Educational, Cultural, and Historical Outlooks (ECHO) 2008 Proposal

Research for Better Schools (RBS) and Holy Family University (HFU) have collaborated on this application for a Fulbright-Hays grant for a Group Project Abroad Program (84.021A). The proposed project builds upon previously funded ECHO projects, and has an existing infrastructure that includes organizations and individuals in East Central Europe, a conceptual framework, and planning and participant recruitment processes.

This proposal was not funded.  The application will be updated and submitted for 2009.

The project design is driven by the overall theme: Government and ethnicity—the interaction of ethnic groups and forms of government in East Central Europe. The focus will be on the period of communist rule and the changeover to democracy, with exploration of previous historical periods, as they constitute important antecedent events, features, and conditions. Twelve American educators will be chosen to participate.

The 2008 ECHO project will pursue the following principal objectives for participants:

• Learn the fundamental features of the educational approaches, culture, and history of the two countries studied—Hungary and Serbia
• Focus on how these features affect and are affected by form of government and ethnicity
• Develop Web-based curriculum modules that capture participants’ learning and experiences with descriptive information, interpretations, and applications useful to their students
• Disseminate the curriculum modules internationally through participants’ institutions and the ECHO partner organizations
• Promote understanding of the United States and its people among persons in East Central Europe.

After preliminary orientation and study activities in the U.S., participants will have the following experiences during the month in East Central Europe:

• Observation and study in university centers, libraries, museums, historical sites, scientific institutes, government sites, and natural venues
• Presentations, seminars, and discussions led by local experts
• Acquisition of information and resource materials for curriculum development
• Informal interactions with educators, other professionals, and the public
• Group debriefings, organization of resource materials, and curriculum development.

Throughout the project, staff will guide participants through learning activities, field observations, identification and organization of resource materials, and development of Web-based curriculum modules that will be maintained and disseminated by HFU, RBS and other project partner organizations. The curriculum materials will be designed to improve area studies and, more broadly, to enhance the international knowledge and sensitivities of participants and, by extension, of participants’ and colleagues’ students.

Educational, Cultural, and Historical Outlooks on Government and Ethnicity in East Central Europe

• Plan of Operation
• Key Personnel
• Impact of the Project
• Evaluation Plan and Final Report

 

Introduction

The proposed Educational, Cultural, and Historical Outlooks (ECHO) project is a collaborative undertaking by two organizations: Research for Better Schools (RBS) and Holy Family University (HFU), both headquartered in Philadelphia, PA. HFU will provide the project director and graduate credit; RBS will provide supportive staff and funding, and serve as fiscal agent. The organizations will share planning, recruiting, management, and dissemination responsibilities.

Consistent with the Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange Act (P.L. 67-365), the ECHO project has six principal elements:

Pre-departure phase

• An open invitation for project participation will be sent to educators who often do not have this kind of opportunity; twelve will be selected, based on the GPA criteria and participants’ rationales, with the assistance of an Advisory Board and project partners.
• Orientation activities will be provided to prepare participants to maximize benefits from the ECHO experience.

Overseas phase

• Participants will spend four weeks abroad expanding their international perspectives and developing resource materials for curriculum modules.
• Participants will incorporate these unique and intensive professional experiences as they develop curriculum that addresses key issues in area studies, such as discrepancies in ethnic vs. civic boundaries, discrimination against ethnic groups, the effects of civil conflict on public welfare, and cultural influences on elections and civic affairs.

Post-return phase

• Follow-up support and professional development will be provided through online communications and in-person events.
• Curriculum products will be actively disseminated locally in participants’ home areas and internationally via the project partners’ Websites.

Two East Central European countries, Hungary and Serbia, will be the project sites for 2008. Project activities and logistics will be arranged in advance of the month abroad. The project staff includes a director, co-director, in-country coordinators, specialist instructors, and support staff. After returning to the U.S., participants will be networked electronically to complete Web-based curriculum modules, which will be maintained and disseminated by RBS, HFU, ECHO Advisory Board members’ organizations, and participants’ organizations.

Plan of Operation

Goals and Objectives

Nations are becoming increasingly interdependent in this age of instant global communications and burgeoning international commerce. At the same time, achieving the goal of peaceful co-existence and proactive tolerance is a challenging problem—as political and economic divisions increase and opposing agendas harden. One way of working toward better cooperation among nations is the person-to-person interactions enabled by initiatives such as those funded by the Fulbright-Hays Group Projects Abroad program. The proposed ECHO project will result in outcomes that improve international understanding, as the participants acquire first-hand resource materials and knowledge relevant to key issues in area studies, capture critical information digitally in Web-based curriculum modules, and share them widely through the U.S. education system.

ECHO has both short-term objectives, those to be achieved during the project period, and long-term objectives, those that will be realized as products are disseminated and used. In the short-term, participants will:

• Learn the fundamental features of the educational approaches, culture, and history of the two countries studied.
• Focus on how these features affect and are affected by the form of government and ethnicity.
• Promote understanding of the U.S. and its people among persons in East Central Europe.
• Develop Web-based curriculum modules that capture their learning and experiences with descriptive information, interpretation, and applications useful to their students.
• Disseminate the curriculum modules internationally through their own institutions and the ECHO partners.

Over the long-term participants will:

• Increase their understanding of international issues and different perspectives, and their commitment to peaceful relations among nations.
• Use and share with colleagues the knowledge and understanding of forms of government and ethnicity based on examples they have observed.

Project Design

The project design is driven by the overall theme: Government and ethnicity—the interaction of ethnic groups and forms of government in East Central Europe. The focus will be on the period of communist rule and the changeover to democracy, with exploration of previous periods of history, as they constitute important antecedent events, features, and conditions. As can be seen in the historical perspectives presented below, the basis for interaction between ethnic groups and government goes back centuries. The principal study locales will be Hungary and Serbia.

