CEU eTD Collection
WIDENING PARTICIPATION: WIDENINGPARTICIPATION: In
partial fulfillment thepartial for Policy degreeMasterinPublic ofArts of Supervisors: Kristina I Supervisors: Kristina IN HIGHER EDUCATIONINHIGHER Central EuropeanCentral University Department Public Policy of Budapest, Hungary Simona Simona Submitted to 2013 By Torotcoi
rion and Jana rion
ROMANIAN Bacevic
ROMA
CEU eTD Collection Signature Name (printed letters) Date: atrueThis is copythesis, including ofthe final revisions. non or degree academic other any of requirements the of part as accepted been has which material no contains thesis This made. been has acknowledgement due where except person other previou material no contains thesis this knowledge my of best the To thesis. this ...... undersigned the I, Author’s Declaration - degree English program, in language. orinany other
...... : ......
30 August 2013 30 August ...... : ………Torotcoi Simona…….……….. : Torotcoi Simona Torotcoi
..
...... T O R O T C O I .
...... S I M i
O ... hereby declare that I am the sole author of author sole the am I that declare hereby ... N A ......
....
..
sly published by any any by published sly CEU eTD Collection access,Roma, social inclu participation, Key words: scholarship providers. an role most and Roma with respect and targets policy and implementers being a in influencing are that effect. participation’ ‘widening inclusion social education higher Romanian Abstract
ex
cruc a prerequisite a is
h tei poie a aayi o the on analysis an provides thesis The ipc o universities, of impact d there t ing ial .
In factors influencing Romanian Roma participation in higher edhigher in participation Roma Romanian influencing factors social inclusion framework within the Romanian higher education system, the the system, education higher Romanian the within framework inclusion social were conducted were the principles conclusion
for participation. for
positive
f acces of
(HE)
interviews with the main the with interviews part A special focus in this this in focus special A
a Rmna Rm acs i hge education higher in access Roma Romanian way system, with a focus on the Roma minority. It uses the the uses It minority. Roma the on focus a with system, I NGOs argue
, atcpto ad ucs i odr o xli the explain to order in success and participation s, The approach used in this regard is to follow the policy the follow to is regard this in used approach The to sion, highersion, education, Romania. determine
okn o Rm education Roma on working that besides the role and impact of policy of impact and role the besides that ii
exist
their ing policy paper
social inclusion policies within the the within policies inclusion social influence
is implementers implementers
directed , impact and role. In this this In role. and impact ,
towards ucation refer to the the to refer ucation and and of 100
the factors factors the the the
- , survey
makers access access main s
CEU eTD Collection BIBLIOGRAPHY 5 CHAPTER 4 CHAPTER 3 CHAPTER 2 CHAPTER 1 CHAPTER INTRODUCTION AND FIGURES LISTOF CONTENTS OF TABLE ABSTRACT DECLARATION AUTHOR’S Table ofcontents 6. 5. 4. 3. 2. 1. 2. 1. 1. 2. 1.
S 2.2. 2.1. Inclusion Social as Access 1.4. participation Widening 1.3. Success and Participation Access, 1.2. key Soci toola for as Participation 1.1. 1.2. 1.1. OCIAL P P T R S NGO R U S T
CHOLARSHIPPROVIDERS CHOOLINSPECTORATES OLICY OLICY HESIS HE OMA ESEARCH NIVERSITIES M I
S Roma political parties and politicians and Roma governmental agencies governmental Roma and politicians partiesand political Roma Government Romanian The Methods Design Research NCLUSIONIN ...... – - - - -
...... P INISTRYOF
- - O
THE ROLE AND IMPACT IMPACT AND THEROLE IMPACT AND THEROLE IMP THE AND THEROLE FRAMEWOR THEORETICAL OLITICAL MAKERSATTHE MAKERSATTHE CONCLUSION RGANIZATION D
......
...... ESIGNAND
......
P E
...... H ARTIES DUCATIONAND ITSAGE TABLES IGHER
...... M
N E ......
......
......
...... UROP
ATIONALLEVEL ETHODOLOGY ...... E
...... DUCATION
...... EANLEVEL ......
......
...... al Inclusion al OF POLICY TARGETS POLICY OF IMPLEMENTERS OF ACT OF POLICY ACT OF
......
......
K ...... NCIES ......
...... iii ......
......
...... - MAKERS ......
......
......
......
......
40 36 34 32 29 29 28 27 26 26 22 18 18 16 15 12 11
IV III
II 9 7 7 7 5 4 3 3 1
I
CEU eTD Collection Table 2 Table Figure 1 List offigures and tables
1 : The Role : Anoverv : Access, participation and successinterventions inclusion p. : Access, social participation in iew of Roma EducationRoma of Fund iew R and ImpactImplementers of and iv
M U SP 2010 SP - 1013
p. p.
10 37 33
CEU eTD Collection Roman of number low the through people Roma make that people institutions, research written been has low career. future students e including policies, access mostly 2006 ( E Quality to Access decade last the children their in participating in means and tools gain and poverty of out get can Roma, the as such minorities, marginalized which people e quality cha everyday persec most the among trad history, Fleck & Ruginis, 2008; Rostas, 2012 Rostas, & 2008; Fleck Ruginis, attendance ) or
ia. A ia. and and nw a Erp’ lret ioiy wt no with minority, largest Europe’s as Known s a a the as far As oriented ’s ducation educational attainment (UNDP,educational 2012) attainment necessary
education in preschool, primary andeducation primaryeducation inpreschool, secondary interested ccording to UNDP to ccording to and ition llenges Roma Roma llenges
in HE in rm v a from
oad afraie cin oiis ( policies action affirmative towards on what stimulates Roma students to pursue further studies. further pursue to students Roma stimulates what on
for Roma Roma for
i ducation for Roma, Vol.1 and 2, 2007), segregation and desegregation desegregation and segregation 2007), 2, and Vol.1 Roma, for ducation
the s stakeholders.
, nowadays the nowadays , topic However, more o more However, great uted and disadvantaged groups disadvantaged and uted ariety of perspectives such as access and quality education (Equal (Equal education quality and access as such perspectives of ariety
low ul potnte, qiy r drop or equity opportunities, qual f HE of students in entering, participating and comple and participating entering, in students face youth diversity
(2012)
comm ubr f Roma of number in
is Education Education and Roma Roma and osn, elh or health housing,
), still still reverse n uoe n C and Europe in , un Introduction
Roma girls Roma “ f the f the ity one of the of one
voice share eco exist
is considered is 1 phenomenon . s concerned is
oi ad oil ie life. social and nomic
ing
heard. The root of this problem this of root The heard. of Roma between 26 and 32 years of age, of years 32 and 26 between Roma of participation ersnaie in representatives
most most research focused on the causes of Roma Roma of causes the on focused research Surdu on the on
historical entral Asia, Asia, entral employment
important
to be one of the of one to be seems to be neglected, be to seems
,
& European h mjrt o te studies the of majority the - out
Szira in education ( education in
homeland but but homeland started toberesearchstarted rates , the lack of proper and and proper of lack the ,
th , issues among the among issues
2009; e public continent. Besides the the Besides continent. oa ouain is population Roma and their effects on on effects their and T ting HE ting he topic of Roma Roma of topic he
first step
What makes this makes What Horvath
Surdu & Surdu, & Surdu, Surdu structures and and structures with is reflected is
very studies in in studies s
2007 , through through a long long a Roma Roma
ed little little are
in ) ,
CEU eTD Collection research this of scope for to first the amongst was Government Romanian the who students and, countries European inclusion address the Roma be will that belief the also standards living decent maintain and develop to individuals marginalized support highereducation?Romanian in Romaparticipation universitylevel. R prospective convincing in contribute HE participation. of concept research mentioned above the of findings Montenegro. and Albania, Serbia, Moldova, is that surveyed the of any in 1%’ exceed not does education, university completed with
HE from the social inclusion perspective, inclusion social the from
Roma students after the fall of the communist regime studentstheof Roma after fall communist (Horvath, 2007). Ro to regards With The Moreover case Romanian The Angéla lvka Hnay Blai, oai, ona n Hreoia Cota Mace Croatia, Herzegovina, and Bosnia Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Slovakia, the future Roma leaders, the ones who will prove to be socially responsible and and responsible socially be to prove will who ones the leaders, Roma future the
perspective access current
present
Kóczé The ,
communities’
since since
h Rmna cs peet svrl etrs that features several presents case Romanian the Rom research
main
a because it has the largest Roma population among the Centra the among population Roma largest the has it because
statement high , a who attended universitie attended who a
access
ht s to is that research question is: is: researchquestion therefore
a nlso i HE in inclusion ma social exclusion risk in the system. the in risk exclusion social aims at approaching the approaching at aims a been has
is considered to be one of the pre the of one be to considered is problems.
which refers to the fact that ‘ that fact the to refers which ,
hge nme o Rm suet ad p and students Roma of number higher a identify
selected for further examination from the social social the from examination further for selected oma students to pursue further education at the the at education further pursue to students oma with regard to Roma in HE in Roma to regard with
h cret eerh carries research current The by identifying and analyzing those elements that that elements those analyzing and identifying by
2
positive aspects which will lead to Roma Roma to lead will which aspects positive What are the Whatare
n is rdce benefits predicted its and s will become part part become will s
implement topic
of Romanian Roma p Roma Romanian of main education
Another reason is the fac the is reason Another several
liminary steps in widening in steps liminary positive , and and of the the of
fits policies and measures measures and policies
’ enables cos oe f the of some across .
has
factors influencingfactors Moreover the objective and and objective the t , Roma elite, who who elite, Roma
in its center the the center its in his paper paper his articipation in articipation
traditionally traditionally countries rospective l Eastern Eastern l ,
the donia, t that t re is is re will will ”, ”,
CEU eTD Collection context the applying of responsibility the bear they since implementers policy its on which they can an actors giving inclusion social the should instruments policy policy and actors stakeholders, relevant research current the Moreover, esp education, this 2002 with comparison in doubled education secondary to according rate participation % 80 an post Eurydice the through relatively also but mediators) Roma inspectorates, school in representatives (minority Roma for spaces leaves that system educational an sector, society civil Roma in participation relation 1.1. 1. - rate com
-
makers, makers, no
The objective of this this of objective The In this research this In Research Designand both governmental influencing
pulsory education, and since since and education, pulsory
t be continued or whether other measures should be implemented in orderto implemented in be should measures whethercontinuedotherbe or t n 2000 in large Roma Roma large ship Research Design the ecially for the HE the for ecially
with the policy the with HE implementers insight , 2011
take take are Romania , through the existence of Roma political representation, relatively representation, political Roma of existence the through ,
future future objective university
efficient
I look at the social inclusion inclusion social the at look I further
ainl census, national to the relevant stakeholders stakeholders relevant the to
Roma youth Roma and nongovernmental actors
a aog h cutis ih h lws par lowest the with countries the among was
research is research 2012) (Eurydice,
M -
steps in redressing theirstage. role intheimplementation steps inredressing , effective, sustainable and whether certain measure certain whether and sustainable effective, , making cycle making with n plc ta policy and can be considered as a a as considered be can
ethodology
freshmen compared with other CEE countries. CEE other with compared freshmen sector with regards to Roma minority ed minority Roma to regards with sector n h Rmna HE Romanian the in 2009
participation inhigherparticipation education -
makers in order to order in makers to h pretg o Rm s Roma of percentage the
make , with a with , it
3 proved a significant improvement improvement significant a proved rgets
.
s a a Rm suet ae concerned, are students Roma as far As a . aspect focus contribution on the on pca attention Special will data background
on the relevant actors as following as actorsrelevant the on system. of the of
as landscape be
of ses
followed 29%
s HE to
to what extent the existing the extent what to t il lo otiue in contribute also will It
policy
the Romani the tudents graduating from from graduating tudents policy document for the for document policy (Romani CRISS, 2013 CRISS, (Romani policies in Romania in policies
of Roma in HE, in Roma of . :
. il e given be will ucational policies. policies. ucational Therefore in this this in Therefore ticipation rate in in rate ticipation
According to to According an system of of system an and reached reached and s e
mployees should or or should achieve
based based wide
and to to ) : ,
CEU eTD Collection who students there education higher bewill taken in providers scholarship and policies educational minority on working officials by provided data (“knowknowledge Bistrita from include will which interviews expert me and (Collier, sequences on based data” qualitative on based with also surveys but Roma, on studies previous and documents policy T studies. outr of way their in implementers, and makers interact about when comes it other the of impact and within 1.2.
