Education Law and Administration in Hungary

Abstract

Hungarian education has a long history and faces challenges even today. In our study, we have presented the history of the development of educational administration and the cornerstones of today’s education system. We have seen how, from 1777 onwards, the government has been responsible for education by involving churches and civil actors in public service. Today, we find in Hungary an administrative (management and legal guarantee) system that has been overhauled several times and which, overall, fulfils its function. The right to education can be asserted, and the law has created a system of legal protection with several levels and actors. The legislation protects vulnerable groups of society, particularly children and people with special educational needs and disabilities. Furthermore, the major international ranking show a medium-grade educational outcomes. However, there is a great social and professional need for further reforms, because the system has serious misfunctions, which are professionally reflected in the practice of rights protection mechanisms (e.g. ombudsman and education rights commissioner). The study also looks for possible solutions that could help the Hungarian education system to break the current developmental deadlock.

1 Introduction

Hungary, with a population of almost 10 million¹ and a size of 93,000 km² (36,000 sq. miles), is a middle-sized Middle-European country. This country is located in the Carpathian Basin, east to the Alps and west to the Ural; its main river is the Danube, which connects ten countries from Germany to Romania. It lay south to the northern Hanseatic trading countries but north to the Adriatic Mediterranean culture. Its language (Hungarian, Magyar) is far from the neighboring countries’ mainly Slavic families and has roots in the East; however, the main religions in the country are in connection with western Christianity. This geographical position had a close effect on the country’s history as well: it was always at the stop and/or contact point of West and East.

The right to education was an integral part of the historic Hungarian Constitution, which was in force from the founding of the state (AD 1000). This so-called ‘Historic Constitution’ was often compared with the British Constitution in their legal tools and historical milestones.² Education, in and after the Middle Ages, was provided typically by the Church; later, Queen Maria Theresa (1740–1780) introduced public education (Ratio Educationis 1777), so the state has continuously and increasingly taken over this task by the second World War. According to our topic, we must mention two main characters of the last two centuries, János Eötvös (nineteenth century) and Kunó Klebelsberg (twentieth century), who were the most influental professionals and politicians helping to approach modern public schooling in the pre-communist modern era. When the Second World War was ended, the Constitution of the Soviet dictatorship had taken place. After 1948 the communist dictatorship had nationalized all church schools, and all services were declared to be provided only by the state. Until 1989, the collapse of the dictatorship, church and private education almost did not exist, nor even religious education could occur. The state explicitly discriminated against the Church and its members, which is why the fall of the dictatorship brought a significant change, particularly in this area.

It is also worth mentioning that since its founding Hungary has been a multi-ethnic state. In the medieval Hungarian state, a significant number of minorities lived who could practice their own language to express their identity. A region inhabited by the minority could use their mother tongue in all private and public relations. In fact, at the end of the 1800s, more than half of schools did not teach in the majority (Hungarian) language but in a minority language. Today, 13 minorities are acknowledged legally in Hungary.

Article 59 of the communist constitution adopted in 1949³ included the right to culture and education, amended in 1972 when modern terms in the Constitution replaced the Bolshevik vocabulary. This amendment was a milestone in the development of education, approaching the contemporary meaning. In 1989 the Constitution was amended⁴ due to the democratic change in the political system; however, major provisions of the right to education remained the same with the previous text, and only clarification of the text has been made (Horváth 2009, p. 2595). By this, the Constitution contained real democratic provisions. A new constitutional framework was adopted in 2011 by the Fundamental Law of Hungary. The new constitution kept the previous democratic achievements.

2 Nature of the Legal System

2.1 Constitutional Framework of the Right to Education

2.1.1 Legislation and Sources of Law in Hungary

Building on democratic traditions, the Fundamental Law states in Article R para (1) that “The Fundamental Law shall be the foundation of the legal system of Hungary.” and in Article R para (2) that “The Fundamental Law and the laws shall be binding on everyone.” This makes a formal distinction between the Constitution and legislation since legislation is based on the Fundamental Law, and Article T para (3) states that “No law shall conflict with the Fundamental Law.” According to Article T(1), “[g]enerally binding rules of conduct may be laid down in the Fundamental Law and in laws adopted by an organ having legislative competence specified in the Fundamental Law and promulgated in the official gazette.” Since not only the legislation but also the Constitution lays down a generally binding rule of conduct, it can still be considered a law in substance (Csink and Mayer 2012, p. 19–20).

According to Article T para (2) of the Fundamental Law, there are two types of legislation: acts and regulations.⁵ In terms of its adoption by Parliament, a law may be a cardinal act (i.e. it requires a qualified majority of two-thirds of the Members of Parliament to be adopted) or a simple act (i.e. it is adopted by a majority of the Members of Parliament). The scope of cardinal laws is defined in the Fundamental Law.

A simple act lays down the rules on the right to education and scientific life. There is a separate law for public education,⁶ higher education,⁷ vocational education⁸ and adult education.⁹

The administrative aspects of education (running, controlling and organizing institutions) are governed by lower-level rules. For example, the government regulates by decree the administrative management of institutions,¹⁰ the promotion of teachers,¹¹ and the general implementation of the Public Education Act.¹² Further detailed issues are regulated by ministerial decree on the basis of the law’s authorization.

Control of education legislation and enforcement of rights is guaranteed by the courts and the special education ombudsman, which is discussed in more detail below in Sect. 3.3.1.

2.1.2 From Decentralization to Centralization—A Brief History of the Development of Education Law

In Hungary, the history of education is as old as the state. The first king, Saint Stephen (997–1038), established the Hungarian kingdom by embracing Christianity and consolidating the church and state institutions, which remained stable despite the struggles of its first century. In the Middle Ages, the Church was responsible for education. The education organization was also adapted to the ecclesiastical administration: primary schools were mainly attached to parishes, while secondary schools were established in bishoprics, next to chapters and monasteries (Szalay and Baróti 1896). There were also separate schools for girls as early as the first royal dynasty (so-called “House of Árpád”, eleventh–thirteenth centuries). The Hungarian kingdom made several attempts to establish a university,¹³ but the first one to survive was founded in 1635 by Cardinal Peter Pázmány in Nagyszombat (now Trnava, Slovakia).¹⁴

From the eighteenth century onwards, royal legal and normative regulation centralized more and more public tasks in Hungary. The name of Maria Theresa (1740–1780) and her son Joseph II (1780–1790) is associated with significant centralization and rationalization in education. In 1777, Maria Theresa issued the educational decree Ratio Educationis. This made education a state responsibility and provided for compulsory education, which was not generally introduced until 1868. An important part of the document was the establishment of an education administration, which unified the previous education system and introduced centralized management. The Crown supervised education; at the same time, the territorial organs of governance were the ‘school districts’, which were atypical regional-level administrative units, not adapted to the typical county level. A second Ratio Educationis decree was issued by King Francis I in 1806, which partially reorganized the supervisory system but maintained centralized control.