The Republic of Hungary today is a successful democracy with multiple political parties and a parliamentary form of government. After a troubled history under Soviet domination, the transition away from communism began in 1987. Over the course of history, since the 5th century, Hungary has experienced a variety of forms of government from tribal, to monarchy, to totalitarian, and finally, to a present-day well-established democracy as a member of the European Union (EU). A variety of peoples have considered Hungary their homeland (e.g., Magyars, Romans, Germans, Jews, Austrians, and Slavs). As a result, ethnicity has always been an important factor in Hungarian history, and often at the root of political controversy and social unrest. Though the country is now relatively ethnically homogeneous, apart from a large gipsy community, ethnic Hungarians living in the neighboring countries once controlled by Hungary find that their ethnicity often causes problems.

Serbia is also a parliamentary democracy. However, its path since the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia presents a stark contrast with the Hungarian changeover to democracy, with multiple competing ethnic groups, wars, state deconstruction, and economic chaos. Historically, Serbia presents a polyglot journey through various forms of government from tribal settlements to a modern constitutional state. The journey has been especially exacerbated by Serbia’s position on the frontier between Christian and Islamic empires for many years. In addition, as the remaining national entity of the conglomerate Republic of Yugoslavia, Serbia demonstrates the process of ethnic-driven dissolution of national bonds to create new nations. The last separation was just last year, as Montenegro departed from the union through a peaceful democratic process. The status of Kosovo is still a vital and controversial issue. Serbia is not a member of the EU.

Together, Hungary and Serbia provide the intellectual territory planned for the project. Participants will experience first-hand many primary resources that will make the project’s overall theme tangible, e.g., seminars with local experts, informal conversations with peers who have personally experienced both communist and democratic governments, and debriefings led by project staff. In addition, they will view and collect relevant artifacts, books, documents, videos, museum exhibits and reproductions, audio recordings, and other instructional materials. With the assistance of project staff and written materials, in-country coordinators and instructors who are proficient in English will personally guide participants and lead in-depth seminars. A host institution in each country will provide workspace, Internet access, and social opportunities for the ECHO group. Other collaborating institutions have also been recruited.

The ECHO project’s content domains are defined as follows; they are explicated in terms of the 2008 theme in subsequent sections.

• Historical trends, including ancient and modern history, civics, and politics
• Cultural perspectives, including language, ethnicity, religion, lifestyle, and the arts
• Educational approaches, including school organization, education policies, student achievement, curriculum, and instruction.

Project objectives will be addressed through these content domains at different levels during the three project phases. The phases and relevant project activities are discussed below.

1. Pre-Departure Phase: March to June 25, 2008

The purposes of this phase are to refine the project plans and, correspondingly, extend the participants’ grasp of project objectives, design, and fundamental features of the countries to be studied, such as demography, political organization, geography, broad regional history, social protocols, and language basics. Very brief introductory material is presented in Appendix A of Other Narrative Attachments. It is anticipated that the project director and co-director will undertake a planning trip to Hungary and Serbia to finalize logistical, institutional, and instructor arrangements. After their return, the complete plan for the overseas component will be presented to the ECHO Advisory Board for review and approval.

ECHO participants will be selected according to the procedures described below in section E, and subsequently networked via e-mail and a dedicated Website. Introductory materials, including print publications, pertinent Internet references and links, procedural information about the project, and information about the group’s composition will be provided to all participants. Participants will be introduced to words and phrases in the Serbian and Hungarian languages. Overview information on the overseas study sites and background on the three major ECHO perspectives will set the stage for the experience abroad. Importantly, all activities in this phase will be supported with non-federal funds.

It is anticipated that this project phase will conclude with a two-day pre-departure orientation seminar and “Webinar” videoconference, which will link in overseas staff. The orientation meeting agenda will include participant and staff introductions, a seminar on Hungary and Serbia led by overseas staff via videoconference, review of detailed overseas itinerary, discussion of curriculum module requirements and formats, and conversations about travel protocols. Detailed background information such as the following will be discussed.

Hungary: Historical Perspective

The first study sites and seminars will be in the Republic of Hungary, home of the ECHO Overseas Coordinator, Dr. László Pordány. A brief historical perspective is presented here, as it will be discussed with participants and as background for the overseas activities.

In the 5th Century, Hungarian tribes emigrated from the Ural area, eventually reaching the Carpathian Basin, expelling and/or absorbing the previous residents. In the 9th Century, Arpad established a ruling dynasty; a successor, King Stephen (1000-1038) converted the nation to Christianity and was later canonized. King Matthias, another key figure in Hungarian history, presided over a time of economic and cultural bounty in the 15th Century. This was followed by defeat of the Hungarian army at Mohacs in 1526 and Turkish occupation for 150 years. After struggles with Turkish and Austrian Habsburg control, in 1867 a dual Austro-Hungarian monarchy was established and prospered until its defeat in World War I, when Hungary lost two-thirds of its territory and nearly as much of its population. There was a brief but bloody communist dictatorship and counterrevolution in 1919, followed by a 25-year regency under Adm. Miklos Horthy.

Although Hungary fought in most of World War II as a German ally, it fell under German military occupation following an unsuccessful attempt to switch sides in 1944. In January 1945, a provisional government declared an armistice with the Soviet Union and established the Allied Control Commission, under which Soviet, American, and British representatives held complete sovereignty over the country. The commission chairman was a member of Stalin's inner circle and exercised absolute control. Postwar cooperation between the U.S.S.R. and the West collapsed, and the Cold War began. Moscow-trained Matyas Rakosi began to establish a communist dictatorship with Soviet support. By 1949, the communists had merged all opposition parties into the Hungarian Workers' Party and adopted a Soviet-style constitution, which created the Hungarian People's Republic. Rakosi became Prime Minister in 1952, and the Hungarian economy was reorganized according to the Soviet model. Freedom of the press, religion, and assembly was strictly curtailed. The head of the Roman Catholic Church, Cardinal Jozsef Mindszenty, was sentenced to life imprisonment.