each of the three the of each The the representing at aims it since strategy qualitative a merits research The actors; of thatinteraction policyistheoutcome is making Policy what decides government the how is making “ Taking in considerati in Taking asures for Roma. for asures . The process tracing tracing process The
oiy s ht h gvrmn sy ad os bu p about does and says government the what is Policy he empirical strategy will will strategy empirical he Methods
research -
aad n Mrue county, Marmures and Nasaud are or were or are to
consideration and analyzed. - 2011) and will focus on the Romanian higher education inclusion policies inclusion education higher Romanian the on focus will and 2011) why”) and procedural knowledge(“know proceduraland why”)
rcs h rls n power and roles the tracks have been have
actors in the decision the in actors mentioned
a method mentioned above the Besides enrolled process m
on that the study has in it in has study the that on ensuring ethod
conducted
ca in universities in of interaction among interaction of
incorporat will be used be will
county inspectorates, county tegories; each of the actors the of each tegories; Roma Roma description
social inclusion inthe Romanian inclusion social students’ surveys. students’ -
making or im or making e 4 eaching Roma students Roma eaching which which
the
as a tool for caring out “within out caring for tool a as , - osrain and observations ,
sharing indifferent whether they completed or not not or completed they whether indifferent “process tracing” “process will be done be will r contributing are ” s
. center the students the center
governmental and nongovernmental nongovernmental and governmental
f ah actor, each of NGOs and political constituencies political and NGOs plementation plementation - how s, another method used method another s, T
were asked to ass to asked were he ”
erceived problems. Policy Policy problems. erceived about perceived problems. problems. perceived about ) (Littig, 20 (Littig, )
(Ripley& Frankl targets of the surveys are surveys the of targets
method identification interviews
in accessing in ih hi interp their with phas mainly and their and
e with HE 09). ,
- and ho and
case analysis analysis case
and student student and system roles actors ess the role role the ess h policy the analysis of of analysis
Moreover university f causal of in access , w they they w
1987) retive retive is the the is .
to - ,
CEU eTD Collection affirmativeaction, outreach campaigns, mentorship, students exten ins the data triangulation by off made respondents. different for meaning reach the Romanian is used language reliability same the in procedure same getting accesseducation. higher to already these through all passed this of points weak the graduated va inclus education government of analysis as such information connections Romapeople with advice t er studies. heir lidity of the study. The study. the of lidity titutions 2. reliability
t,
motn ad eeat epnet bt lo the also but respondents relevant and important
codn t Kn, ehn & Keohane King, to According T h mi agmn o ti tei i that is thesis this of argument main The OrganizationThesis y h wy n hc policy which in way the by and ’ he , the methods used for collecting data are producing consistent answers, since the the since answers, consistent producing are data collecting for used methods the , access to this type of of type this to access university is influenced is
100 students, students, 100 purpose guidance
of the students’ surveys students’ the of h sres ehd rahd u students out reached methods surveys The ,
neves sres gvrmn plc dcmns lgl frameworks legal documents, policy government surveys, interviews, will beused will and not freshmen not and
of using using of
rm oa Gs pltcl edr bt lo from also but leaders political NGOs, Roma from research.
(besides socio (besides
fact surveys are conducted with conducted are surveys , surveys are surveys ,
. that
way
education steps aa triangulation data However
as an
will hel will
o ov ti problem this solve To will always produce the same same the produce always will , -
aes n ipeetr ades h ise f Roma of issue the address implementers and makers and therefore might pose certain pose might - university instrument economic status, parents’ education, etc.) education, parents’ status, economic short Verba
o plce, uniaie data) quantitative policies, ion , th p
I
rough assessing the reliability of the surveys. the of reliability the assessing consider , 5
and
(1996)
participation
students,
in ensuringin data gathering. consistency different policy instrume policy different questions are questions
,
tutorship, assistancetutorship, possess the knowledge and possess theknowledge n hs eerh ( research this in
that st answer eiblt “ reliability ques dns who udents
enrolled students are the ones who who ones the are students enrolled
, rm different from aspect that might represent one of of one represent might that aspect
h sml of sample the tions tions
of Roma in higher education education higher in Roma of option precise since they might not have have not might they since means that applying the the applying that means measure are already enrolled already are mgt have might s
) di and clear and .
fferent sources of of sources fferent counties is to increase the the increase to is
nts (scholarships, nts h pplto is population the ” .
experience my In . to a certain certain a to Moreover
based on on based However term different different personal personal s of of s
of or
, ,
CEU eTD Collection main 4 Chapter and implementers Chapte education. higher in participation em will part conclusion and madeactors through by the themselves ac respective the on framework theoretical a on work their in instruments on focus and access, participation threecomponents: on basedpolicies, inclusion social the within chapter, participation
surveys and through the through and surveys
fin In order to order In dings, data analysis anddings, conclusions.analysis data Chapter 1 Chapter actors’ n ihr dcto, h agmn wl b dvlpd s followi as developed be will argument the education, higher in
, oe (policy roles determine will provide the theoretical framework and will will and framework theoretical the provide will phasize the main findings, including findings, main the phasize
on policytargets on Roma inclu Roma
assessment made by the other actors involved in the in involved actors other the by made assessment
theory the the - aes implementers, makers, extent from ,
publications but also but through publications
sion within the HE the within sion to which one group of group one which to 2 r international
. The last chapter, Chapter 5 Chapterchapter, last The . tor t tor 6
il f will h rough the existent studies, the assessment assessment the studies, existent the rough cs n policy on ocus
n targets and o c to
system. Each chapter will provide provide will chapter system.Each
implementers’ success. uty pcfc HE specific ountry
actors affects Roma students Roma affects actors
the ) and and ) loc -
makers, Chapter 3 on on 3 Chapter makers, Chapter 2, 3 and 4 and 3 2, Chapter ate the Roma context context Roma the ate completed interviews interviews completed
will will
hi impact their impact on Roma Roma on impact leave ng: study
The next next The inclusion inclusion space . The The .
will and and
for CEU eTD Collection educational 2009) Cartmel, and Furlong minorities ethnic or struggle etc. population, system in HE chapter this of sections following the in with together inclusion, 1.1. Participation Inclusion Social asakeytool for minorities with to is chapter this of aim The down break will I which conc on based perspective a HE, in inclusion social of concept the reflect others) and rights cohesion, social ideologies.and n h Rmna HE Romanian the in epts , these three
different level h nto of notion The The There is an extensive literature on social inclusion in inclusion social on literature extensive an is There i within a countr a within
ndicate in achiev such as as such ’
lo epniiiis Social responsibilities. also
experience accessing education. in higher literature on social inclusion inclusion social on literature system
The importance of social inclusion inclusion social importanceof The that the that Moreover, the concept of concept the Moreover, social integration, an equal society in which its memb its which in society equal an integration, social ing social justicewhich and social areing equality,
social justice, widening participati widening justice, social concepts reflect, to a certain extent, the level of inclusion of thelevelinclusion the conceptsextent, reflect,a of certain to
from perspective s
of inclusion. inclusion. of y or a or y participation concept can be examined through a variety of ideologies which might might which ideologies of variety a through examined be can concept concept Chapter 1
diverse
1. ytm rm h prpcie f oil nlso, based inclusion, social of perspective the from system Social InclusionSocial , region ces and/or access locate
s (Preece, 1999) or even even or 1999) (Preece,
such as such perspective T , including ,
he
is one of the key concepts in the literature of social social of literature the in concepts key the of one is
- the current situation of the Romanian Roma students students Roma Romanian the of situation current the
Theoretical framework theoretical framework areas inclusion .
When seen from the perspective of socia of perspective the from seen When access is explored is widening widening huma s
in in Higher Education 7 –
quality the perspective the
and ptnil (Gidl potential n is participation
on, access, equity, admission and admission equity, access, on,
been
success
in relation to a a to relation in
of education, fairness, diversity of the the of diversity fairness, education, of ( uh as such
from the perspective of of perspective the from given by its its givenby the main goal main the ,
HE concepts which will be will which concepts used
of social justice (Basit, 2012; (Basit, justice social of
, focusing on wom on focusing , mlyet euain and education employment, is just one just is y t l, 2009 al., et ey
in this research introduces researchintroduces in this
variety of variety positive positive s ers are ers
of social i part effects, that is, is, that effects,
having
perspectives of existent ) l inclusion inclusion l , nclusion.
access to to access wider the en, racial en, rm the from n other on explore
merit. equal equal
HE HE
CEU eTD Collection idea is that inclusion, decision life. social from aredetached individuals is sorts which e opportunities, equal often that societies, characteristics just about is justice prevent and disparities the is can it achieved latter the once and justice social of issue p (2006) Watson’s andinclusion different withinthe HEar topics informati
encompassed also within the Charter of the Fundamental Rights of the Euro the of Rights Fundamental the of Charter the within also encompassed
have ahave capacity Besides the above s above the Besides lifelong or as aresult opportunities, learning ofdiscrimination of lack or poverty, their of virtue by fully participating from “ The relation its and participation widening to regards With In in the and social economic, in well and living of standard a enjoy to fully and life cultural participate to necessary resources and opportunities “ T the - a process which ensures that those at ris at those that ensures which process a a proc he concept ofsocial inclusion making powerwhen com it on (Archer and Hutchings, 2003) Hutchings, and (Archer on addition
Moreover, it it Moreover, main Europe society significant ess whereby certain individuals individuals certain whereby ess
of the the of :
cause greater participation in decision in participation greater
erspective an Union to this definition this to
in whichthey live ing
society of exclusion, it is claimed that claimed is it exclusion, of role i s noted is
r “ are marginalization. tated definition, tated
(EU, 2004) (EU,
is n underpinningjustice social job
undermined
o nue h well the ensure to worth mentioning worth
or that the effects of social exclusion influences exclusion social of effects the that es to , education
the European Union assesses the assesses Union European the is concerned ”
. defines
everyday
. A .
According y structures”, by which brings the idea that idea the brings which ll of these of ll ea. 8
are pushed opportunities but also from different aspects o aspectsdifferentfrom also but opportunities
social exclusion social
. It . k of poverty and social exclusion gain the the gain exclusion social and poverty of k
- - issues making and access to fundamental rights fundamental to access and making
en o is ebr, euig exist reducing members, its of being is defined
claims
to Furlong and Cartmel (2009 Cartmel and Furlong to as a consequence of social exclusion social of consequence a as studies .
contribute to contribute
to the edge of society and prevented prevented and edge ofsociety to the .
an is participation widening that qual distribution of rewards, rewards, of distribution qual ht i that -
being that is considered normal normal considered is that being as: exploring different aspects of of aspects different exploring
as:
in s ship
” basic .
soci
this added added di o oil inclusion, social to scrimination al cohesion, which which cohesion, al
competencies and competencies case universities, universities, case value pean Union. Union. pean individuals’
of social social of ), social social ),
of any of ing f , ,
CEU eTD Collection (success) (access), neoliberalism as such 1) Fig. (see Gidley success the idea of possible about study this arguing of an discussing heard, voice developments their make and initiatives take exist democratization the to receiving and giving it, of most the making Participation social, the of part also but system educational the within benefit. and democratization accordin and access higher the within and 1.2. Access,SuccessParticipation orpopulationsince homogeneiin size societies differ can of standards The
will above above
examined in relation to to examined inrelation Haug objectives policy such incorporating are states member the how understand to order In similar A et.
are g to which one can can one which to g incorporate of elements .
al empowerment definitions
reflect . , ’s living
bring democratization and democratization is seen as student opportunity to contribute to their membership status and and status membership their to contribute to opportunity student as seen is that will impact directly or indirectly or directly impact will that
(2010)
and
theory education agenda, the next section next the agenda, education ing
s within a society can be be can society a within
benefit new
Haug’s concepts of concepts Haug’s for for ocpulzto of conceptualization
is p is . ,
social inclusion inclusion social is the fact that these concepts these that fact the is
resented both Fellowship participation identify admission policies admission reflect a certain degree of of degree certain a reflect benefit
by Gidley et. Gidley by
refers h lvl f nlso: elwhp participation, fellowship, inclusion: of level the
and fellowship will b will
social and completely
nlsv education inclusive 9 social exclusion social
mostly success e conflated since they they since conflated e
justice al
and their life or their their or life their . (2010 .
, of this chapter will will chapter this of
participation
to the membership status of a student a of status membership the to , meritocracy. different from one society to another to society one from different
ty even or from the social inclusion inclusion social from the (participation) and and (participation) are cultural empower ) ing , where , supported
are cdmc environment. academic
involves and professional and job broad
and access ment society
or other opportunities other or
reflect by several ideologies several by empowerment.
, students starting to starting students , explore in , four components components four participation participation . meaning; human potential human For the purpose purpose the For
a si a
the issue the perspective milar idea, milar life of it. of life
normal normal What What
The and of .