Act XXVI on Religion of the years 1790/91 guaranteed, among other things, freedom of religious education, freedom of church schools (Catholic and Protestant) and the right of Protestant churches to exercise the rights of the Catholic Church. In this way, Parliament struck a balance between church-run schools. It stated that each area had the right to choose a headmaster or a curate according to its faith and the freedom to determine the teaching method while maintaining the royal right of supervision (5. §). It should be noted that the latter legislation was a law, a higher source of law than the royal decree.

The first unified education law came into being with the Austro-Hungarian reconciliation and the consolidation of the monarchy.¹⁵ It introduced compulsory education and stated that schools could be public or private. The state was obliged to establish a school in a municipality to the extent that a church did not do so. The administration and control of the school were vested in the municipalities through elected bodies (‘school boards’), i.e. the inhabitants of the municipality were directly involved in the school’s running.¹⁶ The higher level of supervision was exercised by state bodies (‘school district’). School administration moved from decentralized administration in the sixteenth century to a deconcentrated administration, i.e. a sector organized centrally but implemented by territorial authorities. Hungary lost the First World War and 2/3 of its territory in 1918 and 1920. The reforms of the 1920s also affected the education system, but the administrative system remained fundamentally intact and education law in the first half of the twentieth century continued to build on the achievements of the historical constitution.

The next big turning point was 1947–1948, when the communist takeover in Hungary, which had lost the Second World War, established a total dictatorship on the Soviet model. At the same time—from an administrative point of view—a period of complete centralization and concentration began, which also applied to education. Church and private schools were nationalised, and the previous territorially based administrative system was replaced by centralised management. The state, under the control of a communist party, not only transformed education administration but also determined its content. The 1950 curriculum was radically different from the previous one. It aimed to “educate our young pupils to become self-conscious, disciplined citizens of the People’s Republic, loyal sons of the working people, builders of socialism …”(Curriculum 1950) “Education for ‘disciplined citizenship’ meant at that time nothing more than the development of a subordinate attitude that would meet the demands of a monolithic state power, a dictatorial command system.” (Pukánszky and Németh 1996). The right to education was regulated by Article 48 of the first text of the Charta Constitution (based on Soviet law) introduced by Act XX of 1949 on the Constitution of the Hungarian People’s Republic (the Constitution). Following the 1972 amendment of the Constitution, Article 59 of the Charter of the Hungarian People’s Republic recognizes the right to education for all citizens (Horváth 2009, p. 2595). The Constitution then enshrines the right to education for all citizens by extending the right to public education and the elements of the right to education: free and compulsory primary education, secondary and higher education, further education, and financial support for those who receive an education (Oszlánczi 2018, p. 62–64).

The regime change that began in 1989 brought a real democratic change. A multi-party system was established, and pluralism was introduced in education. The constitution, adopted in 1949 and modelled on the Soviet model, was amended in 1989 almost in its entirety.¹⁷ The first law on public education, which gave substance to democratic constitutional rules, was adopted by parliament in 1993.¹⁸ With the amendment of the Constitution, § 70/F now regulated the right to education, with essentially similar content to the previous texts. The concept of public education and the provision of multi-level education remain important constitutional elements. Concerning education, the text also contains clarifications: primary education is free and compulsory, while secondary and higher education is made accessible to all based on ability in constitutional arrangements. The text of the amended Constitution continues to recognize financial assistance (scholarships) as an essential part of the fundamental right.

In 2011, the Parliament of Hungary adopted the Fundamental Law of Hungary, which formally replaced the 1949 Constitution, but in terms of content, it built on the democratic traditions of 1989. The Fundamental Law continues the public law tradition outlined above. The text is identical to the earlier constitutional rules as regards the content of the fundamental right. The only change is about the financing of education: free education has been included in the text for secondary education, and the Fundamental Law allows for the possibility of making financial support for access to higher education subject to conditions limited in time and subject matter.¹⁹

From an administrative and regulatory point of view, the period of 2011–2022 has brought several changes. Whereas previously, the primary responsibility for running schools was with the local authorities, the new legislation in 2012 returned this responsibility to the state. The government set up a centralized management body (Klébelsberg Institutional Maintenance Centre—KLIK)²⁰, which was dysfunctional due to its excessive centralization. Therefore, the government changed the regulatory framework four years later and de-concentrated the tasks, thus re-establishing the “school districts” as the regional educational administrative bodies managed by the reorganised Klebelsberg Centre (K.K.) as the central administrative body.²¹ The administrative arrangements are described in more detail in Sect. 2.3.2.

2.2 The Broader Content of the Right to Education in Hungarian Law

2.2.1 Culture and Education in a Complex Fundamental Right

The right to education is a complex fundamental right. In the Hungarian legal terminology the English term “right to education” has two meanings. First, in a broader sense, it is a combination of the right to culture and education (közművelődéshez való jog). Secondly, in the narrower sense, it means education (oktatáshoz való jog). This means, it has a multi-element structure and is closely linked to other fundamental rights. The constitutional protection of each of its components may differ, given that different content may be regulated for different social groups (Balogh 2019, p. 335).

Within the right to education, we first distinguish the right of access to cultural values. In line with international treaties (e.g. ICESCR, ECHR), Hungarian constitutional law also emphasizes that culture is a universal value that is the property of the individual and that everyone should have access to it, either to cultivate it (active form) or to benefit from it (passive form).²²

According to the Fundamental Law, Hungary “extends and generalizes community culture”.²³ As a type of constitutional provision, this is a state objective which creates a long-term obligation for the State to take action. (Balogh 2019, p. 335) The Fundamental Law does not provide any further details in this regard. Still, from the twentieth century onwards, Hungarian regulatory history has known the most diverse types of national and local public cultural institutions, which form the basic system of cultural administration from local cultural centers to the most diverse public collections. Public education is always an opportunity for the individual to enrich himself with cultural values, never an obligation.²⁴

On the subjective side, the right to education is open to all. The universality of the right to education in a broader sense presupposes that everyone has equal access to cultural values and learning. Equality implies a possibility of access for the subject and a differentiation obligation on the part of the State, whereby individuals with different abilities and skills are able to access these values in a way that suits them.

The Hungarian Fundamental Law—similarly to the previous constitutional rules—declares access to this fundamental right for Hungarian citizens, but this does not narrow down the scope of the subject since both the international treaties cited earlier and the international court practice²⁵ developed based on them clearly emphasize that this is a universal human right, i.e. a right guaranteed as an innate right to all people regardless of their nationality. Therefore this reference to nationality no longer appears at the level of the law under the constitutional arrangements.

Within the right to education, the primary source of sub-rights other than education is Article 15 of the ICESCR, which links education to two aspects of one’s intellectual life: cultural and scientific life. This is the basis on which Hungary’s present constitutional system is built.

