest.”
Olena Halehova, a social sciences methodologist with the Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine, said: “In our textbooks Ukrainian history ends with the year 2002, so children simply cannot keep pace with the times. Publishing companies are struggling to resolve this problem by issuing a supplement to the textbook with data on events that have taken place in the past five years. However, the state is not financing this initiative, so our children have to pay for these publications. In order for teachers to diversify the in-class material yet stick to the schedule, they can make good use of textbooks, methodological recommendations, and reference sources. Unfortunately, these publications are also denied government support, so publishing companies are not interested in them. Few schoolteachers can afford them either.”
The media are an important link in the chain of comprehending historical events. Stanislav Kulchytsky, deputy director of the Institute of Ukrainian History at the National Academy of Sciences (NAN) of Ukraine, has his own view on the matter: “The impression today is that Ukraine has a huge information field, although this field is actually nonexistent. A closer look at television programming and newspapers (with the exception of The Day, which devotes serious attention to historical issues and analyses of current realities) reveals a horrifying picture of corruption and politicization. For example, the popular newspaper Segodnia looks good (in terms of its look — author), but its analyses of current and historical events are dictated by an individual who is far removed from history and who is also very politicized. He consciously writes in a way that brainwashes the ordinary reader by concealing some facts and reshuffling others to fit a pet concept (or Oles Buzyna’s. — Author). This is dangerous and does not correspond to Ukraine’s national interests.
“Lately, however, public interest in history has noticeably increased and become more acute (assessment of the 1932-33 Holodomor, the OUN and UPA). Why more acute? Because our information space is being controlled by Moscow, while Kyiv and Moscow’s views on certain events are absolutely different. Discussions of various historical topics have led to public divisiveness. In Ukraine public opinion is easily influenced by foreign information because of the lack of comprehensive historical television programs and the scarcity of independent newspapers.”
Ms. Paiuk’s solution to the problem of teaching the contemporary history of Ukraine is this: “What we have lost can be regained primarily by popularizing history. We must have access to inexpensive booklets on history, interesting historical television programming and films for children; we must have a ‘radio newspaper’. For lack of an illustrative background, history teaching turns into a purely academic routine of giving lectures that can in no way attract children’s interest in this necessary and important subject.”
Therefore, decisive steps are needed so that young people will know their modern history, which will help them develop a sober view of the future.
Oleksii ZHMUTSKY is a 16-year-old resident of Kyiv.