Forced industrialization and land collectivization soon led to serious economic difficulties, which reached crisis proportions by mid-1953, the year Stalin died. The new Soviet leaders blamed Rakosi for Hungary's economic situation and began a more flexible policy. Imre Nagy, who replaced Rakosi as prime minister, repudiated much of Rakosi's economic program of forced collectivization and heavy industry. He also ended political purges and freed thousands of political prisoners. The economic situation, however, continued to deteriorate, and Rakosi succeeded in forcing Nagy from power in 1955. Rakosi's attempt to restore Stalinist orthodoxy then floundered, with increasing opposition after Khrushchev's 1956 denunciation of Stalin. Fearing revolution, Moscow replaced Rakosi with his deputy, Erno Gero. Pressure for change reached a climax on October 23, 1956, when security forces fired on Budapest students marching in support of Poland's confrontation with the Soviet Union. The ensuing battle quickly grew into a massive popular uprising. Gero called on Soviet troops to restore order, and fighting did not abate until the Central Committee re-named Nagy as prime minister; Janos Kadar replaced Gero as party first secretary. Nagy dissolved the state security police, abolished the one-party system, promised free elections, and negotiated with the U.S.S.R. to withdraw its troops.

Faced with reports of new Soviet troops pouring into Hungary despite Soviet Ambassador Andropov's assurances to the contrary, on November 1, 1956 Nagy announced Hungary's neutrality and withdrawal from the Warsaw Pact. He appealed to the United Nations and the Western powers for protection of its neutrality. Preoccupied with the Suez Crisis, the UN and the West failed to respond, and the Soviet Union launched a massive military attack on Hungary on November 3. Some 200,000 Hungarians fled to the West. Nagy and his colleagues took refuge in the Yugoslav Embassy. Kadar, after delivering an impassioned radio address on November 1 in support of "our glorious revolution" and vowing to fight the Russians with his bare hands if they attacked Hungary, defected from the Nagy cabinet. He fled to the Soviet Union, and, on November 4, announced the formation of a new government. He returned to Budapest and, with Soviet support, carried out severe reprisals; thousands of people were executed or imprisoned. Despite a guarantee of safe conduct, Nagy was arrested and deported to Romania. In June 1958, the government announced that Nagy and other former officials had been executed.

Over the next two decades of relative domestic harmony, Kadar's government responded to pressure for political and economic reform and to counter-pressures from reform opponents. By the early 1980s, it had achieved some lasting economic reforms and limited political liberalization and pursued a foreign policy that encouraged more trade with the West.

Hungary's transition to a Western-style parliamentary democracy was the first and the smoothest among the former Soviet bloc, inspired by a nationalism that long had encouraged Hungarians to control their own destiny. By 1987, civic activism had intensified to a level not seen since the 1956 revolution. The reform movement gathered strength as communist party membership declined dramatically, and in 1989 the Soviet Union signed an agreement to withdraw its forces by June 1991.

Serbia: Historical Perspective

The group will also spend significant time in the Republic of Serbia, home of Mr. Uroš Cemalovic, who is the ECHO coordinator for work in Serbia. A brief historical perspective is presented here, as it will be discussed with participants, and as background for the overseas activities in the following section.

Even today, well into the 21st century, the roots of age-old conflict among East Central European nations and religions can be seen in Serbia. Historically, Stefan Nemanja created the Serbian state in 1170 A.D. Serbia's religious foundation came in 1219, when Stefan's son, canonized as St. Sava, became the first archbishop of the Serbian Orthodox Church. At this time, the Serbs enjoyed both temporal and religious independence.

After a series of successions, Serbian King Milutin improved Serbia's position among other European countries, was responsible for many of the brightest examples of Medieval Serbian architecture, and began to expand the Serbian lands, seizing territories in nearby Macedonia from the Byzantines. Under Milutin's son, Stefan Dusan (1331-55), the Nemanjic dynasty reached its peak, ruling from the Danube to central Greece. However, Serbian power waned after Stefan's death in 1355. In the Battle of Kosovo Polja on June 15, 1389 (June 28 according to the Gregorian calendar), the Turks catastrophically defeated the Serbs, and by 1459, the Turks exerted complete control over all historically Serb lands.

For more than three centuries, the Serbs lived under an oppressive Ottoman rule, and began to migrate out of their native land – present-day Kosovo and southern Serbia – into other areas within the Balkan Peninsula, establishing Serbian minority groups there. Movements for Serbian independence began with uprisings under the Serbian patriots Karageorge (1804-13) and Milos Obrenovic (1815-17). After the Russo-Turkish War of 1828-29, Serbia became an internationally recognized principality under Turkish suzerainty and Russian protection. Serbia and Montenegro went to war against Turkey in 1876-78 in support of Bosnian rebels. With Russian assistance, this action gained both more territory and formal independence for Serbia, though Bosnia was placed under Austrian administration.

In 1908, Austria-Hungary directly annexed Bosnia, inciting the Serbs to seek the aid of Montenegro, Bulgaria, and Greece in seizing the last Ottoman-ruled lands in Europe. In the ensuing Balkan Wars of 1912-13, Serbia obtained northern and central Macedonia, but Austria compelled it to yield Albanian lands that would have given it access to the sea. Serb animosity against Austria-Hungary reached a climax with the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand and the beginning of World War I. During the war, Austro-Hungarian and Bulgarian forces occupied Serbia. Upon the collapse of Austria-Hungary in 1918, parts of southern Hungary were ceded to Serbia, forming its northern province under the name of Vojvodina. Serbia was the dominant partner in this state, known as the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes, which in 1929 adopted the name Yugoslavia, setting the stage for conflicts that are still unfolding.

The constituent parts of the Yugoslav state often resented control from Belgrade. This pressure for local control continued as an underlying stress. After World War II, Josip Broz Tito gained control, broke with Stalin, asserted Yugoslav independence, and went on to control Yugoslavia for 35 years. In the 1980s, however, Yugoslavia's economy began to fail. With the death of Tito in 1980, separatist and nationalist tensions emerged in Yugoslavia.

In 1989, riding a wave of nationalist sentiment, Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic re-imposed direct rule over the autonomous provinces of Kosovo and Vojvodina, prompting Albanians in Kosovo to agitate for separation from the Republic of Serbia. Milosevic's embrace of Serb nationalism led to severe intrastate ethnic strife. Between 1991 and 1992, Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Macedonia all seceded from Yugoslavia. Serbia and Montenegro joined in passing the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. After several years of devastating war, Milosevic was forced to resign following the 2000 disputed presidential election. In 2003, the Parliament ratified the Constitutional Charter, establishing a new state union and changing the name of the country from Yugoslavia to Serbia and Montenegro, which changed again with Montenegro’s independence in 2006.