CEU eTD Collection successful is education place. takes access that ensuring are and policies such through only achieved be can which participation, widening it because but everyone, for goal ultimate the achieving at aims it because only reachingit (2009), inGidley (2010). et.al. T Figure he
participation being the ultimate goal in one’s life.one’s in goal ultimate the being Human Potential Ideology that Human istheone Potential
1: “ merely
Access , participation and success in social i social in success and participation ,
h satn point” starting the
in highereducation
Accor
. whereas whereas
ding to Tonks and Tonks to ding 10
The current The
nclusion interventions nclusion h final the that incorporatesall theother that research fits the above t abovethe fits research goal Farr (2003), access to higher higher to access (2003), Farr
f ces oiis is policies access of . Source: Source: J. measure
M. M. Gid is based is
ideologies, heory ley
which which ,
not not the on
CEU eTD Collection inclusion perspective access the from education higher in participation a base. solid in with though Even o advantage takes that population wellbeing, to contribution society. functioning earnings them? about do we do What the and effects term long have can education higher in inclusion of benefits such as the Roma, prof background socio excluded historically G factors. “under the on focus special 1.3 order to increase participation in h in participation increase to order . essional aspirations, are aspirations, essional Widening Widening participation out success is simply no access”, no simply is success out - cnmc iavnae the disadvantage, economic W The As stated earlier, the aim the earlier, stated As W society - . The . related benefits related e i cms o ihr education higher to comes it hen str a as regarded be can participation idening roups lower cr lower
reason
(including the the (including h ltrtr are that agrees literature the
paper he/she lives in. lives he/she the uh as such
within
ime propensity, higher earning earning ime propensity, higher o apocig the approaching for The
, mainly due to their social origi social their to due mainly , economy, attempts to expla to attempts
,
ben
the but also but the
efits mentioned efits - contributing quality Murray (2009) looks at both at looks (2009) Murray
higher education institutions ersne” is represented”
oa are Roma
oeiees in cohesiveness
In his In of this thesis is to is thesis this of some f to
f h sho atne) and attended) school the of igher education, the “numbers” the education, igher
wider it is it area in participation through several independent variables independent several through participation in article ces is access
subject en s h non the as seen to
essential form
benefits such as greater life satisfaction or bet or satisfaction life greater as such benefits , hr te lv, iciiain educational discrimination, live, they where include: the
due 11
participation The wider social benefits of higher education: higher of benefits social wider The
low f ihr education higher of
f atcpto i hi in participation of society, political participation, health and and health participation, political society, o the to potential, better parenting and others mainly
to focus on focus to
assess
number of students belonging to belonging students of number tolerance and expanded social networks, networks, social expanded and tolerance ns . Moreover, . results of the the of results
.
tg fr change for ategy individual aot numbers” “about
- what are the factors that factors the are what participant since they have been been have they since participant ersns “ represents , which is the first step for social social for step first the is which , access and and access
students’
” other and social benefits, both both benefits, social and representing
both for the individual the for both Safr e.l, 1984) et.al., (Stafford hr dcto wt a with education gher the interaction of several several of interaction
factors expansion
proportion
n that and since the social social the since
educational
such as the the as such in this case case this in influence
policies “
. groups
access access of the the of
ter ter or or .
CEU eTD Collection meritocracyHorvath, (Floreaand 2009). also and i Moreover, capacity merit, their on based system HE the within admitted get will tighter latter on discriminate not concerned opportunity pa can t f basis a as pre opport term the of the of use initial the from shift a is have as education, higher to participation admiss outreach, from starting practices 1.4 organizations, society, policies, educationalscholarship institutions, universities providers the of role the as such hat all the members of society who so who society of members the all hat . Access as - requisite of requisite
other 1.4.1. Merit is concerned is unity, to unity, rticipate in HE”. A HE”. in rticipate
selection In a recent a In As a
main main ,
Bibbings or equitable equitable or McCowan McCowan atr such factors t is not only the only not is t of obtaining a of obtaining . The aim of of aim The Social Inclusion Social goal equity minimum
policies. It can be concl be can It policies. , when there is a is there when ,
study
unf the (2006) n rsn oeo h xsetdbts esrs and measures debates, existent the of some present and
claims that claims as a “false meritocracy” “false a as
access. A first criterion states that “ that states criterion first A access. air social inclusion inHE inclusion social
on equity access to HE in Brazil in HE to access equity on s h afraiiy f dcto, h fnig te lts o the or elitism the funding, the education, of affordability the as t
inclusive
his preparation place goods second
states university section
in a ” , the ,
a but of course with its with course of but criterion
n equitable system should have “ have should system equitable n hi n HE gh
is to narrow down narrow to is , institution umbrella academic
desire and who have a minimum minimum a have who and desire that has the has that ions, students support and other means that means other and support students ions,
competition for places in HE, the system should have have should system the HE, in places for competition oiis pltcl ersnaie, nongovernmental representatives, political policies, uded that uded
targets targets 12 .
. of widening participation includes a variety of of varietya includes participation widening of
of their choice”
According to McCowan ( McCowan to According experience equity “
there is a high probability that freshmen freshmen that probability high a is there those individuals who should have a have should who individuals those power
own admission criteria. admission own the in educational policy, as equality of of equality as policy, educational in ,
there should be sufficient places so so places sufficient be should there McCowan (2007) claims that there that claims (2007) McCowan
to decide on decide to
focus and .
ability As far as the first asAs far
of this paper this of an entry ,
there are two criteria criteria two are there widen level 2007)
system that does does that system
of pre of policies , ing
perseverance that is access access is that As far as the the as far As ,
besides the the besides cr access stimulate iterion paration, paration, which .
fair but but
is is .
CEU eTD Collection are action affirmative marginalized prov to is measures action educat general” market, trade politics, of fields the in groups marginalized phrase to According case. Roma Serbian the with answer tuition Romania in students Roma for program action significan b should What packages. financial description to legalnational the set HE while have or France Austria, Bulgaria, (see Matura a having countries some p groups and access about the institutional capacity of the university. the of capacity institutional the
their own admission policies (interview, written/ oral exam, practical exam) but res but exam) practical exam, oral written/ (interview, policies admission own their system
softer softer some other some
free places for Roma students Roma for places free ih ead t te diso plce, t is it policies, admission the to regards With S 1.4. to Roma inclusion in secondary and tertiary level has been been has level tertiary and secondary in inclusion Roma to for for . ae n uieste amsin policies admission universities and tate t codn to According
.
impact 2.
on universities admission policies for different types of students and the and students of types different for policies admission universities on general admission requirement admission general inclusive
According to the Romanian National Education Law Education National Romanian the to According Admission Policies or discriminated. or
s framework.
in ensuring s might
equity oiis desig policies Surdu incorporate resenting a risk of social exclusion from the HE systems HE the from exclusion social of risk a resenting ide equal access and chances for those minority groups that that groups minority those for chances and access equal ide , equal chances and chances equal ,
Usually the universities admission policies are design according according design are policies admission universities the Usually
ocial inclusion within thesystem. within inclusion ocial In addition In and
exam Romania) is a a is Romania) e remembered from here is that is here from remembered e Szira
more e i odr o mrv the improve to order in ned .
The or a Diploma of Completion of Secondary Education Secondary of Completion of Diploma a or
,
(2009), the main reason for adopting affirmative affirmative adopting for reason main the (2009), options, depending on the tradition of that of tradition the on depending options, s the authors are arguing that the main objectives of of objectives main the that arguing are authors the Rakovic topic
according to according 13
Chapter
implemented through an annual number of of number annual an through implemented diversity of af of represent rrqiie o etrn HE entering for prerequisite
(2010), “ (2010), s firmative action for Roma Roma for action firmative important
3 and 3 , objectives which can be achieved be can which objectives , particular
decisive affirmative action is a common a is action affirmative 4 will provide a more detailed detailed more a provide will 4
, mentioning
universities are allo are universities research admission
programs or universitie or programs fa o o scea lf in life societal or ion ctors when when ctors status ed
the affirmative affirmative the policies have a a have policies also in also f historically of , others might might others , as a policy policy a as discussing .
While in While specific relation country pecting wed to to wed are are s
CEU eTD Collection importanceactors ofthe analysis targets others. decision groups, interest the through follow a is making and implemented are and life real both 2009) Szira, thr ough specific measures in fields such as such fields in measures specific ough
in taking the “right decisions” “right the taking in
) and thei and ) The due to existing actors at both at actors existing to due As it can be concluded be can it As
that will will that following . complex
r impact and instruments in ensuring Roma inclusion wit inclusion Roma ensuring in instruments and impact r assess
one, in most of the cases the interaction between the actors is difficult to difficult is actors the betweeninteraction the cases the of most in one,
chapter
and their
h cmimn, h rsosblt, u also but responsibility, the commitment, the
will focus on actors’ roles (policy roles actors’ on focus will ,
the roles when it roles it when
that but also in ensuring that these that ensuring in also but inclusion policies require commitment and responsibility responsibility and commitment require policies inclusion the vertical and horizontal horizontal and vertical the - makers, implementers, target groups, partners and and partners groups, target implementers, makers, their objectives objectives their education, labor market, and others and market, labor education, 14 come
s
to Roma p to Roma are achieved. - mak articipation inHE level
decisions decisions ers, implementers, policy policy implementers, ers,
,
The process of policy of process The complexity explained explained complexity h impact the hin the HE the hin are transposed in in transposed are (Surdu and and (Surdu .
and the the and system,
CEU eTD Collection powers continuation. and their level providing in attempts governments chronological elements together conventional actors categorizing in contribute T analysis. policy the of impact policy the assessing with continue will chapter The education. higher in policies mainly exist policy of impact and role the center its in has chapter the in actors mentioned above targets - - - -
ing
f oe, heacia srcue hc epan te fet o te decision the of effects the explains which structure hierarchical a power, of - , this chapter will start by giving an overview on the policy the on overview an giving by start will chapter this ,
makers on the Roma participation education. onthe inhigher makers Roma problem, the agenda cycle policy The policy of role the into further proceeding Before The above stages of the policy cycle show that this instrument is a tool that brings brings that tool a is instrument this that show cycle policy the of stages above The policy and organizations)institutions implementation transformed by the by
evaluation policy oiy ouet wl poie a provide will documents policy Chapter way )
framework MERYS
setting formulation
for descri for
which contribute in organizing governments and actors, in developing a a developing in actors, and governments organizing in contribute which he policy process develops gradually through phases or stages which which stages or phases through gradually develops process policy he
and into government programs) into problem
, its partners and interest groups with regards to Roma social inclusion inclusion social Roma to regards with groups interest and partners its , (a political (a
(the 2 termination
s considered is
for policy for -
bing thepolicy The R stage and
is
put oiy otx of context policy
decision and their actions. actions. their and of process
on theagenda ole andthe Impact of Policy -
goods making but also in br in also but making execution
( seset f mat n intende and impact of assessment
to
–
n
be the most most the be in which in process o t citizens its for maki
overview 15
or enforcement of a policy by the responsible responsible the by policy a of enforcement or
ng
for for
is made HE (problems, proposals and demands demands and proposals (problems,
political further an & Jann
of the policies and measures initiated initiated measures and policies the of promine This Romania. in Roma for policies - aes and makers . T . - inging expertise and knowledge in in knowledge and expertise inging
makers up byfollowing the stages:
public
he attention Weigrich nt above
- ipeetr ad policy and implementers ,
perspective cycle and will will and cycle action therefore -
Makers
is attached is stages 20) ge ta the that agree (2007) ) d outcomes of the the of outcomes d
imply
, based on the the on based , n h field the in
position
to a policy a to
a certain certain a - making making
are are the of CEU eTD Collection - - aiming ofhigher at dimension edu the social that based onthe policy the in them a parents) and students Roma NGOs, inspectorates, school representatives, university leaders, political Roma representatives, Education of Ministry and (Government their setting benefi decision and formulation targets policy and
1. econom socio of independent are which quality outcomes and treatment to in equity access as well as for education, opportunities equal ensuring of importance the stressed which Counci and in activecitizenship education. cohesion social equity, promoting objectives main the of one as has which 2020, Europe - - -
degree ciaries
Policy phase policy political im (MERYS), policy curren the though Even I I te at he yas there years, three last the n thef n plementers l conclusions of 11 May 2010 on the Social Dimension of Education and Training, Training, and Education of Dimension Social the on 2010 May 11 of conclusions l ic
of involvement varies to a great variesof toa involvement extent. o plc targets, policy or ,
- - is a is background targets makers a makers ollowing chapters Ichapters will ollowing
representatives, power complex
Roma politicalRoma leaders
cycle a b fud n h policy the in found be can : : : Government and Minis and Government : Roma students and parents, society in general studentsRoma andparents, societyin
MERYS t the European levelthe European t share
is not fixed, it can it fixed, not is
and otherand factors
- stage making stage, implementers in the implementation implementation the in implementers stage, making
they can asgrouped following:they be ,
NGOs t research has as main focus the tracking of the actors actors the of tracking the focus main as has research t which involves the interaction of all the actors involved, but involved, actors the all of interaction the involves which ihn h eauto ad termination and evaluation the within nvriy ersnaie, col inspectorates, school representatives, university ae en elaborated been have
make
which may to lead cation, including aspectcation, thesocial inclusion
leave the assumption thatpolicy assumption the
16 try of Education, Research Education, of try
-
yl sae: policy stages: cycle space
for changing roles, but it is assumed is it but roles, changing for
several educational
taeis r frameworks or strategies - - makers in the policy policy the in makers makers stage
, disadvantage
Youth and Sports Sports and Youth clear T . , implementers , implementers
he position stage agenda : . Roma Roma
and
of of - - CEU eTD Collection knowledge aime which strategy prosperity”, economic provision meas will Governments why questioning worth is it level, European who should conclusions educatio higher of dimension social the to regards with conclusions Union European all of and - - -
- - - highereducation completing rates. improving for approaches on focusing was which education, higher in rates completion drop reduce to practice and policies on activity learning peer 2020 ET and improve Bucharest The minimizing higher ed Education, from conclusions Council The
shoul ures. developing disadvantagedgroups increasing meeting Council Sport and Youth Culture, Education, the of up follow a as 2013, In participation assessing opportunities,counseling including services fe ietfig h exist the identifying After
d consider According - f ihr dcto i srnl lne t itrainl competiti international to linked strongly is education higher of the based economy in the world, capable of sustainable economic growth, with more with growth, economic sustainable of capable world, the in economy based
bv mnind rmwrs a frameworks mentioned above ie a pooig n esrn acs fr under for access ensuring and promoting at aimed
quality
the
Communiqué
ces priiain n cmlto rts f under of rates completion and participation access,
e en s guideline as seen be strategies that aim at providing information about educational educational about information providing at aim that strategies a mkn te uoen no “ Union European the making at d
adopt to Furlong and Cartmel (2009 Cartmel and Furlong to exist
elemen within theEHEAwithin countrieseducation systems. higher ucation drop ucation ing ing
poli udn ad financial and funding ta mks es i te otx o te uoen Lisbon European the of context the in sense makes that t
2012, which aimed at promoting measures to widen access access widen to measures promoting at aimed which 2012, cy objectivesas: such ing
8 oebr 01 n h Moderniza the on 2011 November 28 -
out rates.