Hungary recognizes the right of everyone to participate in cultural life. Culture is closely linked to art as the transmission of spiritual values. This means, first and foremost, according to the classical approach, creating the beauty and the beauty tangible through any intellectual expression (literature, music, song) or material (architecture, painting, sculpture, applied arts) (Révay and Varjú 1936). Art is as old as mankind (see cave paintings) and follows the evolution of man. The purpose and role of art and culture in society have changed considerably over the millennia.²⁶ Culture also plays a key role in developing emotional intelligence, enriching people’s emotional lives through transmitting values. An emotionally and intellectually rich person can become more inclusive and more open to respecting others, which is ultimately a prerequisite for harmonious coexistence in small and large human communities. Therefore, participation in culture is valuable for both the individual and society and impacts the enjoyment of other fundamental rights.

This fundamental right can be achieved through active action by the state. In fulfilling its international obligations, the United Nations expects States to provide a legal environment that fully integrates access to culture. As with all fundamental rights, the right to education is subject to the requirement of adequate legal protection.²⁷

The Hungarian Fundamental Law ensures that everyone enjoys the benefits of the progress of science and its application and that the moral and material interests of the authors of all scientific, literary or artistic works are protected. Regarding the freedom of scientific life, it provides protection for two main categories of subjects: (i) those who take part in the pursuit of science and (ii) those who enjoy the fruits of the results of science. Regarding the former, respect for the freedom essential to scientific research and creative activity is also a condition.

Both culture and science point outside themselves: their true purpose is in society. Thus, the state’s obligation linked to this fundamental right extends to ensuring participation (cultivation) and free communication and access to the results. Regarding culture, international treaties²⁸ even specifically highlight the right and the state obligation to preserve and develop it (Láncos 2014, p. 45; Gerencsér 2015, p. 97).

2.2.2 The Right to Education in a Narrower Sense

Another major area of the examined fundamental right is the right to education. Education and upbringing,²⁹ i.e. the development of skills and social relations and the transfer of knowledge to children and young people, has been key issue in all ages, regardless of who was responsible for education. The harmonious spiritual, physical and intellectual development of children and young people, the development of their skills, abilities, knowledge, skills, emotional and volitional qualities and literacy, taking into account their age-specific characteristics, has been the basis for a system of education and training with a variety of tools and at different levels for centuries. In addition, in the second half of the twentieth century, the international legal community recognised it as a universal human right and it appeared in Hungarian constitutional law.

The Hungarian constitution distinguishes between three levels of education: primary, secondary and higher education. There is significant differentiation between them, as primary education is “free and compulsory”. In contrast, secondary education is “free and accessible to all”, and tertiary education is “accessible to all on the basis of ability.”³⁰ The Constitution does not define types of institutions. Still, levels of education, so that within the levels, the state is free to decide to establish different types of educational institutions or forms of education.

The right to education is most closely linked to human dignity. Education, knowledge, and enrichment in spiritual values make a fuller human being. International and national constitutional rules tailor participation in education to the individual’s own abilities but also require a minimum level (primary education). The requirement of compulsory education is important for society and promotes equal rights and individualizing the exercise of this fundamental right. Equality of access to education is therefore guaranteed for all, but it is adapted to each person’s personality and abilities.

Academic and artistic freedom makes particular sense concerning higher education. Higher education has a specific autonomy beyond institutional and economic autonomy: it also implies freedom of scientific and artistic life.³¹ Freedom of academic and artistic life, alongside the autonomy of higher education institutions, also protects the autonomy of science, freedom of creation, freedom of research and freedom of teaching (Láncos 2009, p. 2611). The latter is also constitutionally protected as part of the right to education, as shown below.

Freedom of conscience and religion is a fundamental right closely linked to education. The provision of religious education in state institutions (content) and public services in educational institutions maintained by churches (form) have been included in the content of the right to education since the Ratio Educationis (Gerencsér and Csekő-Lengyel 2021). The communist-socialist dictatorship radically restricted the exercise of religious freedom. After the change of regime, there was a lively debate on the relationship between the state and the church in society in legal practice and jurisprudence, which has now resulted in the regulation of both the content and the form of the framework mentioned above (Schanda 2012, p. 122).

Finally, the right to education is also an enabler of several other fundamental rights. Therefore, Enikő Horváth considers it a so-called “key right” (Horváth 2009, p. 2596). The right to education plays an essential role in fulfilling all members of society, especially in the choice of work and occupation (Article XII of the Fundamental Law), which is closely linked to personal knowledge and skills. In addition, the former constitutional judge János Zlinszky underlines that “up to a certain level, it is also a guarantee of the functioning of the democratic rule of law. The rule of law and democracy in public life cannot be achieved if the politically empowered (adult) part of the citizenry is not capable of acquiring, understanding and evaluating the information necessary for the exercise of the law. Citizens must be empowered to choose and support political goals, exercise their rights, elect and monitor their representatives, and participate in public life. This requires a basic level of literacy.”³²

Social responsibility plays a significant role in the system of Fundamental Law. As mentioned above, compulsory basic education and the higher education that can be acquired in addition to it contribute to the proper exercise of this social responsibility (cf: social responsibility of property³³ and duty of care³⁴).

In Hungarian constitutional thinking, we usually distinguish between the right to learning and the right to teaching in the content of the right to education. The right to learning (freedom of education) is first related to the right to access education. The constitutional rule places this right on a dual basis: primary and secondary education must be (a) accessible to all (b) ‘on the basis of ability’. Of course, the State will establish educational institutions that are differentiated in certain respects precisely to ensure that all children, despite their different abilities, can receive the appropriate education. The right to education also implies the right to choose the educational establishment that corresponds to the ideological convictions of the parent and the child. The right to education also means access to quality education, which means modern, high-quality and objective education.

The right to education is a more structured right that takes into account the education levels and the institution’s educational profile. This right is particularly valued in the freedom of academic and artistic life. (Balogh 2019, p. 335) The right to education is also linked to the right to establish institutions, which allows non-state actors (national governments, churches, NGOs, etc.) to play a role alongside the state (Árva 2020, p. 860–861).

On the other hand, the right to education creates not only rights but also a civic obligation (compulsory education). In line with international documents (and Hungarian public law tradition), participation in primary education is an obligation for all. The purpose of compulsory primary education is to ensure equality and to support the development of an independent and responsible human being through the acquisition of elementary knowledge.

The compulsory nature of primary education is not an end in itself: it aims to enable children to develop their personalities to the fullest, to be able to lead independent lives and to make responsible choices.

From the point of view of fundamental rights protection, it should be stressed that a specific form of enforcement is ombudsman control, which may apply specifically to education rights. This is discussed in more detail in Sect. 3.3.1.

Regarding public education, the state has an obligation to provide services and maintain institutions which, like other social and cultural rights, are adapted to the state’s economic capacity. Horváth calls it “progressive” tasking, as its implementation is gradual (Horváth 2009, p. 2597; Balogh 2019, p. 317). However, both in the field of public education and in the field of education law, it is the activity of the State and the obligation to provide services that must be emphasized. In the area of the right to education, there is no negative side, i.e. no action from which the state should refrain since the institutional protection side is clearly present in the provision of public services. Access to the fundamental right would not be possible if the state did not provide the institutional backing for it.