In the education context, Serbia is attempting to address the sources of ethnic conflict through the school curriculum, which emphasizes civics, multiculturalism, constructive conflict resolution, and nonviolent communication. Assistance is sought from non-government organizations (NGOs) and international organizations such as UNICEF and the Fund for an Open Society.

2. Overseas Phase: June 26 to July 23, 2008

This phase comprises the project period actually spent in East Central Europe and will provide participants with the opportunity to experience Hungary and Serbia first-hand. In so doing, they will gather the information and personal perspectives needed to accomplish the project goals and objectives. Participants will discover resource materials, explore field sites, interact with a variety of local content experts, and learn from the foreign nationals they encounter and from each other. The project staff and a variety of Hungarian and Serbian resource persons will guide this overseas experience. Activities will be focused on a conceptual framework of questions that will provide starting points for curriculum development. The preliminary version of this framework is presented below; it will be refined and expanded throughout the project. All federal funds will be committed to this phase.

Conceptual framework

In the ECHO design, history is a major focus. Participants will study and document how major historical events in East Central Europe, including ancient and modern history, civics, and politics, have affected and been affected by ethnicity, the form of national governments, and the welfare of their peoples. Participants will be asked to consider such topics and stimulus questions for curriculum development as the following:

• Feudal Order (tribes and loosely related groups under a leader): What peoples inhabited the region after the fall of the Roman Empire? What do we know about them? How did they influence today’s ethnic group conditions?
• Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian Empires (several territories or nations ruled by a supreme authority): What impact did five centuries of Ottoman rule have on the Serbs? After 1867, Hungarians co-ruled the Habsburg Monarchy; what effects did this experience have on the Hungarians after the demise of the Empire in 1918 and on today’s culture?
• Constitutional Monarchy (independent country with king, parliament, and political freedom): To what extent were the regimes of Admiral Horthy and Royal Yugoslavia responsible for what happened to their citizens during World War II? What are the implications of monarchy in surviving traditions and culture?
• Nazi Occupation and Soviet Domination (civil control of a nation or territory by a foreign military force): What role did the atrocities committed during and after World War II, play in the wars that accompanied Yugoslavia’s breakup in the 1990s?
• Socialist Dictatorship (single party system, planned economy, and restricted human rights): Was Tito the only or even a good solution for Yugoslavia after World War II? To what extent was life easier in Socialist Yugoslavia than elsewhere in Communist East Central Europe, and what brought about the state’s demise?
• Constitutional Republic (independent country with elected officials, balancing branches of government, and constitutional powers): How were the political parties formed and how have they evolved? What will be the effect of Montenegro’s separation from Serbia? Is there a good resolution possible for the Kosovo issue? What has been the post-Yugoslav republics’ experience with the European Union? What positive or negative effects has Hungary experienced and what problems loom large?

Culture is the project’s second focus. Participants will study and document how cultural aspects of East Central Europe, including language, ethnicity, religion, and the arts, have affected governments and the welfare of their peoples. They will also delve into the implications of East Central European events and conditions on other parts of the world, including the United States.

• Language: What has been the role of language in ethnic and national identity and issues? How have the Hungarian and Serbian languages fared, themselves and in relation to other languages, under various forms of government?
• Ethnicity: What factors are facilitators and barriers to unity among ethnic groups? What are the features of ethnic groups who are a majority or a minority in their country of residence? How do ethnic group populations affect the form of government?
• Religion: How does religion interact with language, ethnicity, and form of government? Is religion a more uniting or dividing force in civic and private life?
• Arts: How do ethnicity, religion, government, and language affect artistic expression? How do the arts affect ethnicity, religion, government, and language?

Finally, East Central European education systems, including education policy, student experiences, curriculum, and instruction, will be explored to learn how they affect civic life, ethnic relations, and the welfare of the people. What are the implications for other parts of the world, including the United States? How can differing national perspectives be discussed and shared among educators?

• Policy: How does education policy affect the experience of various ethnic groups?
• Student Experience: Does student education meet public expectations? Are students well prepared for further education, vocations, and success in life?
• Curriculum and Instruction: How does the curriculum address ethnicity and government issues?

Itinerary

The overseas activities will take place from departing the U.S. on June 25, 2008 to the group’s return on July 23, 2008, with the following general itinerary:

• Arrival in Budapest, Hungary on Thursday, June 26, 2008
• Study in Hungary from June 26 through Tuesday, July 8
• Study in Serbia from Wednesday, July 9 through Friday, July 19
• Discussions and curriculum development in Hungary from Saturday, July 20 through Wednesday, July 23 and return to U.S.

Overview of Activities

The ECHO participants will study in primary resource sites (examples are described below) with the assistance of English-speaking seminar leaders. They will also have university “home bases” for their work and faculty instructors who will address the ECHO framework topics. The colleague institutions will include the following:

• Pannon University (Lead Partner in Hungary)
• Hungarian National Assembly
• Szeged University
• Center for Democracy Foundation (Lead Partner in Serbia)
• University of Belgrade
• Belgrade Open School

Participants will have a variety of opportunities to meet with civic, education, arts, business, and other public groups for focus-group-like discussions. Finally, project staff will conduct weekly debriefings and individual mentoring sessions.

Hungary. Dr. László Pordány, the ECHO overseas coordinator, has arranged for Pannon University to be the primary host of the ECHO group in Hungary; other institutions will also contribute. These institutions will provide working space, Internet access, and opportunities for academic and social interactions. Pannon University will provide faculty to lead seminars on the framework questions and the opportunity for participants to discuss their experiences thus far and begin planning their curriculum modules. The first activity will take place at the Hungarian National Assembly, with a seminar focused on more in-depth explorations of Hungarian features related to the project theme and advance organizers for the activities in Hungary. This seminar will be led by the Overseas Coordinator, and will include a welcome by the Sándor Lezsák, Vice President of the National Assembly, who will discuss the current challenges to the Hungarian Republic. The Assembly (Parliament) building contains unique Hungarian artifacts, which will be available to the ECHO group.

