It did not take me long to decide that I wanted to write my Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) paper on Romania’s national history curriculum. History education is a deeply political and highly debated subject around the world, and for me, this topic goes beyond a mere academic exercise. Being a Hungarian minority raised in Romania, I have faced many tensions that this paper addresses.

Writing about Romania’s curriculum made me acutely aware of how my personal experiences shaped my research. I was not just a student conducting discourse analysis; the topic became personal to me. I attended Hungarian-speaking schools in Romania, and I recognise that this is a significant achievement for minority rights. Being educated in your mother tongue is an empowering experience.

However, the systematic erasure of minority histories, particularly those of Hungarians and Roma, is undeniable. The absence and invisibility of these stories in our national narrative have left a lasting impression on me. This realisation formed the basis of a paper in which I applied Recognition Theory (Honneth) and Critical Discourse Analysis to examine Romania’s history curriculum and textbooks.

📖 The Curriculum as a Mirror

Curriculum is never neutral; it shapes collective memory, identity, and a sense of belonging. What is included in the curriculum signals who is valued, while what is excluded sends a message, even if that message is silent.

In the case of Romania, I found some troubling gaps; the official curriculum documents, supported by state-approved textbooks, heavily focused on ethnic Romanian narratives. When minority groups, especially Hungarians and Roma, were mentioned, the framing was often passive or even problematic. For instance, one post-war history textbook referred to “problems to address: minorities.” That phrase stuck with me and took me on an emotional journey.

As someone who has experienced discrimination based on ethnic identity, that kind of language was painful to read—but it was also critical to analyse. I had to pause frequently while writing, ensuring that my emotional reactions did not compromise the clarity of my analysis. Nevertheless, the conclusion was clear: minority groups were portrayed as outsiders or, at best, footnotes in someone else’s story. They were not considered part of the national “we.”

🔍 Theory in Practice: Recognition and Identity

Using Recognition Theory, I examined how curricular exclusion impacts students’ sense of social value. Axel Honneth argues that recognition—being seen and valued—is essential for developing a secure identity. When students do not see their community’s stories reflected in what is considered “official” knowledge, it conveys a subtle yet powerful message:

“You do not belong here.“

I reflected on my own educational experience. I was proud of my Hungarian heritage, but I always felt that it made me “different.” In history class, my identity was never acknowledged; it was never integrated into the broader national narrative. This exclusion was not overt or aggressive, but rather structural and consistent. The silence felt deafening.

🧠 Textbooks as Power Tools

Textbooks in Romania are standardised, state-approved, and widely used. Scholars like Michael Apple describe them as vehicles of “authorised knowledge.” These textbooks do not simply convey facts; they also reinforce political and cultural ideologies.

During my review of secondary sources analysing Romanian textbooks, several patterns emerged:

• Contributions from multicultural perspectives in Romanian history were downplayed.
• Minority communities were seldom given a voice.
• Efforts to promote inclusion often lacked authenticity and depth.
• There was a noticeable lack of multi-perspectivity and minimal critical engagement with diversity.

As a result, minority students often struggled to see themselves represented in the national narrative. When they appeared, it was frequently viewed through a deficit lens.

✍️ What This Paper Taught Me

This was the most emotionally impactful academic project I have ever completed. It blurred the line between theory and experience, challenging me to maintain a critical distance while honouring the lived realities that informed my interest in the topic.

I also gained a broader understanding of Romania’s structural challenges. History education remains deeply politicised, shaped by post-communist narratives and nationalist priorities. Reforming the curriculum alone is not enough; true inclusivity requires systemic change in several areas:

• Curriculum design
• Teacher training
• Our perceptions of national identity and belonging

🌱 Looking Ahead

This paper confirmed a belief I hold strongly: education is not just about acquiring knowledge; it is about fostering a sense of belonging.

When children see themselves represented in the curriculum, they feel recognised and included. Conversely, when their stories are erased or distorted, they disengage not only from school but also from society as a whole.

While Romania has made progress—such as protecting Hungarian-language education—there is still much work to be done to create a curriculum that reflects the rich diversity of national identity.

Access the full paper here:🔗A critical analysis of the inclusivity of Romania’s history curriculum with regards to the recognition and identity formation of minorities

💬 A Note to Fellow Educators and Researchers

Have you ever questioned how inclusive your country’s curriculum is? Which histories are emphasised, and which are overlooked? I would love to hear how others are addressing issues of curriculum, identity, and recognition, particularly from the perspectives of policy, practice, or research.