In the state’s tasks in the enforcement of education law (education administration, i.e. the administration of public education and higher education), we can distinguish between two further elements: education as a public service and the activities of the education authorities. The latter is an explicitly public, even governmental, task, but the provision of public services is not exclusively open to the state. Given that the state’s role in public education, in particular, emerged several hundred years later than that of non-state (ecclesiastical) education, non-state actors have traditionally been involved in this public service.³⁵ The public provision of education and training by state and non-state actors has established a pluralist educational system in Hungary (Balogh 2019, p. 335). The uniformity of the quality and standard of education and training (and, ultimately, the equality of rights for all legal entities) is guaranteed by a system of public control which uses a mix of contractual, regulatory and quality assurance instruments (see for example public education contracts, operating licences, accreditation, etc.).

Non-state institutions, mainly church-run, not only complement the provision of public services but also guarantee the exercise of freedom of conscience and religion (parental right to choose the upbringing and education of their children).³⁶ The state must establish ideologically neutral institutions, not religiously committed schools (Schanda 2012, p. 104). It does, however, provide subsidies for the maintenance of the latter: the public tasks taken on by the religious institution receive budgetary compensation from the state commensurate with the number of public tasks it takes on.³⁷

Article XI of the Constitution continues to contain provisions on free movement and subsidies (Láncos 2009, p. 2625). International treaties also emphasize that primary education should be free of charge, in addition to being compulsory. Concerning free education, the Constitutional Court stresses both the subjective and the institutional aspects of the right to education: “the State has a constitutional obligation and parents and pupils a fundamental subjective right to free education.”³⁸ The support system enshrined in the Fundamental Law (e.g. the setting of scholarship ceilings) is a constitutional guarantee that further broadens access to education and, thus, equal opportunities in society. However, financial support is not of a constitutional nature but is determined by the state according to its capacity to bear the burden.

2.3 Organizational and Administrative Aspects of Education Law

2.3.1 School Maintainers and Founders—Institutional Side

The Explanatory Memorandum of Act CXC of 2011 on National Public Education (hereinafter: Nkt.) underlines that the new educational legislation is intended to be a framework law.³⁹ The wording of the Nkt. is detailed and has been subject to several amendments over the last decade, so the depth of regulation in the text is not homogeneous. The Nkt. regulates first the main subjects: the institutional system, the order of operation, the pedagogical program, the different rules for religious, private and defense institutions, the rights and obligations of pupils and teachers, the representation and promotion of teachers, parents’ organizations, and finally the government’s and the maintenance authorities’ tasks, controls and financing, and the supply of textbooks.

Regarding the right to education, the Constitution expects citizens to participate in the public education system. At the same time, the state is responsible for ensuring its attainment and high quality for all citizens. According to its explanatory memorandum,⁴⁰ the law guarantees the state’s tasks primarily through the common definition of a minimum curriculum, national professional supervision, introducing a career model for teachers and, linked to this, sector-neutral central wage financing. At the same time, the law also ensures a certain degree of participation by local communities. It highlights the diversity of the Hungarian kindergarten and school structure, the circle of maintainers and the pedagogical culture as values.

As discussed in the previous chapters, the law in force has not decentralized (or only minimally deconcentrated) the education administration. The term ‘local communities’ is used here to refer primarily to the multi-stakeholder model of the school maintenance circle. According to Article 2 of the Public Education Act, public education institutions are primarily maintained by the state. In exceptional cases, the national minority self-government, a religious legal person, a religious association⁴¹ or any other person or organization may establish and maintain an educational institution within the Act’s framework if it has acquired the right to do so. Before 2012, local authorities were the main providers of education and health services. By then, however, significant funding difficulties had arisen, and the financial capacity of local authorities had been overstretched. In addition, there was tension between the government’s responsibility for education and the municipalities’ ability to use their independence to implement the law to make decisions that went against the government’s wishes. The 2012 reform, therefore, opted for centralisation and gave municipalities powers in development policy decisions instead of education and health. Local governments may establish and maintain only kindergartens.

Non-state operators (i.e. minority self-governments, churches, religious associations and other foundations and enterprises) may establish and operate a school (or an equivalent institution under the law) if they meet the quality assurance requirements. The first step is establishing a contractual framework,⁴² which the maintainer enters with the ministry to participate in the public education service. Through the public education contract, the non-state operator undertakes to fulfill the public functions, operate the institution under the same regulatory framework as the state schools, and receive the state subsidy that makes education free for pupils in such institutions. According to a specific rule for churches, if they have a framework contract for public human services, they may establish an educational institution by unilateral act (notification). In two cases, an international treaty regulates the framework for the provision of education. (i) The provision of education by the Catholic Church is governed by an international treaty between the Holy See and Hungary (Schanda 2015, para 75–76; Gerencsér 2017, p. 95–108). (ii) The establishment of a foreign educational institution may be based on an international treaty, but the Ministry will still register the educational institution. The established public education institution will receive an operating license from the authority, establishing the elements of its operation’s legality.

2.3.2 Government Administration and Governance in Education

Until 2010, the Hungarian government typically had a ministry with a separate education portfolio. In 2010, the government placed the management of the main public human services (health, social services, sport, and education) under one ministry.⁴³ The year 2022 brought changes at all levels of education in Hungary. This year, these sectors were separated, the former ministry was abolished, and education came under the control of the Ministry of the Interior.⁴⁴ From 2018, the Ministry of Innovation and Technology was responsible for higher education and vocational training; from 2022, the Ministry of Culture and Innovation took over these areas.⁴⁵

The minister manages the public sector, typically through state administration bodies. The management and control of Hungarian educational institutions are exercised by two main types of bodies: an administrative-authority body and a professional-administrative body.

• (i) The administrative operation of schools is ensured by the school district centers [tankerületi központ], which is a network of administrative institutions organized on a regional basis.⁴⁶ The central body is the Klebelsberg Centre, which is managed by the Minister responsible for education. The school district center may propose, in addition to its operation, the reorganization, closure, change of core tasks and naming of any school, but the Minister decides on these matters. It supervises the management, carries out national and international measurements and studies in the field of public education, performs statistical tasks and prepares development plans. It has an advisory, consultative and advisory body. The centers of the school districts carry out some of the official tasks when the school takes decisions of the first instance, for example, on the establishment or termination of pupil status or disciplinary matters.⁴⁷

• (ii) The Education Office [Oktatási Hivatal] is a central administrative professional body for education headed by the Minister. Its main tasks are record-keeping and data management concerning schools, the operation of national education information systems, the administration of school-leaving examinations and central admissions to higher education, textbook publishing, international professional relations, the preparation of vocational examinations for vocational training, and other tasks as defined by law, such as the development of teacher qualifications. In addition, it provides pedagogical-professional services and, in some cases, performs tasks of secondary authority.