The time in Hungary will provide a unique opportunity to study the reformation of government as a democratic state in a country that has a well-established infrastructure and national tradition, and an excellent environment to study the process of developing new political parties. The concept of political parties can be examined in a fresh context, including the meaning of conservative vs. liberal, coalition of interests, and party policy platforms. Ethnic interests play a role in the Hungarian parties and comparisons with U.S. politics may prove quite enlightening, as with, for example, the shifting roles of African Americans in U.S. political parties from Reconstruction through the 2004 presidential election.

The Hungarian National Museum will be a major resource site for the project, as it has collected, preserved, and processed historical materials for over 200 years. The Museum contains permanent exhibits on the history of Hungary from the state’s founding and the history of Hungary’s ethnic groups. The Matthias Church, another major resource site, illustrates an important aspect of the intercultural conflicts in Hungarian history, as it was the scene of Charles IV’s coronation (as the last Habsburg king), and it served as a mosque during Turkish occupation; it also offers a fine museum collection.

Two resource sites will be particularly illuminating about the Nazi and Soviet periods. The House of Terror is a technologically advanced museum situated in the former headquarters of the Hungarian Nazi Party and the Soviet secret police. The Jewish Museum and Archives has exhibits on past and present Jewish culture and the Holocaust. The site is also the birthplace of Theodor Herzl, founder of the Zionist movement.

The impressive hilltop Buda Castle Royal Palace, Wing E contains the Budapest History Museum, where exhibits portraying major historical events, artifacts, and medieval sculptures may be studied. The palace also includes several art museums.

On the way from Hungary to Serbia, the group will visit an extensive hands-on resource site, the National Historical Memorial Park (http://www.opusztaszer.hu), where various periods of Hungarian history are recreated. This region of Hungary also offers the opportunity to explore the Gergely Pongratz Museum of the 1956 Revolution, a private museum developed by its namesake hero of the Revolution. This revolution involved the U.S. in complex ways, including foreign policy trade-offs and an influx of Hungarian immigrants. Pongratz provided a moving and informative tour of his museum for the 2004 ECHO group.

Finally in Hungary, the group will stop in Szeged for seminars led by faculty members at the University of Szeged. The university has a Hungarian and Central-European International Studies Center and long-standing ties with the ECHO projects. Here, development of the ECHO curriculum modules will begin in earnest. Participants will self-select into teams, and staff will work with the each team to develop their topic. Staff will help the teams plan for the information resources they will need. Adjustments to the planned itinerary may become desirable as the curriculum plans progress.

Serbia. Mr. Uroš Cemalovic, the ECHO Serbia coordinator, has arranged for the Center for Democracy Foundation to be the primary host of the ECHO group in Serbia; other institutions will also contribute. These institutions will provide working space, Internet access, and opportunities for academic and social interactions.

The ECHO group’s first activity will set the historical stage with an exploration of the fortress complex, Kalemegdan, which is situated in the middle of Belgrade at the strategic confluence of the Danube and Sava Rivers. Kalemegdan was constructed from the 1st Century (Romans) through the 18th Century. In the long-term conflict of Christians vs. Ottoman Turks, Serbia was the scene of dramatic and historic victories for both sides. In the 1389 Battle of Kosovo Polja (Field of the Blackbirds), the Turks crushed the Serbian army, led by Lazar, the last Serbian prince. However, the Ottoman expansion into Catholic Europe was held up for nearly 70 years when Hungarian Janos Hunyadi led the Christian armies to victory in the Seige of Belgrade on July 4-22, 1456. The Fortress of Belgrade finally fell to the Ottomans in 1521.

Moving to present-day issues, the group will participate in seminars at the Center for Free Election and Democracy, an organization that organizes lectures, seminars, round tables, and conferences on the strategic issues concerning the development of a civil society. The Center was one of three main coordinating agencies for the EXIT 2000 campaign, which greatly influenced the political changes of October 2000 and has served as the independent watchdog group during the presidential elections.

The activities in Serbia will emphasize opportunities for critical seminars with local experts and community members about the deconstruction of the combined states of Yugoslavia into the independent countries of Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Slovenia, Macedonia, and, most recently, Montenegro. This process involved several wars that had national interests and ethnicity as major features. For example, some observers see Serbia's war with Croatia as a systematic offensive aimed at conquering territory and purging it of its non-Serb inhabitants and their culture, resettling the territory with Serbs, and annexing Croatia. In almost all other examples of expansionist nationalism, the aggressors want other peoples' lands, but they are willing to annex them together with their inhabitants. The fate of native inhabitants is never enviable, but it is neither extermination nor expulsion.

These events will raise serious questions for the ECHO group to pursue, for example: What may be the responsibility of intellectuals and organized religion in providing supportive arguments and rationales, possibly tantamount to intellectual organization of political hatreds? As an illustration, in 1973, Vasa Cubrilovic called for ridding Kosovo of its Albanian population in order to resettle it by Serbs. He praised the cleansing of Greater Serbia of all foreign elements, and argued that the only way (to succeed) is the use of brutal force by state authorities. This issue is of great current interest, with possible implications for many countries. Montenegro’s recent peaceful separation from Serbia provides an instructive contrasting example. Ethnic conflict and cleansing were also central issues in the settling of America’s West in the late 1800s.

Participants will observe sites of war damage inflicted by NATO and discuss opposing points of view on causes, effects, and future directions with local people who have had first-hand experience. They will hear diverse perspectives, many opposed to U.S. policies and actions, both recent and long-term.

Belgrade is the site of many unique cultural resources. For example, the Banjica Concentration Camp held 23,637 Jews, partisans, communists, and Roma between 1941 and 1944. The Jewish History Museum further documents the Holocaust experience, among other exhibits. In addition, the Ethnographic Museum provides extensive collections of artifacts representing the traditional life of various ethnic groups. The Temple of St. Sava is an impressive Serbian Orthodox cathedral built on the alleged site of the burning of Serbian Church’s founder by the Ottomans.