oiy rmwrs ih ead to regards with frameworks policy fr h mme sae and states member the for s 17
new new
) “ ) base from the government’s the from support
h ms cmeiie n dynamic and competitive most the
a set was
cee ad hi ipc on impact their and schemes
pledge p o te oni o the of Council the for up - represented groups and and groups represented eeat stakeholders relevant
o uh oiis or policies such to - education out and out -
perspective tion of Higher Higher of tion represented or or represented veness and and veness i n. Such Such n. ncreas
at the the at , the the , e ,
CEU eTD Collection - Romanian Government are: Gruber Gabriela to According wit measures condi several National butalso Agencyfor Roma Education Higher for Council National Romania, Foundation Soros (CEDU), Organizatio Student of Alliance county or prefecture there Moreover, the Labor), (e.g. Ministries different of representatives educatio tertiary to comes it when initiator main the the that ensure and legislation Affairs) Internal of Ministry the (within Unit Policy Public General departments, designated unfulfilled objectives EUregion atthe level. jo better and
2. people and 2001 between implemented Ro of Condition the Improve to Government Romanian the of Strategy The ministries’ representatives and with the help of the exis the of help the with and representatives ministries’ them. among being
tion Policy t h R the At 2.1. with together Ministries, the within PolicyUnits Public the policies, public of termsIn public
of Roma, eradicating poverty or social inclusion strategies. strategies. inclusion social or poverty eradicating Roma, of participation in 10 areas, improving the access to primary and secondary education secondary and primary to access the improving areas, 10 in participation is respected is
The RomanianThe Government bs and greater social cohesion”, social greater and bs - i ti plce tee a b fud pcfc ns agtn Rm education. Roma targeting ones specific found be can there policies this hin makers at
policies designed for Romanian Roma, policies that aim at improving the the improving at aim that policies Roma, Romanian for designed policies mna Gvrmn level Government omanian s a is range
and hs strategy This
the National level the National elaborate
the policies the f national of
(2012) s n oai (e.g. Romania in ns
ulc policies public i nternational actors: WB,UN, 00 n hd s an betv to objective main as had and 2010 a implemented was
are implemented are the the policy
i te at eae there decade last the in ,
an unachieved objective, which is sti is which objective, unachieved an main 18 cos ht ih b as initiators also be might that actors
public policy documents adopted by the the by adopted documents policy public send n legislation
. petitions through hm o the to them In most of the cases the of most In ting Roma organizations. I organizations. Roma ting
, Centrul ), h Rmna Governmen Romanian the UNICEF but also senators, also but Government Secretary Secretary Government ae en developed been have Among the many many the Among , encourag UNESCO Educatia
the MERYS the ll one of the the of one ll a People ma Financing National : councils deputies e Roma Roma e
, FRA. n 2004 2004 n 2000+ 2000+
is t . , ,
CEU eTD Collection - - - -
society. knowledge a develop to and growth economic achieve to order in system education th in Roma for education to access universal and free equal, ensure to is strategy housing, health, market, s 2012 Period the for Minority Roma to Belonging Citizens Romanian the of Inclusion the for Romania of Government the of Strategy The level by Romanian Government andANR. the twelve of 2005 Inclusion Roma of Decade The secondaryandeducation; higher at participation their stimulating as well as education, vocational or primary kindergarten, of measure the which among Roma the targeting measures the implementing for responsible being ANR Protection, Social and Labor of Ministry NGOs. and society civil and structures public the between also but structures public the among cooperation and dialog the improving in contributed implemented was Memorandum Inclusion Social Joint The aboutcommunities their social including situation, aspectofedu thelegal 2012, strategies process implementation and monitoring the h Ntoa Anti National The trategies N ational aimed at stimulating Roma participation and raising awareness among the Roma Roma the among awareness raising and participation Roma stimulating at aimed
.
governments in the Central a Central the in governments for ensuring Roma Roma ensuring for
gny o Rm (ANR) Roma for Agency - oet ad oil nlso Pa im Plan Inclusion Social and Poverty culture providing extended school attendance of Roma childre Roma of attendance school extended providing people people.
and social infrastructure. The first objective of this this of objective first The infrastructure. social and -
2015 social inclusion in areas such as education, labor labor education, as such areas in inclusion social
nd Eastern Europe Eastern nd This a created was
19 f xset an existent of is a political commitment at international at commitment political a is
ouet rvdd several provided document
and - 00 i oe f h ms recent most the of one is 2020, d
t a an had it
The national coordinato national The is implemented at the national national the at implemented is uue ainl rgas an programs national future plemented between 2002 and and 2002 between plemented
ewe 2005 between executive cation. cation.
priority actions actions priority
oe n the in role and
e public public e r is the is r - based based 2010, 2010, level n in in n d
CEU eTD Collection and year) per 3000 (around policies cultural people needed representation Roma was Romania the minorities, discriminated or marginalized to services quality Szira department Romani on course Prof. year same the in Moreover Timisoara). Iasi, (Cluj, yearacademicthe next the with 10 of consisting Bucharest, the started Education of Ministry the also atcreatingeducational materialspupils. Roma andfor tools appointing at literature, and education the included which haveRoma a initiatives of types the from not and themselves teachers the by developed programs developed
(2009 As far as the as far As After Gheorghe to According n re to order In contain
there were programs aim programs were there
ny after only 2.1.1. , eie te main the besides ), of
little 90 te MERYS the 1990,
‘ hindi to
esrs uh s h annual the as such measures
tradition in theRomanianeducationaltradition in system. support Ministry of Education,SportMinistry Research, of and Youth language prove enhance - position university romani
99 tee ee eea porm bten 1949 between programs several were there 1989,
o ol that only not Roma Roma
special at University of Bucharest until 2001 until Bucharest of University at Roma educational Methodists for Roma children schooling, but but schooling, children Roma for Methodists educational Roma a created was universities oa ces o etay dcto te Romanian the education tertiary to access Roma o a oa col inspector. school Roma a for
level Sarau program expanded to the other the to expanded program
objective set people ing at at ing
places for Roma students studying social work. Starting Starting work. social studying students Roma for places is concerned is
p h Euainl ieto fr ainl Minorities, National for Direction Educational the up the Romanian initiatives for Roma education education Roma for initiatives Romanian the
the
aon 0 e year) per 500 (around positive preparing Roma teachers to teach to teachers Roma preparing within the same university. same the within efforts in consolidating the democratic, civic and and civic democratic, the consolidating in efforts
’ high to access and chances ‘equal providing of . phenomenon
20
rvso o seil lcs in places special of provision , starting with the academic year 1992 year academic the with starting ,
discrimination program at University of of University at program discrimination
s o a e oe u as ta the that also but one new a not is Sarau t h scnay pre secondary, the At big
for Roma. for goal
central raie te is elective first the organizes . This .
universities from Romania from universities
of affirmative action i action affirmative of According to According
idea expanded idea policy
Romani la Romani codn o the to According - 1 9
centre 51 or 1975, 1975, or 51 high Government - university were not not were Surdu - schools schools . These These . nguage - 1993, 1993, and
&
n a
CEU eTD Collection the Ministry ofEducationproviding 10 Literature and language Prof. host universities the of number the 149, to 40 inspectorates ineach situation’ this Roma, main a as had strategic a Education of Ministry the to proposed representativesand/o (national advice organizations. Education in Council National state departments programs/ available the of capacity the reserved for increasing Roma the noted be can As students. mainstream for places subsidized 61.226 of out Roma for places reserved 594 year 62.380 of 3.894/2013) Orderyear academic and 4334/2012 (Order orders Education of Ministry
Sarau usdzd places subsidized
In 1998, Prof. 1998, In a The In 1998 In n cusln rcie from received counseling and .
s , t , t Another strategic program comin program strategic Another a vision bove numbers provided by the Ministry of Education of Ministry the by provided numbers bove the t ogether with the representatives of the Roma Roma the of representatives the with ogether
e principle The criteria The the
- subsidiz
1999 at the university the at 1999 Language
re were 555 were re o Hge Euain iacn (NI) b te eea D General the by (CNFIS), Financing Education Higher for
eut en te 2001 the being result county affirmative action program is expanding slowly, the number of places of number the slowly, expanding is program action affirmative Sarau together Sarau
ed places for mainstream students, and for the 2013 the for and students, mainstream for places ed to section u as acrig to according also but
think of National based on which on based , eachan ofthem having slightly
r local r e
and within the Faculty of Letters at the at Letters of Faculty the within s e r v appl e political with yearyear. by d M
special level pl rectors y inorities inorities aces for the Roma students Roma the for aces
‘Governmental Strategy for Improving the Roma Roma the Improving for Strategy ‘Governmental other professors interested in minorities education, minorities in interested professors other together
the Roma places Roma the ing the Roma students increased students Roma the ing g from the MERYS the from g the number of the special places increased from from increased places special the of number the
21 constituencies).
places the section. proposed for te ony Office County the ,
h pooas ae y h uieste, by universities, the by made proposals the with the vision
with the Roma the designed programs for for programs designed the Roma the with inspector /universities
for Roma education, a education, Roma for advice party
are distributed are assigned for Roma education.Roma forassigned
, and counseling of the Roma theRoma counseling of and proposes to have a Romani a have to proposes is the is
h nme o previously of number the are allocated are
fr oa and Roma for s University of Bucharest, of University in state universities, out universities, state in creation -
2014 academic academic 2014 also. depends
o 2012 for
irectorate for for irectorate vision of 42 school school 42 of according to according
Moreover, Moreover,
on which which Roma Roma - 2013 2013 the the
CEU eTD Collection the for elections national the in representatives their through participated who constituencies political to was which alsoa contained period communist af course, Of on. Roma times those from and CRISSRomani have Roma Romanian decisions. taking and influencing instruction develop area this in re political Roma of area the However politics. Romanian the within Roma of representation and participation inclusion, order in and thesis this of scope become contribution Bucharest. of University from coming students schools, in language Romani teaching were who students Roma for scholarships provided politic
obtain The participative political political participative The politic and politics Roma of topic The 2.2. From After 1990, there was there 1990, After Deputy Chamber, the Party of The Roma (PR) succeeding to get to succeeding (PR) Roma The of Party the Chamber, Deputy
Romani Romani
al
and Roma political parties and politicians and Romaand Roma parties political governmentalagencies
to organization
2001 until 2006, together with the with together 2006, until 2001 rights through rights , Bleahu and Frunzaru (2005) s Frunzaru, Bleahu (2005) and education th Languageand primary History teacher and in secondary schools e annual summer school where around 50 Roma students are prepared to to prepared are students Roma 50 around where school summer annual e ter the the ter
h Rmna Cmuit at hd a had Party Communist Romanian the (seeMcGarry, 2010
measure were drc pltcl participation political direct a .
rise Through during the interwar period and it lasted until the late 1930s. late the until lasted it and period interwar the during
asking for access to education, professional qualifications and soandqualifications education,professional to access for asking political a to started research and recently interest gain has presentation f h cmuit eie tee tre to started these regime, communist the of n
of increasing theeducationalof level ofRoma
explosion of Roma political constituencies whose main whose constituencies political Roma of explosion to explore the topic it would require a similar research on research similar a require would it topic the explore to culture
political codn to According
actions. Between 1990 and 2004 there were around 15 15 around were there 2004 and 1990 Between actions. ).
is the result of a high level of culture, management, culture, of level high a of result the is
participation participation 22 tate
al UNICEF
that Roma started to started that Roma Burtea representation Another joint program was UNICEF UNICEF was program joint Another ” .
oevr i Moreover, citizens have to have citizens
(2001) Romania representa Romania rga fr is Integration Gipsy for Program ,
n Romania in “ ny after only n a study published by by published study a n have play 0,55% . cease
quite
a major role in role major a tives, MERYS tives, 90 dd the did 1990, is . .