3 Major Legal Developments

3.1 Main Legislation Affecting Education

3.1.1 Substantive Legal Framework

The Nkt. regulates the operation of public education, which the Minister manages. The purpose and rationale of the Act are to establish a system of public education, which it defines as a public service.⁴⁸ In this way, it fulfills its obligation under the Fundamental Law to provide free and compulsory primary education and secondary education and training for all.⁴⁹

All children between the ages of 6 and 16 are compulsory school-age.⁵⁰ The Nkt. regulates the tasks of the institutions of the public education system, such as kindergartens, primary schools, secondary schools, vocational schools, vocational schools, and schools for skills development. It also provides for colleges, specialized pedagogical services and professional services, the pedagogical program, and determines the organization of the school year. It also sets out the rights and obligations of pupils, parents and teachers, the framework for rewarding pupils, disciplinary action and liability for damages, the rules for children with special educational needs and the status of pupils.

Higher education is currently regulated by Act CCIV of 2011. In addition to the Minister of Culture and Innovation, the Hungarian Higher Education Accreditation Commission (MAB) is linked to Hungarian higher education, which is responsible for quality control and its tasks are defined in the Higher Education Act⁵¹ and Government Decree 69/2006 (28.III.2006) on the MAB. The tasks of the authority are performed by the Education Office, which is a central budgetary body operating as a central office under the authority of the Minister responsible for public education.⁵² The National Doctoral Council, the Higher Education Planning Board, the Dual Education Council, the Hungarian Rectors’ Conference, the National Conference of Student Self-Governments and the National Association of Doctoral Students are responsible for the representation of interests.

Higher education comprises higher education vocational training, the interlocking bachelor’s degree, master’s degree, doctoral training and specialized continuing training. A bachelor’s and master’s program may be organized in a split or undivided organization according to the provisions of the legislation.⁵³ The Hungarian state may establish institutions of higher education, a national minority self-government, a religious legal entity, a business company with its registered office in Hungary, or a foundation, trust foundation, public foundation or religious association registered in Hungary.⁵⁴ In the academic year 2021/2022, there were 63 higher education institutions in Hungary. Studying at higher education institutions with a Hungarian state scholarship, partial scholarship, or self-financed study is possible. Higher education students can take advantage of the possibility of pursuing part-time studies related to their studies and establish a visiting student status with another higher education institution.

Vocational education and training is a partially separate subsystem of the education sector, governed by the Minister of Culture and Innovation and, since 2020, regulated by Act LXXX of 2019 on Vocational Education and Training. VET is “vocational education and training preparing for a vocational qualification.”⁵⁵ The legal status of a vocational training institution is that of a legal entity established to perform a basic vocational training task. Currently, in Hungary, two types can be distinguished: technical and vocational schools. The “technicum” prepares the student for the general school-leaving examination and the vocational examination, whereas the vocational school only prepares the student for the vocational examination.⁵⁶ The State, a national minority municipality, a religious legal person, a company, a foundation or an association may run a vocational training establishment.⁵⁷ The school year is the same as that of a public education establishment, and the decisions of the vocational establishment and their review are subject to the procedures laid down for public education. In vocational training, a student status and an adult education status may be established, the latter being subject to the provisions of Act LXXVII of 2013 on Adult Education. Under the legislation in force, it is possible to acquire two professions free of charge.

3.1.2 Special Actors in Education

The Nkt. defines the children eligible for special treatment in the special subject area of public education. This group includes children with special educational needs, children with difficulties in integration, learning and behavior, and particularly gifted or talented children.⁵⁸

“A child or pupil with special educational needs is a child or pupil requiring special treatment who, based on the expert opinion of the committee of experts, are handicapped or have perceptual, mental deficiency or speech disorder, or have multiple disabilities in case of the simultaneous occurrence of several deficiencies or have autism spectrum disorder or any other psychic disorder (serious disorder concerning learning or the control of attention or behavior)”⁵⁹

According to the data of the Hungarian Central Statistical Office (KSH) for 2021, the number of children with special educational needs has been steadily increasing since 2013, and in the school year 2020/2021, 7.9% of pupils had special educational needs, which means 57.7 thousand pupils.

Children with integration, learning and behavioral difficulties include children and pupils with special needs who, according to the expert opinion of the expert committee, are significantly underachieving in relation to their age, have problems with social relationships, learning and behavioral deficits, and have difficulties in integrating into the community and personality development, but do not qualify as children with special educational needs.⁶⁰

In accordance with the Fundamental Law, the Nkt. states that the special needs of children in the situations mentioned above requiring special attention should be taken into account as a priority task of public education.⁶¹ Compulsory schooling also applies to children with special educational needs, from the age of six to sixteen, and may be extended to the age of 23 for children with special educational needs.⁶²

The Nkt. also states the right of pupils with special educational needs to receive pedagogical, remedial or conductive educational care appropriate to their condition within the framework of special treatment, starting from the time when their eligibility for special treatment has been established⁶³ and provides additional rights in accordance with their needs.

The legislation refers to ten types of institutions where pupils with special educational needs have the opportunity to participate in public education. These are kindergartens, primary schools, secondary schools, vocational schools, vocational schools, primary art schools, special education establishments, educational establishments providing special education, educational establishments providing conductive education, colleges, specialized educational services, and establishments providing pedagogical-professional services. In addition, the Nkt. names the specialized vocational school, the unified institution for curative education, the specialized pedagogical services, the pedagogical-professional services, and organizes the services and the time frame. In addition, there are guidelines for pupils with special educational needs in pre-school and public education.

3.2 Litigation or Dispute Resolution Concerning Education

3.2.1 Traditional Legal Route

Table 1 lists the relevant rules for decisions in the public education system.⁶⁴

Table 1 Relevant rules for decisions in the public education systemFootnote

Own editing based on the Nkt.

3.2.2 First Instance

If an educational establishment makes a decision, takes a measure or fails to take a measure (hereinafter: decides) that affects a pupil, the pupil may appeal against it. The right to legal remedy is guaranteed by Article XXVII(7) of the Fundamental Law, which applies to everyone, including children.⁶⁶ The legal representation of the child is the responsibility of the parents who have parental authority, which is not only their right but also their duty.⁶⁷ Thus, they can appeal against a decision taken by the school. The form of how the decision is communicated does not affect the possibility of bringing proceedings (Szüdi 2012, p. 125).

The Nkt. lists the disciplinary sanctions that can be imposed on a student if he or she is guilty of a serious breach of duty. Disciplinary sanctions may only be imposed as a written decision during disciplinary proceedings. No disciplinary proceedings may be taken against a child under the age of ten who is necessarily of compulsory school age.⁶⁸ The scope of disciplinary measures and the arrangements for their application shall be laid down in the rules of the educational establishment.⁶⁹

3.2.3 Second Instance

As shown in Table 1, if the parent, pupil or child does not claim breach of interest in their application, the decision in the second instance is made by the maintaining authority, thus removing the possibility of solving the problem from the school and the directly involved actors.