To pursue its education focus, the group will meet with faculty at the Belgrade Open School, a non-profit post-secondary educational organization committed to dissemination of knowledge and betterment of social science research. BOS promotes change in higher education by advocating the re-examination of basic organizational and pedagogical premises. It offers undergraduate studies based on cross-disciplinary programs and interactive teaching methods. The BOS faculty will help the group explore Serbian culture and current societal trends.

While there are many impressive and unique resource sites included in the proposed ECHO itinerary, as shown in the examples given above, it is important to emphasize that the presentations and seminars with local experts and informal discussions with the people met along the way are absolutely critical to participants’ development and achieving the project goals.

The group will complete the overseas phase with a few days of debriefing, evaluation activities, and curriculum module development in Budapest and return to the U.S. on July 23.

Curriculum Development

Participants will divide into teams based on their interests to develop curriculum modules based on their ECHO experiences. Staff will provide a list of possible projects, or teams may select their own in consultation with the project director. Each team will begin discussions of possible topics in the first two weeks, develop preliminary content outlines towards the middle of the overseas phase, and then decide on schedules and timelines for completion. During the entire time overseas, they will collect and document materials and experiences—including digital photos, contact addresses, Websites, videos, seminar notes, resource descriptions, and graphics—to include in their curriculum modules. A Web-based module framework and customized authoring software using Dreamweaver will be designed by the project staff and provided to participants prior to departure. The modules will be drafted on laptop computers during the time overseas; staff will review them in progress.

A curriculum module could develop as in the following example: A current problem defines the issue. Participants document current evidence of the problem, and then research and organize information about antecedent conditions using project seminars, resource sites, and collected materials. Possible interpretations and solutions are proposed. Relevance to U.S. issues is described, and resources for further study are referenced.

3. Post-Return Phase: July 24, 2008 to January 2009

This phase will focus on completing the curriculum modules, pilot-testing them, editing and disseminating them for Web and print publication, evaluating the project outcomes, and preparing the final report. Participants, networked by e-mail and the dedicated ECHO project Website, will review, extend, and refine their curriculum modules, submitting the final drafts to the project director in November. The Advisory Board will critique the modules, which will then be given a final edit by the project director and co-director for posting on the HFU and RBS Websites and linked to participants’ and partners’ Websites. The modules’ availability will be extensively advertised as part of RBS’ and HFU’s international programs. The evaluation will be completed as described below, and the final report will be submitted. Local contributions will support all activities in this phase.

Management Plan: Dr. Leonard Soroka will direct all phases of the project, with the assistance of co-director, Dr. Keith M. Kershner, who will manage the fiscal affairs through RBS and serve as the Advisory Board Chair. RBS will contribute Dr. Kershner’s time, as well as support personnel. The availability of both a director and co-director, who have worked together on several previous projects, provides the management resources and support to ensure completion of the proposed timeline and commitments. These directors have also both worked in person with both overseas staff members and many of the instructors, thus building the personal relationships that are so important for successful international ventures. Finally, the directors have had experience with many of the proposed resource sites, which will facilitate their effective use in this project.

The Advisory Board will review and critique the project plans and the resultant curriculum modules. The board members are: Dr. Michael Speziale, Dean for Graduate Studies, Wilkes University; Dr. John Micgiel, Director of the East Central European Center at Columbia University and head of its federally funded East European, Russian, and Eurasian National Resource Center; Dr. John DeFlaminis, Executive Director, University of Pennsylvania Center for Educational Leadership; Dr, Richard Basom, Jr., Managing Director, Partnership for Dynamic Learning; and Dr. Ralph Nelsen, Director, Columbia Education Center, who has directed previous ECHO and other international projects. Supportive letters from board members are provided in Appendix B of the Other Narrative Attachment Form, along with other letters of support from HFU and several of the overseas host institutions.

The project timeline and milestones are presented in the figure below. The funding announcement is expected in February 2008, and the project will conclude in January 2009.

Activity	Dates	Milestones
Pre-Departure Phase
Participant selection	April-May 2008	12 qualified participants selected and forms completed.
Orientation materials		Materials prepared, sent, and reviewed.
Planning trip	April-June	Design refined, fiscal commitments made.
Advisory Board	April
Orientation Meeting	May	Design finalized.
	June	Participants prepared for overseas activities.
Overseas Phase
Study & development	June-July	Activities completed as per design.
Post-Return Phase
Curriculum revision	November	Curriculum modules completed.
Dissemination	December	Modules Web-posted, linked, and shared.
Evaluation	August-December	Evaluation conducted.
Project report	January 2009	Report submitted.

Use of Resources: Less than half of the resources needed for the project are requested in the GPA grant; the remainder will be contributed funds by RBS, participant fees, and contributed time, such as by the HFU for the project director and the Advisory Board members. The GPA grant will support the project director’s time overseas, group transportation and subsistence expenses in Europe, curriculum materials, museum fees, telephone expenses, and facilities rental. All other costs will be covered with grantee contributions. More details are provided in the budget section below and the Budget Narrative Attachment.

The cost-share resources will make it possible to accomplish significant preparation activities and to conduct much more follow-up dissemination of the curriculum materials than would otherwise be possible. HFU and RBS intend to establish the ECHO participant groups as continuing small learning communities (not included in the current workscope or budget). All proposed activity expenses have been provided for in the combined budget from the three funding sources—grant, participant fees, and grantee cost sharing.

Selection of Participants and Equal Access: The participant invitation process will begin in November 2007, with an e-mail notice to the list of persons who have shown interest in past ECHO projects. In January 2008, a public recruitment effort will begin through RBS, HFU, and the institutions represented on the Advisory Board. A diverse participant group will be sought, particularly from urban areas such as Philadelphia, PA; Washington, DC; Baltimore, MD; and Newark, NJ. After completing pre-applications to establish eligibility, participant candidates will submit application materials, including background information, a letter of institutional nomination and support, and an essay on how the project will further their own teaching goals and their institution’s goals. Completed applications will be ranked by the project director and co-director, and then reviewed by the Advisory Board members in terms of their best fit with the project goals and objectives. Applicants will be invited in rank order to participate until the complement of 12 is completed; in case of ties, the date of application will be used. Remaining applicants will be kept on an alternate list to be used in case any of the selected participants withdraw.