.
of the 2004 2004 the of strong beyond the the beyond During the the During
Even civic aim ,
CEU eTD Collection the havinglatter the Policies, Public with connec is 1 which of out proposals legislative 3 submitted education. them of 4 proposals, legislative 28 adopted was has who Roma) the of (Party have policy and politicians Roma from coming new mentionin constituencies. women Roma. system, orfinancial especially offer electoral their in bought and parties Roma with alliances of Roma. Situation the Improving for strategy Government Romanian the implementing in engaged got SDP le political a non made Roma the The of forParty the supporters (SDP), Party Democrat Roma of number high the to due 2000, In results. ad to the recognition of Roma political representation. As a follow a As representation. political Roma of recognition the to ad
party students’ In each In As the focus of this research is to look at look to is research this of focus the As recentl More campaign electoral 2004 the In In Romania there is a strong link between the Parliament and the National Institute for for Institute National the and Parliament the between link strong a is there Romania In rpeettvs n h Rmna Parliament. Romanian the in representatives 3
g Roma Democratic Union and Unionand gDemocratic Roma with educated youngwith educated as Roma leaders. Roma Roma Another
as law, none of them of none law, as
monthly county education
support y, the PR proves to be one of the most appreciated parties among the the among parties appreciated most the of one be to proves PR the y, Roma member of the Romanian Parliament is Damian Draghici who who Draghici Damian is Parliament Romanian the of member Roma
it has a a has it allowance Among the other still still other the Among
for students. promoting through
had representative .
10 legislative proposals legislative 10
being concerned being role a be adopted been has
of monitoring the monitoring of
Civic Democratic Roma Alliance Roma Democratic Civic ay f h Rmna political Romanian the of many makers it is worth mentioning that currently Roma Roma currently that mentioning worth is it makers
23 and
Roma identity and culture in the educational the in culture and identity Roma
active within the within policy
with
oa oiia parties political Roma
or
education. activities and none of them connected to to connected them of none and ted with education, more education, with ted until now out of which only one one only which of out now until legislative county several alliance
of the Parliament. Inthis Parliament. the of it aims to aims it Madalin -
up of this protocol, the protocol, this of up
offers targeting Roma, Roma, targeting offers educational initiatives initiatives educational
. The latest being a a being . The latest ih t vn that event it, with ioa Paun Nicolae
Voicu parties created created parties - have oa Social Roma
it is worth worth is it
youth who has who exactly
or or
CEU eTD Collection e of importance “Education m The education. to access school the has Party Roma donors. the to accountable financially being been 2009 in respect and integritywith access education to organized the 2009 which recently, initiated activities the analyzing comes it when county represen most the is since Amentza pub within positions through also but activities monitoring p context ediators, whowill
blamed
The national party leader leader party national The this of section next the In The other two important campaigns run by the PR PR the by run campaigns important two other The the national national the representative. The PR PR The representative. for implementing 5 projects 5 implementing for ”
arliamentarians
event - and Parliament Romanian the in Roma Center Roma Policies. forPublic - omnt atesi, which partnership, community
for not for pirt fr oa ad a raising had and Roma” for priority A county
bu Rm issues Roma about ducation run several campaigns or campaigns several run ald “ called regard . representative
contribute maintaining a maintaining
ersnaie, is I il ou o M. ioa Pu atos and actions Paun Nicolae Mr. on focus will I first representatives,
to the implementation of educational projects targeting Roma. In educationalto the implementation of this targeting projects Roma. Roma as its main aim main its as tative at the national level and it has a decentralized structure and and structure decentralized a has it and level national the at tative r involved are partnership
to -
national
pirt i natio in priority A supporting youngsupportingeducational through process. Roma the chapte s’ showed
are connected are relationship with other with relationship poet, programs projects, ,
main target of criticism was ANR, which waswhich ANR, was criticism of targetmain out of which 2 were on Roma Roma on were 2 which of out
r implied PR involvement in the training of school school of training the in involvement PR implied
n policy in and . I will focus on the on focus will I
interest established The campaign The touched upon social policies and Roma youngsters Roma and policies social upon touched s considered is
In terms of secondary and tertiary and secondary of terms In 24 local
with Roma public policies and and policies public Roma with in
- making regarding Roma issues through through issues Roma regarding making ersnaie poe t so openness show to proved representatives a ad uoen ulc Polices” Public European and nal stimulating
partnerships. One of the partnerships is is partnerships the of One partnerships.
wrns aog oa bu the about Roma among awareness
or o e an be to was run was central lic policy centers, such as “ as such centers, policy lic atesi opportunities partnership activities of the of activities
transparency, accountability accountability transparency, and local bodies and for not for and bodies local and
s h ntoa campaign national the is influential during the summer the during youth
education. ANR education. arty of the Roma Roma the of arty
factor in Roma Roma in factor
education education responsible responsible Before . period Aven Aven
was was
. has has the the In
CEU eTD Collection structure next capacity organizations transnational or NGOs associations, as such have the Moreover aretake affecting decisionsRoma the andmaking capacity to started Roma that an legislative to regards with now educational system. recommendation Roma r program). action affirmative high the at studies represe ‘We The country. the around all from Roma 4000 around included and ecommendation letter ecommendation chapter give organization ttvs Te i o ti cmag i to is campaign this of aim The ntatives. As a conclusion on Roma political representation and on what has been discussed until until discussed been and has onwhat political representation conclusionAs aonRoma
s are either financing or implementing measures, policies or projects or policies measures, implementing or financing either are proper
.
you it
is speculated is will look at implementers and it will examine the role of this type of organized of type this of role the examine will it and implementers at look will
h rcmedto’ which recommendation’, the
decision
does not not does -
being a being school or university level on the places reserved for Roma students (the students Roma for reserved places the on level university or school
have s
for Roma freshmen, such a letter coming either from a Roma Roma a from either coming letter a such freshmen, Roma for - making power
that since the since that “corrido prerequisite imply
ic is inception its Since
ht h suet o erle i te sec the in enrolled got student the that d rs of power” of rs
policy initiatives at the national level, it can be claimed claimed be can it level, national the at initiatives policy
, this lead to the creation of Roma organized structures organized thecreation of Roma to lead , this in accessing the tuition free places. freeplaces. tuition the accessing in domestic s run is 25
but unfortunately but
Romanian Roma political structures do not not do structures political Roma Romanian encourage young Roma to pursue further further pursue to Roma young encourage
at the national level, through the county county the through level, national the at
the , structures which according to their their to according which structures , campaign n by the “others” the by n
they do not do they
other other gave more than 2000 2000 than more gave campaign Of course giving agiving courseOf nay r tertiary or ondary . (McGarry,2010 Int his regard his hold
is called is decision party
the the
or or ) .
CEU eTD Collection Financing Education Higher universities to according done is This Education. of Law National the programs) on based their order, Ministerial with places the distributing for responsible are (which MERYS sometimes high to access existence high in Roma high the at both free) (tuition Roma for places special the through program action affirmative the is research current this identified were education Roma the upon touching of way their Roma. for Agency National its Governmentand of implementation andvery implementers being policy between s t done have not might they things do to them enables it or done, have not would otherwise they things o t r
a p t 1. e a g r
t i i e In the previous previous the In The Ingram (1990)Accordingand toSchneider hn t oe to comes it When c s
i
. p provides
f h afraie action affirmative the of a otherwise o te ups o ti research this of purpose the For encourage ’ t Ministry of Educ Ministry of
e capacity,
o - - - col en a being school Chapter 3 r aes n beneficiaries and makers col r nvriis ny t only universities or school
c o h ttl ubr f tt subsidi state of number total the m ” h existing the
. to access the mainstream citizens. the for available Romanian places p
advice T l y h
chapter i s w
p h ipeetto o hge euain oiis n Ro in policies education higher of implementation the i .
- t - n
r h
school and school ation This e n pro and a The Role andImpact Implementersof
m r a r base
o i s t a sae ta te main the that stated was it p w oil nlso policies inclusion social e
order o and and . os o ma ta Rm fehe ae iie t get to limited are freshmen Roma that mean not does i l
m i oas u as acrig o h Ntoa Cucl for Council National the to according also but posals c o Rm acs t hge education. higher to access Roma for y p
its agencies l
i mn css the cases many in , i university ae rfrne to reference makes that e s
t 26
h mlmnes il e ecie a a as perceived be will implementers p hrough this program but they are free and and free are they but program this hrough a
t o Moreover , l i , i
c n public policy“ public
y
l
o
evel e pae alte i sae universities state in allotted places zed r h d a e s r , the annual 3000 places 3000 annual the ,
t the objectives of objectives the f o o p r
r for Roma are the Romanian Romanian the are Roma for eodr education secondary a b o n o v . The most relevant most The .
r i i d d attempts to get to attempts to people n responsible e e d
r i
a v ewe policy between d i d e u q a u l a
t t o
hese policies hese e r
nuly by annually,
s r body for the the for body However the the However e p s e
o allotted for for allotted c , u
i f BA, MA MA BA, policy r i - ‘ c c makers makers bridge e mania,
g s
r
o and and a
the
u do do n in in p d a ’
CEU eTD Collection the c it or when Association) Roma the Roma of Party Ardelian the of as representative (such county the in NGOs Roma few preferences. their upon theydecide orientation on to candidates level secondary and primary candidates. potential out reaching and toGeneral Directorate Minorities National of Languages the in Education for Direction General the with it shares Order Ministerial the once bureaucrats level inspectorates,pol (Lipsky, government the to by access provided ensure who servants public other many and lawyers’ judges, workers, social personnel, enforcement law other and officers public teachers, called are work” their have who and jobs, their of course the in citizens ‘delivered’ policy, students areto apply earlier asbothcategories. eligible Roma stated for the to abroad, living citizens level PhD and
2. state Roma
codn t Lpk ( Lipsky to According School The school inspectorate school The
subsidized p subsidized
and counseling sessions both with Roma parent Roma with both sessions counseling and b education
te government” the y the places reserved at the high the at reserved places the
s, inspector
and it it and itical parties, and university and parties, itical
category
ae, MERYS laces,
(Bistrita includes a variety of variety a includes street ates Moldavian citizens and Roma. Roma. and citizens Moldavian
for Higher . As . is
and therefore they are focusing on ensur on focusing are they therefore and - ee bureaucrats level
published in the Official Gazette, the Ministry of Education Education of Ministry the Gazette, Official the in published
- has in each county a Roma representative who is in is who representative Roma a county each in has a s h oa freshme Roma the as far Nasaud . 1980 Th The inspector claimed that claimed inspector The The
is ) Education. Education. provides also scholarships for the beneficiaries of this this of beneficiaries the for scholarships also provides ,
t school y ulc servants public County) p 1980 e
- f ulc evns “ servants public of personnel 27 school level. school freshmen from freshmen
).
inspectorates are responsible responsible are inspectorates
(Lipsky,
,
For the purpose of this study, school school study, this of purpose the For
s h sho isetrt is inspectorate school the u omes to Roma primary and secondary secondary and primary Roma to omes b
s areconsidered t ’ a n
It is worth mentioning that mentioning worth is It n
1980 According to According t cin “osiue h services the “constitute actions are concerned are i s and candidates, sessions candidates, and s a antem citizens, mainstream l they are in partnership with the the with partnership in are they
discretion in the in discretion ) .