The state, national minority self-government, a religious legal entity, an organization carrying out religious activities, or any other person or organization may maintain a public education institution, provided it has been authorized to do so. The municipal government may also maintain a kindergarten (Report of the Commissioner for Education Rights 2015). The State Secretariat for Public Education within the Ministry of the Interior and the Education Office are responsible for the management of public education. Since 1 January 2017, the Klebelsberg Centre has been the central management body liable for the 60 school district centers.⁷⁰ These centers are responsible for the maintenance of state-run primary and secondary schools. As a result of the change in 2017, the school district centers have an autonomous budget. The Klebelsberg Centre does not control private, church-run and minority self-government-run schools and municipal kindergartens.⁷¹ Thus, either the competent school district center under the Klebelsberg Centre or, in the case of church-run, private or minority-run institutions, which are independent of the Klebelsberg Centre is entitled to act as a second-tier provider.

At the end of its procedure, the maintainer may reject the appeal, change it or order the educational institution that has been tried in the first instance to make a new decision.⁷² The discretion of the maintainer is within limits set by the law. The maintainer has a direct, subordinate relationship with the educational establishment.

3.2.4 Administrative Proceedings

The Nkt. regulates the legal remedy procedure against the decisions of educational institutions with a separate procedure. In the first instance, a decision taken by an educational establishment is not a decision of an administrative authority since by virtue of its legal status. Likewise, a decision taken by the maintainer in the second instance is not an administrative authority’s decision (Szüdi 2012, p. 126–127). As in the case of private, ecclesiastical and national self-government institutions, the Klebelsberg Center, as a central budgetary body operating as a central office under the authority of the Minister responsible for education, is not an administrative authority.⁷³ Nevertheless, the legislator provides for the possibility of judicial review of a decision taken by the maintainer in the second instance. The application must be lodged with the court.⁷⁴ At the end of the procedure, a judicial decision is issued, which establishes obligations and settles the dispute as to its legality. However, as with the decision in the second instance, the source of the problem that caused the conflict is not identified, and the court decision does not give any guidance on how to prevent it in the future. The court is completely independent of the child, his parents, and the educational establishment.

Act I of 2017 on the Act on Public Administration Court Procedure (hereinafter: Kp.) allows for court mediation.⁷⁵ The previous legislation did not allow for this, but since 1 January 2018, parties may use it voluntarily. Given the nature of education disputes, one of the parties is usually a minor in a vulnerable situation due to his or her age. He or she is dependent on his or her parents and, in the educational institution, on his or her teachers. The Convention on the Rights of the Child⁷⁶ and, in line with this, Act XXXI of 1997 on the Protection of Children and Guardianship Administration declare that the best interests of the child must be the primary consideration in decisions affecting the child. It can hardly be doubted that the best interests of the child would not be better served if it were possible to have recourse to a mediation procedure where a decision is taken in accordance with the principles of interest-based dispute resolution and where the real interests of both parties are taken into account. The court decides on the application, within narrowly defined rules, on what is lawful. However, mediation aims to produce a settlement in which both parties agree (Bereczki 2020, p. 65–67). This does not mean, however, that the parties can reach an agreement on content contrary to the law. The court will examine whether the settlement conforms with the law before approving it, and only then will it issue an order.⁷⁷

In mediation, the parties define the problem and have the opportunity to decide on issues that cannot be taken into account in court. Another important aspect of mediation is its preventive character. In addition to redressing past grievances, mediation can also lead to a settlement that explores the problem in sufficient depth to prevent similar situations from arising in the future. In contrast, the judicial process focuses exclusively on past events to establish the facts and reach a decision (Bereczki 2020, p. 68–69). Mediation is voluntary, unlike litigation, where one party is obliged to participate in the proceedings (Bereczki 2020, p. 70). The parties’ decision to participate in mediation can be seen as a declaration of intent for the future, that they are interested in finding common ground to resolve the problem. In litigation, the parties face each other in court, whereas in mediation, they face the problem side by side. It is also important to highlight the sensitizing function and role of mediation. A sensitization is an essential tool for effective communication, consensus building and openness towards the other party. (Fehérpataky B et al. 2012, p. 78.)

Another advantage of mediation is its speed and cost-effectiveness. Speed is an extremely important factor in education disputes, as in many cases, the right to education of school-age children is violated, and a protracted dispute can have serious consequences for the student’s academic progress. In the event of a successful mediation, the court will enter the settlement into a decree with the effect of a judgment, and in the absence of a settlement, the proceedings will continue.⁷⁸

3.3 Alternative Legal Instruments

3.3.1 Commissioner for Educational Rights

The legal Commissioner for education rights institution is a rare but not unknown institution in Europe. Some countries have created a special ombudsman among the parliamentary commissioners for fundamental rights, specifically to oversee education rights.⁷⁹ In Hungary, a specialized ombudsman system was established in 1999, which placed the control of educational rights under the control of the Minister responsible for education (Education Rights Commissioner).⁸⁰ Any person involved in education (pupils, parents, teachers, students, researchers, lecturers and their associations) can turn to the Education Rights Commissioner if they believe their rights have been infringed or are at risk of being infringed. This is particularly the case where a decision or measure or lack of those infringe an educational right or creates an imminent threat of such infringement.

The Education Rights Commissioner is not an authority but rather a mediating body. If it finds something illegal, it reports it to the head of the educational establishment; if no progress is made, it reports it to the maintenance or supervisory body. The Education Rights Commissioner can also open an inquiry of his own motion if a law or measure or lack of action causes serious violations of rights or affects a large group of citizens.⁸¹ The procedure of the specialized ombudsman is subject to two conditions: (i) The available remedies must be exhausted, except for judicial proceedings; (ii) In addition, an application must be submitted within one year of the date on which the decision adversely affecting the education system becomes final. The ex officio proceedings may be brought without a time limit. The Nkt. provides for the right of children, pupils, teachers and parents to apply to the Education Rights Commissioner in case of a violation or imminent threat of violation of their rights in education. Complaints may be made in writing, orally or in person. The Commissioner cannot act in the case of a final court decision or pending court proceedings.

The Office’s tasks, status and operation are regulated by the Ministerial Decree 40/1999 (X. 8.). The Office operates as an autonomous internal department within the Ministry. The Minister responsible for education appoints and dismisses the Commissioner and exercises the Commissioner’s powers as an employer.⁸² The Commissioner is accountable only to the Minister. The Education Rights Commissioner heads the office. He may not be instructed in the performance or execution of his duties.

