A few days ago the Web site of the Ostriv Center for Research on the Social Prospects of the Donbas (http://ostro.org) posted an article entitled “The Sources of Patriotism: What Kind of History Are Children Being Taught in Donbas Schools?” The article presents the transcript of a history lesson in a school in Druzhkivka, Donetsk oblast or, to be more exact, a dialogue between a schoolboy and a female teacher on the role of the UPA in World War II. Too lazy to write notes, the pupil decided to record the dialogue on his cell phone. When this recording got into the hands of the Ostriv webmasters, it became a matter of public knowledge.
“The UPA are Hitler’s henchmen who wanted to destroy your great-grandfathers and great-grandmothers, shoot them, and burn them in a crematorium. And now a certain Hans would be living on this territory, and you would be growing potatoes and radishes and sending them to Germany!” These were the arguments the teacher used in the debate with her pupil.
The teacher’s emotional speech shows that she firmly believes in what she is saying and nobody can possibly convince her otherwise. “Bandera fled together with Hitler, he knew he would be killed as a traitor and an advisor or, to be more exact, an ally of Hitler. But they said to him, ‘Get away, you dog, you betrayed your own people and you will betray us.’ And they wasted Bandera, all right!” These words are not the expression of someone’s viewpoint. It is an unfounded fantasy and a glaring distortion of facts.
The question is whether an individual with a totally unprofessional approach has the right to teach and rear children. Harping on the stereotypes of a certain part of the population, this teacher is shaping the outlook of the younger generation. The pupils are reading one thing in textbooks, hearing something else from their teachers, and seeing something else on television. The twisted facts of history, which everybody uses for their own interests, are causing Ukrainians to form a certain attitude to the history of their own state.
This incident raises a number of problems that the Ukrainian system of education is facing today. First of all, there is the question of reconsidering the essence of the subject by teachers themselves because a history lesson is, above all, a way of shaping schoolchildren’s civic positions. A teacher’s professionalism means the ability to rise above his or her own subjective attitudes, convictions, and interests. To make matters worse, most teachers are not even aware of the need for professional upgrading, often forgetting that they are intermediaries between the state and the younger generation of Ukrainians.
Stanislav FEDORCHUK, political scientist, Donetsk:
“The above-mentioned fragment of a high school lesson once again reveals the problem of the entire humanities sphere of education in today’s Ukraine. Totalitarian regimes, to which the Soviet system undoubtedly belongs, committed violence against their citizens not only by means of punitive bodies but also by way of systematic suggestion in the system of secondary and higher education. The consequences of this entirely antihuman approach to education will continue to haunt society because awareness of the fact that the history of Ukraine is no longer part of the history of the USSR is an important social and state-building factor. In our opinion, the retraining system is unable to uproot anti-Ukrainian and anti-scholarly staff from the educational sector. Therefore, such cases may continue and be reflected in the public’s thinking. The main thing is that children taught by such ‘teachers’ will be the victims.”
Artem ROMANOV, 11th-grade pupil at School No. 10, Kramatorsk:
“In general, I am satisfied with the quality of history teaching. Naturally, I know about various events in the history of Ukraine not only from the school curriculum but also from my parents and grandparents. I think that is also important.
“The OUN and UPA question was never particularly raised during our history lessons. To be more exact, these topics were there, but nobody focused on them. We were told briefly that some people had fought on two fronts, against both the Nazis and the Soviets, i.e., they defended their country’s independence. They may have collaborated with the Germans in some operations. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. But there were different Germans, too. My grandmother told me that when our troops came around, they would take everything away. People ended up starving. In contrast, during the occupation the Germans would give children chocolates. They helped people get food.
“I think history should be taught either ‘neutrally’ or from more than one viewpoint, and, naturally, with historical facts. I repeat: my relatives suffered more from the Soviet authorities, and people had the right to protect themselves from them. Here is another fact: the UPA was a guerrilla movement. Nobody fought against regular soldiers. They preferred to eliminate Soviet officials and food trains, block roads, etc. Only now can we see the films that show the whole truth about the Country of Soviets. Yes, many people switched over to the German side. What if your parents had been shot, your home and cattle looted, and you were deported somewhere to Siberia?
“One thing is certain: ordinary Soviet soldiers and the OUN and UPA fought for their own land.”
Anna POSLYKHALINA, 10th-grade pupil, Donetsk:
“I think that history is a difficult subject: you have to study and read a lot. We have always had interesting lessons. There was never a situation where the teacher is talking about something, and we are listening but cannot express our own opinion. We always have debates, we always discuss different things, so I have never had a problem with somebody imposing his viewpoint on me and I cannot oppose it. I think the situation in other schools is the same. At any rate, history should be taught this way.
“As for the history of the Great Patriotic War, I am convinced that I know quite a lot about it — about the Red Army and the OUN and UPA. We were told a lot about it. I wrote an essay on the UPA, read some books by Polish historians, which contained photos of atrocities committed by UPA fighters. Although I personally do not think that these people were heroes, I tried to tell my classmates about this without undue emotions. I brought materials from an exhibit that demonstrated the heroism of the UPA fighters because I wanted to show another view of this problem. I think emotions are out of place where questions of history are concerned, and you have to take an impartial look at everything. I dream of becoming a historian, and I think I will be adequately prepared to get into university on the basis of what the school curriculum offers. In any case, I have acquired enough knowledge in our school.”