In project staffing and participant selection, no one will be discriminated against because of age, gender, race, national origin, color, or disability. Affirmative representation of diversity will be a factor in selecting project resources and presenters in Europe. Every effort will be made in the overseas phase to accommodate any group member’s special needs, such as housing, diet, and transportation.

Key Personnel

This section contains brief descriptions; resumes are presented in Appendix C of Other Narrative Attachments.

Project Director

Dr. Leonard G. Soroka is currently the Dean of the School of Education at Holy Family University in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. He has organized and directed numerous student field trips in the U.S., as well as the following foreign countries: England, the former USSR, Canada, Ecuador (including the Amazon Basin and Galapagos Islands), Iceland, Jamaica, and Mexico. He has presented papers at international conferences in the Philippines, Hungary, and China, and has traveled to Africa (Zimbabwe), Europe, Indonesia, Central and South America, Australia, Egypt, Greece, Italy, France, Spain, Turkey, Greece, China, and the Bahamas.

Prior to his appointment as dean, he held the position of a tenured full professor and Chair of the Department of Earth Sciences at St. Cloud State University in Minnesota. He served as President of the Minnesota Academy of Science, President of the University Faculty Association, and Chair of the Science Education Division. He is the recipient of several awards including the Minnesota Science Teacher of the Year Award and the Minnesota Governors Commendation. He has been a middle school science teacher, a member of the School District of Philadelphia’s Campaign for Human Capital and its Diversity Campaign, and a founding board member of the Franklin Towne Charter High School in Philadelphia. He has been a Principal Investigator of numerous grants and contracts that work to prepare pre-service and in-service teachers. Recent projects include a Teacher Quality Enhancement grant through the U.S. Department of Education, a FIPSE grant, a Wachovia grant, Verizon technology grants, and numerous Eisenhower Science and Mathematics grants. He has published numerous articles and chapters dealing with topics in science education, science curriculum, educational partnerships, professional development schools, and geology. Dr. Soroka received his bachelor’s degree from Temple University, a master’s from West Chester University, and his doctorate in Earth Science Education from the Pennsylvania State University.

Dr. Soroka will oversee all aspects of the project. He will be responsible for the final design, leading the overseas phase, and facilitating the curriculum module development. He will devote approximately 10 percent of a full-time equivalent (FTE) for the overseas portion of the project funded by the GPA grant and an additional 5 percent FTE supported by HFU contribution.

Project Co-Director

Dr. Keith M. Kershner, RBS’ Executive Director, has extensive experience in directing projects in education in many content areas; for example, he directed the Mid-Atlantic Eisenhower Consortium for Mathematics and Science Education for a dozen years and is currently directing the research component of the Memphis Striving Readers project – both efforts sponsored by the U.S. Department of Education. He has directed numerous professional development projects and Web-based development projects. Dr. Kershner assisted in the leadership of the 2004 ECHO GPA project, which included both of the currently proposed countries. He also led a delegation to a 2007 conference on conflict at the invitation of the Vice President of the Hungarian Parliament. Dr. Kershner received his A.B. degree in Slavic Languages from Princeton, M.S. in Educational Research from Bucknell, and Ph.D. in Behavioral Sciences from the University of Delaware.

Dr. Kershner will assist in the design of the project, recruitment of participants, and part of the overseas phase. He will assist in the completion and dissemination of the Web-based curriculum products. He will be responsible for the fiscal management, along with RBS’ Business Office, and submission of the project reports. His time commitment is approximately 10 percent FTE, all grantee contribution.

Overseas Coordinator

Dr. László Pordány will coordinate the project’s activities in East Central Europe. Formerly a professor of American Studies at the University of Szeged, he was a founding member of the Hungarian Democratic Party, and has served with the Hungarian diplomatic corps since 1992, with postings as ambassador to Australia and New Zealand and South Africa, Namibia, Angola, and Zimbabwe. He has experience with past ECHO GPA projects, having served as the overseas coordinator for the 1991 and 2004 programs. Dr. Pordany received his Ph.D. from the University of Indiana.

Dr. Pordány will assist in the design of the ECHO program prior to travel, serve as an instructor and arrange for instructors and organization contacts in East Central Europe, coordinate the curriculum and the logistics of the group while overseas, and assist with informal Hungarian language instruction. He will devote approximately 22 percent FTE to the project, all local contribution.

Serbia Coordinator

Mr. Uroš Cemalovic will serve as the coordinator for activities in Serbia. He is a Law Advisor to the National Assembly of the Republic of Serbia and a Ph.D. candidate at Robert Schuman University in Strasbourg, France. He also serves as board chairman of ILLUSTRA, a non-governmental organization (NGO) in Belgrade that is active in building regional networks of NGOs. Mr. ?emalovi? has previous experience with the GPA program, having coordinated 2004 ECHO program activities in Serbia.

He will assist in the design of the ECHO program prior to travel, arrange for instructors and organization contacts in Serbia, coordinate the curriculum and the logistics of the group while overseas, and assist with informal Slavic language instruction. Mr. ?emalovi? received his LL.M. degree from the Center for European Studies of the University of Nancy, France. He will devote approximately 11 percent FTE to the project, all local contribution.

Instructors

The project will rely on local instructors identified by Dr. Pordány and Mr. Cemalovic. All local instructors will be chosen according to the criteria of competence, professional involvement, and their capacity to contribute to the curriculum development effort. These in-country experts will serve as speakers on topics in the project conceptual framework and curriculum, identify resources needed for curriculum development, and otherwise help the group to experience East Central Europe’s education, culture, and history. Twenty instructors are envisioned in the project plan. The following instructors have been identified thus far:

Hungary Sándor Lezsák, Vice President of Hungarian National Assembly Prof. József Pálinkás, MP and former Education Minister Flórián Farkas, MP and Pres. of Lungo Drom (Hungarian Gypsy organization) Jenö Bárdos, Head of Institute of English and American Studies, Pannon U. György Szõnyi, Faculty of Arts, Szeged U. Prof. László Bogár, Karoly Református U. Prof. Magdolna Csath, Szent István U.