The Education Rights Commissioner will seek an agreement between the parties to remedy the situation. As a first step, it will contact the institution or individual concerned with a view to obtaining a statement on the complaint received. It then invites the parties to agree in writing and reconcile their positions. If this is unsuccessful, a personal meeting will be arranged. If the infringement persists, it shall take the initiative to bring it to an end by recommending it to the institution or individual concerned and its supervisory body.⁸³ Proceedings may also be initiated ex officio if there is a serious infringement or an imminent threat of a serious infringement affecting a large group of citizens.⁸⁴ The Commissioner will report annually on his/her activities, experience, the effectiveness of his/her recommendations, ex-officio and complaint procedures.

3.3.2 Commissioner for Fundamental Rights

The provisions of the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights are contained in the Fundamental Law of Hungary and the Act CXI of 2011 on the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights.

The Commissioner for Fundamental Rights is the Parliament’s control body to protect fundamental rights (Varga 2012, p. 127). Its task is to investigate “irregularities” that arise in connection with the proceedings of an administrative authority⁸⁵ that comes to its attention. The fundamental rights that affect education are the right to education,⁸⁶ the right of children to protection and care,⁸⁷ the right to human dignity,⁸⁸ and the right to legal remedy.⁸⁹ According to Article 18 (1) of the Act CXI of 2011, anyone who considers that a decision or failure to act by a public authority, in this case, a public service⁹⁰ infringes a fundamental right may apply to the Commissioner. In case No. AJB-860/2017⁹¹, the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights, deduced that his jurisdiction also extends to schools and their maintainers. The Fundamental Law lays down the obligation to provide free, compulsory primary and universal secondary education⁹² as a public service of the Hungarian state.⁹³ Thus, education stakeholders—pupils, teachers, and parents—can also turn to the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights if they have experienced or are at risk of violating fundamental rights. The Commissioner’s procedure is subject to the condition that the petitioner has already exhausted the legal remedies available to him/her or that no final court decision or administrative action is pending. Complainants have one year from the date the administrative decision in question becomes final or enforceable to lodge a complaint.⁹⁴

The Commissioner may take action to remedy the situation, which may include a recommendation, an initiative to the head of the body concerned to remedy the instance of maladministration, a request for a Constitutional Court proceeding, a request for prosecution, or a proposal for a change in the law.⁹⁵

The Commissioner is elected by a two-thirds majority of the National Assembly on the proposal of the President of the Republic for a term of 6 years. He is required to report annually to Parliament on his activities.⁹⁶ The Commissioner is independent, cannot be instructed and is subject only to the law.⁹⁷

The Fundamental Rights Commissioner has the following tools at his disposal: he can ask the authorities for information and copies of documents, and he can ask the head of the authority concerned or its supervisory body to carry out an investigation, which the bodies concerned must do within the time limits set. They may also attend public hearings and carry out on-the-spot checks.⁹⁸

For cases concerning education, as described above, anyone can apply to both the Commissioner for Education and the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights under almost similar conditions—exhaustion of remedies, one a year time limit. A significant difference is that the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights can act in cases of fundamental rights violations or threats thereof, whereas the Commissioner for Education can be approached for any kind of rights violation related to education. Both can make recommendations, but the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights has wider powers in terms of means. The Commissioner for Education aims to bring the parties’ positions closer together and to facilitate a joint resolution of the situation and is specifically responsible for dealing with education matters. The Commissioner for Fundamental Rights, while seeking solutions to the situations complained of in individual complaints, draws attention to systemic shortcomings and problems, including those of a legislative nature. The annual reports of the Commissioner for Education provide a comprehensive picture of the current state of the education system, typical problems encountered in schools and the difficulties that currently need to be addressed. While the Commissioner for Education reports to the Minister responsible for education and works to remedy situations of non-compliance and promote the education system’s positive development, the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights is responsible for protecting fundamental rights and promoting their unhindered and lawful exercise.

3.3.3 Alternative Dispute Resolution Methods in Public Education as Provided for by Law

In Hungary, there are three types of alternative dispute resolution options available to educational institutions for the resolution of educational conflicts, as specified in the legislation⁹⁹: the conciliation procedure prior to disciplinary proceedings, the educational mediation procedure and the reparation mediation in the conciliation procedure.

Table 2 lists the options for alternative dispute resolution in the public education system.

Table 2 Options for alternative dispute resolution in the public education systemFootnote

Own editing based on the 20/2012. (VIII. 31.) of the Ministerial Decree.

Ministerial Decree 20/2012 (VIII. 31.) on the operation of educational institutions and the naming of public educational institutions (hereinafter: Ministerial Decree 20/2012) provides that the detailed rules of disciplinary proceedings and the conciliation procedure preceding them must be defined in the organizational and operational rules of educational institutions.¹⁰¹

A pupil who culpably and seriously fails to comply with his/her obligations may be disciplined by a written decision based on disciplinary proceedings.¹⁰² By contrast, the scope of disciplinary measures is not specified; the forms and principles of application must be laid down in the institution’s rules of procedure.¹⁰³

The legislation defines the conciliation procedure as an option with two objectives. On the one hand, to deal with the events and grievances that led to the misconduct and, on the other hand, to create an agreement between the two parties—the person who has suffered the harm and the person suspected of misconduct. Participation in the conciliation procedure is voluntary and only possible if the parties—in the case of minors, their parents or legal representatives—have agreed to it. Although the Decree regulates the conciliation procedure itself as an option, it establishes an obligation to notify.

The legislation also states that the disciplinary authority may refuse to apply the conciliation procedure if a third instance of misconduct occurs.¹⁰⁴ The Regulation does not specify which instances of misconduct should be taken into account when determining the third occasion. According to one piece of literature, “if the institution’s rules of organization and operation do not provide for it, it is appropriate to take into account two instances of misconduct for which the pupil has already been the subject of a conciliation procedure or disciplinary proceedings.” (Juhász 2015, p. 6). Thus, on this basis, in the case of a first or second disciplinary procedure, the disciplinary authority would not have the possibility to reject the conciliation procedure. On the contrary, the Administrative and Labour Court of Eger, in its judgment No. 9.K.27.058/2016/12¹⁰⁵ concluded that the disciplinary authority had lawfully refused to hold the conciliation procedure. It reasoned that the repeated misconduct or disciplinary offense could be established on the basis of the nine warnings for minor misconduct, which dated from the past period, and the partial admission of the student concerned. The Curia confirmed the court’s first instance reasoning in its precedent-setting decision no. Kfv.37827/2014/8.¹⁰⁶ The fact that more than three disciplinary offenses had been committed and that the achievement of the objective of the conciliation procedure, i.e. the remedying of the grievance and the conclusion of an agreement, could not have been envisaged in the case in question, justified the lawful dismissal of the proceedings. However, it must be concluded that, in calculating the third misconduct, an account may be taken not only of misconduct which has been the subject of a disciplinary or conciliation procedure but also of misconduct that, where appropriate, is a disciplinary offense for breach of the measures of the rules of conduct set by the school and which is embodied by a warning. On this basis, two disciplinary measures taken in response to a breach of the rules of conduct prior to the culpable and serious misconduct giving rise to the disciplinary procedure may be sufficient grounds for dismissing the conciliation procedure.