This who interact directly with with directly interact who programs and services services and programs ing ing
to be part of the of part be to category the the the access of Roma Roma of access the
ihnti policy, this within school
mainly
e incorporates x
organizing organizing e Romanian Romanian
charge of of charge c inspector u
besides besides for the the for t county street public i where o n
of of -
CEU eTD Collection Roma a from letter recommendation a a including and institution, diploma, education higher a in enrollment for documents application t that After Roma. university calls. a such for available representatives o University f and Roma following: t firstly providers, theirfunding being universiti between also but Directorate the and universities between communication and cooperation data are collect County), Maramures education Roma on (inspector county the within Roma is that representatives Roma the to issue this address data minorities inspectors school Roma these that primar preschool, to access and language main their to due education higher the on done is little but education 3.
on the existent existent the on
urther T representative In this sense, the steps required for accessing a special place for Roma students are the the are students Roma for place special a accessing for required steps the sense, this In T Universities he next step is for the Roma candidates to candidates Roma the for is step next he e oe f the of role he es, Roma repr Roma es,
and well, as package is expected to be submitted isexpectedto package advice te North the f ed atare level thealso local policies but how implemented. request he rectors togetherhe with rectors Romarepresentatives from local
such as Hungarians or German or Hungarians as such
focus he he n counseling. and
number structures are supposed to meet and discuss Roma Roma discuss and meet to supposed are structures
to esentatives and Roma candidates, universities being the being universities candidates, Roma and esentatives university eea Directorate General
get , hc is which
in this stage of the process, there have never been Roma Roma been never have there process, the of stage this in
o enrolled in a specific field of studies on the the on studies of field specific a in enrolled f Roma students in high in students Roma f dependent
s rcsig the processing is are
meeting quality According to to According usually not Roma and they are responsible for other for responsible are they and Roma not usually
from the Directorate. the from y and secondary education. secondary and y
, even though the secretary gave several phone phone several gave secretary the though even , o Hge Education Higher for of education for Roma, education in Romani Romani in education Roma, for education of 28 ; the package ; the
aspect present s h dt poie by provided data the .
When asked whether they can provide provide can they whether asked When information - school , due to their weak their to due , organization
themselves to the secre the to themselves
should should , the inspector recommended to recommended inspector the ,
oiiin ad organizations and politicians
n then and is to ensure that there is is there that ensure to is contain
It is worth mentioning mentioning worth is It
fact youth in which should be be should which in
reserved
administration ersnaie of representatives
that explains how explains that all the
capacity
the field Baccalaureate main candidate
mandatory tary of the of tary of interest of places for for places
but also also but
service
and ’s
CEU eTD Collection implementers. serv as also through groups interest fightingcause for theRoma to also but studies further pursue necessary students interviewed made students, C enrolled already ‘We education higher in participation their inception Roma” of “voice the being as level Roma of structures organizing others drop their within students Roma of university number maximum the that claim North the f University minori Roma the to belongs candidate the that mentioned ounty). This campaign proved to have to proved campaign This ounty). 5. 4. give
cag in change a The main contribution brought by the Party of the Roma with Roma the of Party the by brought contribution main The McGarry to According Ro In the previous previous Inthe NGOs
claim that this is the claim is that this
you ma documents for the application package, this this package, application the for documents is around 10 per year and only few of t of few only and year per 10 around is - out after the first yearfirst theout after of studies. ice providers providers ice
PoliticalParties the due tothei n NCFs eiw f oa dcto Iiitvs n eta ad South and Central in Initiatives Education Roma of Review UNICEF’s In
n E institutions HE in recommendation
th ) Bsds h main the Besides . e chapter
lobby l i
f c e o
(Par and m of
w
m and advocacy, policy advocacy, and it it
representation” a
i ty ofthety representative, Roma Bistrita Roma y was stated was t hs s h cs we they when case the is this (2010 e
is reflected is through which theywhich through m , ’ which ’
acknowledge Roma people people Roma n
t
(P , oa poli Roma ), to y great o
ry f h Rm rpeettv, Bistrita representative, Roma the of arty go improving the u
t that NGOs can can NGOs that h is done is al
29
firstly through the nat the through firstly e hog tee opport these through ; of outreaching freshmen and giving them the the them giving and freshmen outreaching of
f
moreover they moreover f
e their Roma identity and become activists, activists, become and identity Roma their c got hem graduate from the programs while programs the from graduate hem t
-
with the help of Roma students who students Roma of help the with makers when their their when makers and ia pris r “ are parties tical
t show r
u s campaign s a i t t
u
l take in the the in o
a the t t
i ty. o o
ir gratitude towards gratitude those who ir f are recognized are n different positions: part of the of part positions: different r seen are
y of R The representatives of the the of representatives The
o stimulates Roma Roma stimulates oma u Roma. Roma. unities ional campaigns such as as such campaigns ional n g - Nasaud
capacity supp political parties since since parties political regard h most the
as complementary complementary as
( orters, especially especially orters, says one of the the of one says
County) at t at to access and and access to
allows it but but it allows
he national he l e youth - g Nasaud i . t i
m the the are
a to to t e -
CEU eTD Collection the of one education, of terms In areas. different in trainings and services social provides the this, Besides education. to access youth Roma increasing through conditions communities, disadvantaged of 5 which of (out Roma young 30 of up representatives, university ‘disenfranchised’ the of members the whether graduates, school secondary indicators action accept not need strategies claimed such topics Europe” Central in minorities actors startin to comes it when state than problems local ‘solve to implementing in policies in public ‘watchdog’ a as role its services, provide to government the with along had the Europ Eastern
are Stroschein et. Ivan n hs research this In
greatest implementation process. role inthe ht hn t oe t NO srtge fr oa tee are these Roma, for strategies NGOs to comes it when that
whivh aim to “ to aim whivh or they become integratedor force they become inthework sd for used education s grants, as g withMERYS e (2010) it is proved that NGOs, that proved is it (2010) e
al from Maramures from second . (2010) . ’s educational s educational educational
(2002) vlaig hs srtge cn e elce truh th through reflected be can strategies these evaluating , contacts advocacy
- a hand pass the idea that disenfranchised minorities, particularly minorities, disenfranchised that idea the pass , state that throughout Romania throughout that state , special , n his in local authorities, schools, other NGOs, but also communities. other communities. local NGOs, authorities,schools, butalso
status argues that NGOs that argues services, Romanian NGOs are in partnership with a with partnership in are NGOs Romanian services, ua ihs rsac results research rights, human , ector
especially County.
and other areas of community building for Roma. Roma. for building community of areas other and attention public
study within their own country” own their within being - 10
This NGO is a Roma grassroots Roma a is NGO This bodies’. Moreover, according to Ivan et. Ivan to according Moreover, bodies’.
are
n “ on of oa omnte, n ipoig their improving and communities, Roma il e given be will 30 great active members) interested in the development the in interested members) active
Gs taeis o Hnain n Ro and Hungarian for Strategies NGOs local authorities local are engaged are
importance, NGOs being more motivated motivated more being NGOs importance,
( Stroschein , the civil society sector sector society civil the ,
o o to
. The most most The . in distributing information on information distributing in ne n o on so and
, 2002). and of the interviewed NGOs NGOs interviewed the of
e d mainly u
c
. organization, made made organization, a common In this this In t i o n
a status e number of of number e group
l o
is involved, is r institutions institutions the Roma, Roma, the study g al
a range fields of of fields . (2010) (2010) . n -
raising raising
i z attend living living
a it The The t i ma
o of of is n
CEU eTD Collection contributed intheir access themost education. higher to education. organ university Roma the of Party the campaign,annual semester) of University students during their studies socio better universities in county, another enrolled. high 40 only year academic this students, hig 200 around were there year academic recently down went level tertiary and secondary at education for demand the that said was it universities, and school th says “ candidates, uses high youngparents among also promoting but promising Roma thenon promote to is priorities
- school students about the about students school c ization o e When it comes to higher education, the role of the organization is to inform Roma Roma inform to is organization the of role the education, higher to comes it When The m
o
, with the school inspectorate but she also she but inspectorate school the with , m It was was It
r g F u level. a urthermore
- NGO NGO n sometimes Roma sometimes n cnmc status economic as being one of the most most the of one being as
i i t Baia Mare (even an elective course on Romani language was held for one one for held was language Romani on course elective an (even Mare Baia z y a
t lo ttd ht hr ae oa tdns who students Roma are there that stated also etns sca mda ad ot meig o nom and inform to meeting youth and media, social meetings, i mor oh h P rpeettv ad h sho isetr e the see inspector school the and representative PR the Both o representativ n ’ s eover
is striving to striving is representative. all theinterviewed fromall students
education
u t the to due she and .
y studying
e claimed that it has very good collaboration with North North with collaboration good very has it that claimed e claimed that she thinks that at the national levels the levelsnational the at that thinks she that claimed h ognzto provides organization The a have to assumed being students these prefer, they which o also volunteering opportunities within thealsoopportunities organization. within volunteering u t
h mn Rm cmuiis inc communities, Roma among
keep is looking for me, sin me, for looking is In terms of cu of terms In
high opportunities at the university l university the at opportunities important
h the affirmative action program at high at program action affirmative the - school Roma students, and around 10 around and students, Roma school -
school students and 7 7 and students school 31 oet lvl mn Roma among level poverty
actors in Roma students access to higher higher to access students Roma in actors
praised the PR the praised rrent
the situation ce I am living in the community” the in living am I ce
c o support u n t - choose y Roma community.Roma
of Roma students in high in students Roma of from the the from said that said luding work with Roma Roma with work luding univer counseling evel. In this In evel.
to go and study in in study and go to i i 2011 in if ; sity
the Roma NGOs the Roma NGOs count a d
v tdns got students i - s school and and school y e for Roma Roma for university
r and their their and leader of of leader potential potential e
s p Roma Roma -
e 2012 c t
it -
CEU eTD Collection 2011.pdf at: More thefor studies. in considera taking without 1 (REF) of and continuity sch these Usually level. PhD for scholarships 2010 in objectives, main their main the is Roma for Agency system education higher the in Roma targeting measures also include compe receive have schola own their up comin students for scholarships based merit scholarships, based performance as such students students’ studies these from students on effects its and aid financial existing the to relation analyzed
West University of Timisoara provides scholarships to its full its to scholarships provides ofTimisoara University West Roma students’ Roma needs. 6.
wea a tition among fortition getting students one.
emerged
As said in the previous chapter, the Romanian social inclusion policies policies inclusion social Romanian the chapter, previous the in said As a is there Romania in Currently The Scholarship Within the Decade of Roma Inclusion (2005 Inclusion Roma of Decade the Within
the
enrollment decisions. in relation to the social and economic factors (Stafford et al., 1884) but also in in also but 1884) al., et (Stafford factors economic and social the to relation in
k side side k topic confirmation
agree that financial aid packages aid financial that agree iavnae background disadvantaged are not replicated not are s n of one as
of of and rship schemes rship http://www.uvt.ro/upload/pdf/regulament providers widening participation and social inclusion in higher education education higher in inclusion social and participation widening
tion whether the students are studying on state subsidized places or theypaying or are places subsidized studyingstate on are students whether the tion
that is the fact that that fact the is that
f nomn wti a nvriy ad t novs a involves it and university, a within enrolment of h largest the
a
ANR g from rural areas and so on. Additionally on. so and areas rural from g c t
o at the BA level since, this would this since, level BA the at 1 r .