Serbia Nemanja Krajcinovic, Coordinator of Social Programs, Center for Democracy Foundation Aaron Presnall, Director of Studies, Jefferson Institute Vesna Duki?, General Director, Belgrade Open School Milina Mrdjenovacki, Director of Studies, Beoschool Dragana Aleksandri?, Project Coordinator, European Movement in Serbia

Impact of the Project on the Study of Modern Foreign Languages and Area Studies in American Education

Participants will complete the project with greater international understanding and knowledge in terms of:

• The two target nations’ key features and relations with world nations
• Ethnic groups and governments in the East Central European region
• History, culture, and education that are different from and/or similar to the United States
• Current and changing conditions in East Central Europe.

This participant professional development will affect their teaching and provide benefits to their students and colleagues.

Participants will prepare Web-based instructional materials focused on the theme of ethnicity and forms of government and, as a result, will have new resources for both their own and their colleagues’ area studies activities and programs. RBS, HFU, and the Advisory Board members’ organizations will actively disseminate the curriculum modules that are produced by ECHO 2008, primarily through Websites and e-mail invitations to visit. RBS also has a publications unit, which will review the modules for possible production in print and CD formats. Finally, all project participants will be encouraged to make presentations at professional and school meetings. This sharing in-person and through media will have second-generation impact on students’ learning and colleagues understanding and interest in East Central European intercultural environments and outlooks.

Citizens of the nations visited will gain clearer, more empathetic, and more balanced understandings of U.S. cultures, interests, opinions, and concerns through their contacts with project participants, and vice versa. Personal relationships formed among participants will promote inter-institutional linkages. Contacts made overseas will expand international connections and the potential for future exchanges, as ECHO has demonstrated in the past.

Evaluation Plan and Final Report

The ECHO project evaluation will address both process (formative) and outcome (summative) concerns and will be based on a discrepancy analysis model that compares intents with outcomes, as developed by Dr. Robert Stake, professor and director of the Center for Instructional Research and Curriculum Evaluation at the University of Illinois. The data collected will be used to make management decisions as the project proceeds and to ascertain its overall success. Data will be collected in verbal and written form during and after each major project activity; sources will include participants, staff and instructors, Advisory Board members, and users of the ECHO curriculum products.

A. Process Evaluation: To be educationally sound and true to the principles of adult learning, any program is dependent on its participants and staff for continuing evaluative input. ECHO will rely heavily on these sources for information that can stimulate mid-course revisions and corrections to better achieve the project goals and objectives. The project director will provide structured formal survey and informal interview opportunities for participant and staff feedback on a regular basis. Written evaluation instruments will be designed around the specific activities of the pre-travel orientation workshop and the weekly overseas itineraries, with a summary survey after the group returns to the United States.

These instruments will focus on the activities’ clarity of relationship to the goals and objectives; value in curriculum development; quality of content, scope, and sequence; relevance to application in U.S. classrooms; and description of personal value. They will also include Force Field Analysis techniques, which seek to identify the enabling and constraining factors to be dealt with in achieving project goals. Staff and participants will strive to identify such forces and explore ways by which constraining factors may be reduced in influence and enabling factors may be expanded in impact. The project director and overseas coordinator will administer these instruments.

B. Outcome Evaluation: The outcome evaluation is structured around the project objectives, which will be expanded to include performance measures for reporting purposes. The data sources will include an overall pre/overseas/posttest instrument of change in knowledge and attitudes, to be constructed based on instruments used in previous ECHO projects. The pretest version of this instrument will be sent to all participants immediately after their selection and confirmation. The overseas version, covering the first objective below, will be administered at the conclusion of the overseas phase. Structured documentation for objectives 2 and 3 will also be collected from participants at this time. The project director will document the curriculum modules for objective 4, and track the dissemination figures for objective 5. A final posttest version of the pre-post instrument will be administered three to four months after return to the U.S. for objectives 6 and 7, as discussed below. All outcome measures are the project measure type, and are as follows for the short-term objectives:

1. Participants will learn the fundamental features of the history, culture, and education of the two countries studied. Performance Measure: Participants will show increases on the pre/overseas/post measure, and correctly identify features at a level of at least 80 percent accuracy on the posttest.
2. Participants will discover how these features affect and are affected by the form of government and ethnicity. Performance Measure: Participants will each develop at least three sections for the curriculum modules that illustrate these effects.
3. Promote understanding of the U.S. and its people among persons in East Central Europe. Performance Measure: Participants will each provide at least three written examples of interactions with residents of Hungary and Serbia that promoted international cooperation and understanding.
4. Participants will develop Web-based curriculum modules that capture their experience in East Central Europe with descriptive information, analytic content, and applications useful to their students. Performance Measure: At least three ECHO Web-based curriculum modules will be developed that have high quality content, are easily navigable, and are relevant to U.S. classrooms. The modules will receive mean ratings of good or excellent by at least 80 percent of respondents to a survey which will be sent to 50 or more raters, including Advisory Board members and potential users.
5. Participants will disseminate the curriculum modules through their own institutions, HFU, RBS, and the other ECHO partners. Performance Measure: The curriculum modules will be disseminated to at least 50 U.S. schools and other education institutions.
   
   Successful evaluation of the long-term objectives is more difficult, given the brief one-year project period and the complex nature of the desired impact variables. The pre/overseas/posttest instrument will provide data for objective 6, and HFU and RBS will embed a brief Web survey to collect data relevant to the final objective:
6. Participants’ understanding of international issues and commitment to peaceful relations among nations will increase as a result of the project. Performance Measure: Knowledge and attitudes as measured by the pre/overseas/post instrument will show growth and maturation over the project period as shown by increasing scores.
7. Knowledge and understanding of East Central European sources of forms of government and ethnicity will increase as a result of use of the project Website. Performance Measure: The ECHO Web modules will receive mean ratings of good or excellent by at least 80 percent of respondents to an embedded survey, which will be triggered by each viewer’s second page hit.