when it c it when
Besides their positive impact positive their Besides provided 10 provided foundation
variety Jh ad ol, 1989 Noell, and (John
these offers are coming only after the students students the after only coming are offers these ome 32 , of whatever type, have type, whatever of ,
s
lrhp ae project are olarships s of scholarships available for the enrolled enrolled the for available scholarships of
okn o Rm Education. Roma on working c to - - h time students (BA, MA) based on students GPA, studentsGPA, on based MA) (BA, students time 2015) o the - l acordare a r
s i h m h acs t higher to access the framework i p p s l a e
- per year per m burselor , e
Hne, 1983 Hansen, ;
n study, social scholarships, scholarships, social study, these contribute t a t . As noted the noted As . i
- o Roma Education Fund Education Roma 2011 -
n for MA level and 30 30 and level MA for based and have no no have and based a positive impact on impact positive a scholarship . I . universities can set can universities - n order to achieve achieve to order n 2012
to the to
- education of of education 06
. ). quite - One of its its of One 12 and plans plans and
fulfilling fulfilling has been been has National schemes ot of Most -
high -
CEU eTD Collection criteria, and stages deadlines. T scene. education fr representative claim representatives political Roma and inspectorates school the both level university the at students Roma for students. Roma 13.000 of out % 24.3 in body student university Romani estimated the of quarter a nearly ‘reached scholarships inRomania: the yearsand academic four last the in scholarships education higher REF the Thecountries demand scholarships. following table for thehighest shows with case Program ScholarshipHealth Program Humanities and main prepared to ‘contribute to is emergence SP the of goal main the 2012, Report Annual REF to According and education higher to access lar RMUSP Table Table et rgas s h Shlrhp Program Scholarship the is programs gest
are scholarship schemes ( schemes scholarship 1 REF operates in 16 countries countries 16 in operates REF n h 21 Annual 2012 the In : Ano
RMUSP and RISP. According to to According RISP. and RMUSP
to
scholarships Number of awarded Number of applications f ciia ms o itleta Rm wt Hge euain ere who degrees education Higher with Roma intellectual of mass critical a of become verview of Roma Education Fund Roma Roma Fund Education Roma of verview Romania om Maramures County acknowled County Maramures om ruh h NGO the hrough
agents for change intheir ed
- ht hy o o ko aot REF about know not do they that
LHP, Roma Memorial University Scholarship Program Scholarship University Memorial Roma -
eot Digest Report RHSP), currently the two main two the currently RHSP), hc ofr shlrhp fr etay ee Rm students Roma level tertiary for scholarships offers which oa nentoa Shlrhp Program Scholarship International Roma
,
When asked ab asked When and h students the 268 497 2010
it has a Romanian office. Romanian a has it the -
- 33 lsn te a, E cam ta is P has SP its that claims REF Gap, the Closing respective
2011
M (SP) d
a emorial emorial t a
ging are , provided by REF, Romania REF, by provided through which REF pledged to expand expand to pledged REF which through out the available financing opportunities opportunities financing available the out en ifre aot h application the about informed being
U
REF importance in th in importance REF communities andcommunities countries’. niv ersity ersity 320 536 2011 important
S - cholarship cholarship ’s 2012
Even though REF ha REF though Even wo
ones in the Roman the in ones rk, only the the only rk,
number of awarded awarded of number - P
rogram IP and RISP -
e Roma higher Roma e Romania’ that that Romania’ RMUSP, RMUSP,
322 536 2012 is one of the the of one is demand 2010
-
2013 - Roma Roma 1013 NGO NGO Law Law
s 4 s ian ian the are for for
. . CEU eTD Collection and representatives teachers followed NGOs, from it about program action affirmative the about knew they did how asked universities. in Roma for places reserved the on studying are students surveyed the only and education” they th states, get the census studen Roma of number the Romania actors thi implementers, education higher in participation to and effective are assess their achieved final the in and problems groups or e
r Romanian educated even th even educated e will s
and will conclude with the students’ and conclude will
p we to what what to codn to According The T data o ), he n
37
a s s 1 from 21% .
i u s % of them graduated them of % , circularity surveyed students surveyed b s
p t i u p h l m i H o e initial t extent Chapter 4 y r r e E e t
s chapter focuses on students’ assessment of both mentioned categories of of categories mentioned both of assessment students’ on focuses chapter s
for f that s o oa onses atcpto i post in participation youngsters Roma y r identify
s e ough they live in deep poverty (75% of the Roma). the of (75% poverty deep in live they ough
h 21 cnu rsls n a and results census 2011 the working on increasing Roma students level of of level students Roma increasing on working friends t not or goals
the
universities. those Roma those e there is a rise a thereis of the policy cycle implies th implies cycle policy the of m . Romani CRIS Romani . exist
- 1% rm eaie ad h rs through rest the and relatives from 14% , ht the what
The Role andI are coming from 22 from coming are ent 21% from high from 21% ,
the
social inclusion higher education policies targeting Roma Roma targeting policies education higher inclusion social “ Jn & (Jann who have graduated from college or university ar university or college from graduated have who are from n hs context this In rest stage ts pursuing HE doubled in comparison with the 2002 the with comparison in doubled HE pursuing ts positive .
S
fe aayig oh h policy the both analyzing After are 7% s
u claims that this is a sign that Roma are Roma that sign a is this that claims hs policies these r Weigrich v 34 still to 14% to e
- y
factors that are influencing Romanian Roma Roma Romanian influencing are that factors schools schools mpact of s
students. m
c
a ounties at policies policies at r i
of the the of 2007) , e n c
e cannot we findings. e ( including me including n t r evaluated are -
One of the findin the of One , most of them are them of most , eodr e secondary Policy Targets Romani Romani Roma . h am f hs eerh s to is research this of aim The are made are
23
p o % responded they knew knew they responded % education CRISS claim p diator, headmaster and and headmaster diator, u ducation and tertiary tertiary and ducation
l
a
oil media social to to t i
o As -
see solve n gs is that is gs makers and the the and makers that press press
participating
females Angéla
and whether they they whether
individuals individuals h Roma the release willing therefore e taking e , Roma Roma , 60
Kóczé (57%) When % of % in ,
to to in in ,
CEU eTD Collection making comes whenit power assess Moreover own q i parties political Roma and students’ case their in applied not did question this that answered students surveyed the of 40% universities, to admission previous academic was achievement on studying are students the mos university responses: financing a of existence 22%, frequent howeverat the high the not is campaigns not are campaigns representatives’ m u e p s a
t c c i o ed t a study
n p hn se aot h support the about asked When students surveyed 100 the of Out I t ruh b tee varying these by brought n
a
did not did not d scholarship s secondarily as
c
acces . c
e
they ad they i o 10% stated that for them this was the most important most the was this them for that stated 10% t c Moreover
y n e scholarship
s c skills, knowle skills, i l s to universities, in most of the cases. As cases. the of most in universities, to s v u e applied s
i mit that there were there that mit factor, followed b factor, o - n . school school
,
As
adequate provider provider students personal students’ , .
opportunity expected
ic suet se hmevs s h oe wo ae h decision the have who ones the as themselves see students since the reserved the being rest the and 11%, is concerned is level dge or motivation contributed to contributed motivation or dge
to
p one or that those students simply do not enroll in universities; in enroll not do simply students those that or one s REF is e
their own choices. thesemight campaignseffective. bemore r , c
there was little little was there e c effective y their high
i o important during the studies pre studies the during v
n also other “external” other also e
places for Roma, only 3 only Roma, for places s
ih 5, olwd by followed 65%, with , students answers students ,
that i
d of the school inspectorate in their enrollment and and enrollment their in inspectorate school the of m e r o
a those factors that factors those
t 85% b i but 35 v l
in their in y a -
school teachers and friends. teachersfriends. andschool
t
i it might be ass be might it n ol i aon 2% f h cases the of 20% around in only and o impact were n
merit and their relatives support proved to be be to proved support relatives their and
a d scholarship
m from - far as the as far sented a great a sented varied ae scholarship based i
s factors
s their access to higher education. higher to access their a i o
r the school inspectorate school the e 6% stated that their GPA and GPA their that stated 6% n
umed that the target of these these of target the that umed university , the level of importance and importance of level the , d t o i r
element but
e
u s c ben n u t i p l
v y their contribution their p e
fcais Te most The eficiaries. variance o c r
r s o
t
i social n
t n hi ces to access their in Since from universities from y c
. e recipients.
r n e
in students’ students’ in d scholarship most
with their their with side
of the of the The The was
the on -
CEU eTD Collection main the social policies and inclusion framewo and implemented. be to assigned measures specific are there turn their international the specifically at which Governments, National the are policies these level policy in the Romanian HE inclusion actors the of each how of terms in education, higher to access students’ Roma on targets) policy and and effects evaluates the section chapters’ this analysis, theprevious Based on education. access higher to stage implementation the including process, making actors’ the tracking on focused thesis this system, education Romanian higher education system. a aimed it but success. and participation access, of social throughthe education higher to accessof issue addressingthe at aimed national
and positive - makers. assess Whe the identifying After This T aking in aking
policies. it includes policies fo policies includes it contribution n it comes to assess to comes it n
t policy makers is of is makers policy
h
ah te bt lo o each how also but other each e
atr ifunig oain oa atcpto i hge education higher in participation Roma Romanian influencing factors ecmasn te e plc iiitvs agtn Rm icuin n the in inclusion Roma targeting initiatives policy few the encompassing t In the Romanian case Romanian the In s i to s
a age ta Roma that argued has consideration that this thesis aims at answering the question: the answering at aims thesis this that consideration system
of the three main three the of
first there should be a clear distinction between different of between levels clear distinction a first be should there policy existent r each r ing Chapter 5 high
the role and impact of policy of impact and role the
through national policies and a and policies national through As noted As
importance
European Higher Education Area. Education Higher European the “supranational” policy “supranational” the
social inclusion policies in the Romanian higher higher Romanian the in policies inclusion social rks.
s Europe is categories of actors (policy actors of categories
– , 36 actor
this research did not focus on a specific policy specific a on focus not did research this C
,
onclusion since they are establishing the legitimacy of of legitimacy establishingthe are they since
see , ’s and their contribution to contribution their and
most disadvantaged group and it it and group disadvantaged most tef n h Rmna Rm social Roma Romanian the in itself
The main role of both supranational both of role main The
role - - makers and Roma inclusion inclusion Roma and makers makers are makers
ccording to these policies these to ccording and and - makers, implementers implementers makers, try impact The implementers of of implementers The
to
inclusion at the at
Roma students Roma
address
in the policy policy the in What are the the are What
European European
t ? h more more , e
o has t he r y
CEU eTD Collection moral to subordinates induces strategies approach MERYS legitimacy impact greatest the has Romania in ran education. higher in participation A Average score providers Scholarship Universities NGOs Roma Party ofthe Inspectorates School MERYS score each for actor. MERYS data no applicable, 3 influential, from scale focus will section next Implementers i cn e concluded be can it s Impact of Role and Role and
value Table
(tf slr ado fnnig dctoa isiuin) r other or institutions) educational financing and/or salary (staff ’
col inspectorate school do Big top a Being .
t 5 to 1
of inclusion. -
comply 2
significantly
put 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 , indicating the the indicating ,
together . MERYS
h table The n mlmnig h policy, the implementing in on the implementers implementers the on -
down policy, this program aims to ensure that subordinates within within subordinates that ensure to aims program this policy, down MERYS
nleta, 4 influential, the
assessment 2.8 1 2 3 5 3 3 Table 2: Table
assessment il e read be will Inspectorates
It rvd o ae h highest the have to proved comply degree is believed is
The Role and Impact of Implementer of Impact and Role The School
-
) i Y), n oa freshmen Roma on
of of
ey nleta, 5 influential, very and implement the policy, besides the ethical or or ethical the besides policy, the implement and and and
37
influence hori te last the n
conclusion 3 3 2 2.3 2 2 2
that that it will will it
Roma of the otly ( zontally Party
moreover the
use s follows: as annually 5 4 4 4.3 5 4 4 row
NGOs of the previous chapters’ analysis. analysis. chapters’ previous the of as e.g.
-
the
system en represented being and ot influential most
influence MERYS
existent affirmative ac affirmative
3 NA 5 5 5 5 this is mainly due to its its to due mainly is this 1 s
Universities
of –
e 4.6
ut ifunil 2 influential, quite
valuation self in Roma students’ students’ Roma in ‘ carrots and sticks sticks and carrots
- assessment X, X, assessment
game n NA and tion program program tion
the average average the
a grading grading a 4 4 4 4.3 5 4 5
Scholarship theory
- providers
not -
CEU eTD Collection funds f more makers for tostrive Roma and work. their in improvements score yearacademic are university) (REF, awards scholarships the though even that is noticing worth is What status. a from providers scholarships the as a is there when cases be main the gain, any Roma on working letters. recommendation including package, opportunities. the share and families their and candidates potential with of position, and facili run can they students Roma of number e students of number being funding their policies, admission own their up set National2011, inRomaniauniversitiesLaw are Education
known outreach campaigns and campaigns outreach ,
hs os o ma te are they mean not does this h rl ad mat f Gs and NGOs of impact and role The Another Even though Even low ties.
youth after the academic yearstarte academic the after
very influential very socio
if they know thereif they know isafinancingopportunity. Moreover ’s important
- education, and higher education higher and education, needs to the political the to needs cnmc tts Te iaca package financial The status. economic interest Roma Roma rle. oevr uieste hv the have universities Moreover, nrolled. project ,
NGOs
atr s the is factor , political being for the Roma Roma the for being
As far as the former the as far As since the former former the since promote are concerned are
behind but this might be considered as an ‘externality’. an as considered be might this but behind or Roma students Romastudents or provide
admit representatives and school and representatives insignificant
their departments, scholarship opportunities, discounts opportunities, scholarship departments, their d party
role and impact of universities. According to the the to According universities. of impact and role
Roma students Roma on the reserved places for Roma. Universities can can Universities Roma. for places reserved the on tdn spot hl cmiig the compiling while support student
, it it , The added The 38 scholarship
have center and center
is k is community is concerned is
which can be used ascan used which be but
nown the is that in this case NGOs case this in that is
i role t might be a sign that there can be be can there that sign a be might t dependent value
aremotivated highly
address providers that most of the Roma are coming are Roma the of most that autonomous
of working with the community the with working of in general, however general, in
, is to aims available of NGOs getting involved and and involved getting NGOs of
it should report Roma realities Roma report should it inspectorate receive inspectorate
them, pushing the decision the pushing them, power
in most of the cases on the the on cases the of most in prove
complement and and
financial study to decide upon the the upon decide to
to therefore
do not do to hold n f and ,
start
packages there might might there application
d the same same the
students’ inancing inancing
they can they can
seek the firstthe a lower lower a
As far far As
. for for A - ,
CEU eTD Collection andare tools mechanism existing thepolicy implemented and goalsachieved. are studies education higher pursuing in otherwise”. done have thi actors. interested all of responsibility and commitment interaction, the requires which area complex capacityand apply knowledge outreaching to inhigh thestrategy for Roma plus potential a be might NGOs and universities with collaboration better ngs they otherwise would not have done, or it enables them to do things they might not might they things do to them enables it or done, have not would otherwise they ngs participatio Roma As Schneider and Ingram (1990) argue “public policy attempts to get people to do do to people get to attempts policy “public argue (1990) Ingram and Schneider As This paper proved that proved paper This n in higher education is a is education higher in n
. It is therefore actors’ responsibility responsibility actors’ therefore is It . 39 Roma students have the motivation and interest and motivation the have students Roma
n
issue of social inclusion, moreover it s a a s it moreover inclusion, social of issue ,
since they have they since - schools. to ensure that the that ensure to
the the CEU eTD Collection Bibliography Gidley, M. J. Gidley, J. Furlong, A. Florea, S Fleck, 2008. C. and Rughinis, G. Eurydice. onEducation data Available 2012.Key inEurope. at: European Union.2004 EUMAP. 2007 oftheCouncil European conclusionsUnion. 2013.Council onthe social of dimension Collier, D.2011. Burtea, V. 2001. Bleahu,Frunzaru, G.2005. A. and Bibbings,L., 2006. S. Basit, 2012. T.,and S. Tomlinson, L.,Archer, and M.Hutchings. Education Policy, Higher by and Education Informed Practice Social Inclusion Theory ofUniversity Journal Research Education.McGraw inHigher Higher E Higher Education: NotesfromaRomanian/United States Comparative Analysis. present df http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/education/Eurydice/documents/key_data_series/134EN.p report_2003_en.pdf http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/social_inclusion/docs/final_joint_inclusion_ EmploymentAffairs. andSocial at: Available Serbia. df http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/educ/137144.p higher ateducation. Available 830. europeana? 29 http://www.romanicriss.org/PDF/participare%20politica%20romi.pdf and Comparative Perspectives and Society,Vol. 33,No.1, Exclusion andInclusion, Hutchingsand A.Ross(eds .
, andE., M.2009. Horvath,,
- (Accessed on29 (Accessed on29 M., 8 ,
-
and Cartmel, F.and 2009. Cartmel, 2013) ,
et.al. (2010). et.al. -
. Vol.1 and 2,Budapest:Institute. Open Society day Romanian society Equal Access EducationRoma. for to Bul ducation inEurope,ducation Vol.34.Nos.3 Puncte dePuncte vedere: Rromii Understanding Process Tracing .
2009 Availableat: Widening andHigher Education Participation . Joint Report onSocial Inclusion Joint . . 23, (123 23, (123 Social inclusion: Context,Social inclusion: theory and practice. - -
08 08 From Access to Success: AnIntegrated From Access toQuality Success: Approach to (Accessed on29 (Accessed - Community Engagement - - 2003. 2013) 2013) pp. 119 www.romathan.ro Come closer. Inclusion – Social Inclusion andHigher Education Political participation ofRoma participation Political Higher Education andSocialJustice Higher Education . Debating affirmative action: Conceptual, Contextual ),
. . 147). The “value” of higher education. The “value”
: The Promise andChallengeAccess ofIncreasing to . Bucharest: Human Dynamics.. Bucharest:Human Higher Education and SociHigher Education , pp.74 – 136. London:136. RoutledgeFalmer.
- o noua “minoritate nationala” “minoritate sauoetnieo noua - 40 08 - 91.
- - Hill. 2013) . Political Science. Political & 823 44:4, Politics
- (Accessed on29 (Accessed 4.
. , Vol. 5,No.1,pp.6 , Vol.
. Directorate for General
and exclusion ofRomain garia, Hungary,garia, Romania,
al Class: Issues of al Class: . Available at: - . The Journal of L . The of Journal
8 -
2013) . The Societyfor. The
The Austra The InL.Archer, M.
. Chicago Press. - 36. . Higher Higher .
(Accessed on (Accessed
lasian aw aw -
CEU eTD Collection
Rakovic, S.2009. Preece Party at: Available Roma. ofthe Council National National Available Agencyfor at: Roma. Murray, 2009. J. M McCowan, T.2007. Littig,B. 2009. Lipsk Kóczé A. andKing, Verba, 1994. O., S. G.R.,Keohane, E.P. 1989. andNoellSt., John, J., and Wegrich, W. Jann, 2007. K. Ivan,et.al. C. 2010. H Haug, 2010 P. L.Hansen, W. 1983. Gruber, G. 2012. orvath, A. cGarry, A.2010 y, M.1980. , J Rights, SocialInclusRights, Publicand Tertiary Education inSerbia Limited.Publishing Available onlineat: 2013) them? Community Minority higher education inBrazil PalgraveHoundmills: pp.98 Macmillan, Bogner,Littig,Alexander, Beate and Wolf Menz, Services Inference inQualitativeResearch Enrollment Education: Special An Progress Consideration Analysisof with ofMinority Methods Millerand Mara Sidney, Education SupportProgram. Open Society Foundations. involvement ofeducation the delivery in Universitatis Babes ofDisabilityJournal Research, pp.199 12(33), http://www.jstor.org/stable/3700892 (1983), pp. 84 HigherAcademy in Crisis The Education ofPolitical Science.Vol.35,No.2. (Acce online at: .
Background Research for Higher Education ofRoma Research Backgroundfor Higher Education 1999. 2007. . ssed on29
Australian ofEducation,3,pp. Journal Vol.53,No. .
. New York: Russell Sage Russell Foundation. York: . New Interviewing the Elite Interviewing , CRC Press. , CRC Approaches to Empirical Research toEmpirical onInclusiveApproaches Education Combating soc Combating
The wider highereducation:What socialbenefits know of about dowe
http://www.educazionedemocratica.org/pdf/ED_4_2012_90 Education and social inclusion of Roma minority inRomania ofRomaminority andsocialinclusion Education Street for Higher . AffirmativeAnswer Action toRomaInclusion asaPolicy inSecondary Affirmative Action atBabes Affirmative . ResearchHigher Education,Vol.30,No.6,pp.56 in WhoSp The rise of service delivery third sector in Europe: The third sectorrise ofservice third sector Europe: The in delivery third Expansion without equity: An current without analysisof policyExpansion onaccess to Impact of StudentFinancialAidonAccessImpact of - 96. Published by: Science.96. Published Political Academy of The Stable UR - - Level theIndividual of Public Dilemmas in Bureaucracy: 08 - -
eaks Roma? representation for Political atransnational of Bolyai. Cluj http://www.cnfis.ro/?page_id=687 ion and Social Cohesion in theion andSocialCohesion in theEU Balkans Roadto on its 2013) . New York and London, Continuum. YorkLondon,. New and Continuum.
Education Financing. Education Financing. ial exclusionial inuniversity adulteducation Handbook Policy ofPublic Analysis:Theory, Politic Theories ofthe Policy Cycle http://www.partidaromilor.ro/ . Higher 53,pp.579 Education,Vol. . The Effects Student of AidonAccess Financial Higher to
- Interviewing Experts:Interviewing Is adifference? there - Napoca. . Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University N.J.: . Princeton, Press http://www.anr.gov.ro/
(Accessed 29 on 41 -
Designing Social Inquiry: ScientificDesigning Bolyai University Bolyai al services for Romaal services for children in Romania. . In. -
113. Public Policies inHigher Policies Public Education. Integrating Differences:Integrating Human
- 209. 209. gang(eds)
. InFrank Fischer,. Gerald J - 08
(Accessed 29 on . (Unpublished
. Proceedings ofthe (Accessed on29 -
. Sociologia. Studia Studia . Sociologia. 2013) (Accessed on29 230
Interviewing experts - - 244. . 598.
3 . - 581. A . Scandinavian.
shgate -
98.pdf paper).
. Available - 08 - 08 - . In. - 08 2013) - s and 2013) - .
L:
.
.
CEU eTD Collection
Watson, D. 2006. Watson, UNICEF. 2010 UNDP. Education 2012.Roma inComparative Perspective. at: Available Tonks, D.and Farr, M.2003. 2009.Surdu, M.andJ. Szira, S Stroschein, 2002. S. Stafford et.al. 1984. IngramSchneider A.and H.1990. Sarau, G. I. Rostas, LawRomanian of Education onlineat: National 2011.Available CRISS.Romani Release 2013. Press at: Census.Available on2011National online EducationRoma Fund. at: Available Randall B. Ripleyand GraceFranklin.1987. A. urdu, L.urdu, and
Available at: InstituteDiscussion paper HEFCE by for ofEducation, http://www.unicef.org/ceecis/ROMA_PAPER_FINAL_LAST.pdf Europe 2013) http://issuu.com/undp_in_europe_cis/docs/education_web InternationalEducational Vol.17No.1,pp.26 of Management, Journal Fund. High schools, vocational schoolsanduniversities Romania. Vol.13, No.1,pp.1 Europe ofH Journal Vol.52.No.2,pp.Politics, 510 f http://www.oportunitatiegale.ro/pdf_files/Istoricul_invatamantului_pentru_ andEasternEurope Central (Accessed on29 http://keszei.chem.elte.hu/Bologna/Romania_Law_of_National_Education.pdf ori trei http://www.albaiulianul.ro/eveniment/item/1995 08 (4thPolicy ed.) pp.181 Ed. byLozanoska Euro SlavcoSkopje: Jana Dimitrov. and
(Accessed 29 Istoricul Invatamantului pentruRomi Istoricul Invatamantului ( - - ed - 2013) mai ori )
.
. 2012. Surdu, - - . Availableat: International ofVoluntary. Voluntas: Journal andOrganizations, Nonprofit - 199. mai . Review of RomaEducation andSouth Initiatives in Central . Review mult.html .
Open Society Institute. NewInstitute. Open York. Society How to participation think aboutwidening UKhigher in education -
saraci igher Vol.55,No.5,pp.590 Education. Social NGOs Strategies for Hungarian and Roma minorities in Central NGOs forHungarianandRomaminoritiesinCentral Strategies
http://www.trlp.org M. 2006 M. Ten Years After After Years Ten - . Chicag 08 - 08
- - (Accessed on29 2013). decat
- - Factors Higher Affecting in Education Participation 2013) 26. Analysis ofthe impact theaffirmative Roma of action for in . Broadening the agenda. The Status of Romani Women. Broadening the agenda.Romani of The Status in Widening higher inUK participation access education. and o: The Dorseyo: Press.
- restul
. Behavioral Assumptions ofPolicy Tools Behavioral Assumptions
. REF &Budape. REF Press, CEU http://www.romaeducationfund.hu/ - - -
populatiei A History of in RomaSchool Desegregation 529.
(Accessed on29 (Accessed - 08
42 - 2013)
. Available onlineat: Congress, the Bureaucracy, andPublicCongress, the Bureaucracy, - parintii
.
- recensamant - . Budapest - romi 08 - - 608. 2013) -
University of London. University of si st andYork. New st - (Accessed on29 au
- Balkan Institute,Balkan . : Roma Education Education : Roma
- educat - 2011
(Accessed on29
. The of Journal - - - desi copiii Eastern - . The – sunt
- 36
- romi.pd 08 de . - . - de
-
2 - - -