The second dispute resolution option in an educational establishment is the educational mediation procedure which can be used in two cases. It can be applied if the institution cannot eliminate the reasons that endanger the child or pupil by pedagogical means and if it is justified to protect the learning community. Thus, the school may seek help from the services to protect minors and family law or the educational mediation service.

In his 2018 report, the Commissioner for Education Rights pointed out that in the event of conflicts between students, the institution must fulfill its supervisory obligation under Article 25 (5) of the Nkt., and ensure the creation of healthy and safe conditions for education (Székely L et al 2019). However, there may not be an appropriate method in the teachers’ pedagogical toolbox to fulfill the supervision obligation. In such cases, the educational mediation procedure provided for by the Regulation may be a solution. “Mediation is a conflict management and dispute resolution procedure to reach a mutual agreement between the parties involved in a dispute. With the involvement of a third party (mediator) who is not affected by the dispute, the parties reach an agreement to resolve the dispute.” (Fehérvári 2013). The aim of the educational mediation procedure is also to reach an agreement. It is important to stress that education mediation emphasizes mutual understanding of the needs and interests of the parties (Juhász 2015, p. 6). Thus, since the agreement is based on consensus, the parties will be more motivated to comply. Therefore, it is of particular importance that the mediator does not influence the content of the decision but only the process (Fehérvári 2013, p. 4).

The Ministerial Decree 20/2012 also allows reparation in conciliation procedure, optionally available in the conciliation procedure preceding disciplinary proceedings. Thus, reparation mediation differs from educational mediation or any other mediation procedure in that the parties are confronted as parties who have suffered harm and are suspected of misconduct. Thus, in this dispute resolution technique, the parties involved are not equal, and there is a meaningful role in reparation and restitution.

Instead of disciplinary proceedings, the conciliation procedure can be used, which offers the possibility to settle the conflict through reparation mediation. The conciliation procedure prior to disciplinary proceedings and reparation mediation differ in terms of the requirements concerning the identity of the mediator,¹⁰⁷ and, in the case of the latter, the agreement on reparation is a prerequisite for the agreement. Thus, victim protection and prevention play a key role in reparation mediation. The focus is not on sanctioning the wrongdoer but on reparation and reparation for the harm suffered by the victim.

4 Before and After Reforms: The Need for Strategy in Education

Education has been the state’s responsibility for almost 250 years in Hungary. Education is a public service for which the state is primarily responsible, but its implementation is a multi-stakeholder model in which churches (and civil actors) have always had a prominent role. For two centuries, contemporary Hungarian education administration has been following a progressively centralized and deconcentrated model,¹⁰⁸ the advantages and disadvantages of which are not the aim of this study. Today in Hungary, the historical administrative achievements and the application of modern international tools are present at the same time. However, the application of the historical acquis is mostly only apparent: the “school board” [iskolaszék] and the “school district” [tankerület] are the same in name as they were in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, but their content has changed.

Since the regime change in 1989, educational reforms in Hungary have placed great emphasis on setting up the institutional system and the legal environment. In addition, international measurements and comparisons have had a major impact on the development of education. It is, therefore, instructive to take a brief look at where Hungarian education stands in major international comparisons.

Of the 79 countries participating in the OECD PISA 2018 survey, Hungary is in the middle of the field, ranked 29–38. The picture that Hungarian education is in the middle of the pack on most measures is supported by other surveys.

The TIMSS (Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study) 2019 survey on mathematical competencies involved students from 64 countries. The survey also shows Hungary close to the international average. The survey shows that the home environment is more conducive to learning than the school environment. Teachers’ teaching experience is significant (16 years on average, 24 years in Hungary), but this does not reflect the social prestige of teachers, but rather an aging teaching society (TIMSS 2019a, b).

The 2016 Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) a survey of reading literacy skills involved 50 countries. In this survey, Hungary ranked 9 out of 16, meaning that students scored substantially high in reading comprehension skills (PIRLS 2017, 2021).

The TALIS (Teaching and Learning International Survey) is the largest international questionnaire survey that asks teachers and school leaders about their teaching and learning conditions, attitudes towards teaching, teaching practices and the characteristics of school leadership. The 2018 survey showed that the Hungarian teaching profession is aging, with few young teachers and high average age (48), and that the social prestige of teaching is very low (TALIS 2018, 2019).

According to international surveys, the Hungarian education system is not outstanding, but it is not the last. Nevertheless, in 2022, teachers and students took to the streets of Budapest and major cities across the country to demonstrate a better education system and for the dignity of the teaching profession (Euronews 2022). In our view, the strong social pressure being felt as we write this paper points to a new—and, we hope, deeper—education reform than before.

Today’s education legislation pays particular attention to administrative and institutional tasks. However, the experience of the international surveys shows that the means of improvement must be sought at a deeper level than the administrative level (teacher training, teacher careers, pedagogical tools, inclusive education). The development of education law does not necessarily mean the development of education.

From the above analysis, we can conclude that since the fall of the socialist dictatorship, institutional reforms have been the focus in Hungary. It is also clear from the above that a series of problems have accumulated since the change of regime in 1989, which came to light in the recent times. In comparison, however, the development of staff and training and the restoration of the prestige of the teaching profession in general has taken a back seat. In particular, the current government strategy sets out objectives geared to students’ output requirements but does not address the system’s weaknesses or teachers. We are aware that an education strategy is not a common tool in Europe, most of the EU member state countries do not have such (Public Education Strategy 2020). Nevertheless, in our view, the main challenge for the development of Hungarian education is to prepare a comprehensive strategy that does not address the current (basically well-functioning) administrative system but instead provides a realistic assessment of the situation from the perspective of all actors in education and sets targets based on this.

5 Conclusion

In 2022, Hungarian education appeared in the news more than once. The main reason teachers and students went on strike together was to raise awareness of the need to restore the prestige of the teaching profession, both morally and financially and fill in those gaps that were accumulated since the fall of the communism. Therefore, there is a strong social pressure to improve the education system further. In our view, the present study was born on the threshold of an era. Today’s Hungarian education system draws on both the legacy of democratic change in 1989 and centuries of experience. Despite (or perhaps because of) the legal reforms in education over the last 30 years, Hungarian education is currently facing a new turning point.

In our study, we have presented the history of the development of educational administration and the cornerstones of today’s education system. We have seen how, from 1777 onwards, the government has been responsible for education by involving churches and civil actors in public service. Today, we find in Hungary an administrative (management and legal guarantee) system that has been overhauled several times and which, overall, fulfils its function. The right to education can be asserted, and the law has created a system of legal protection with several levels and actors. The legislation protects vulnerable groups of society, particularly children and people with special educational needs and disabilities.

Further reforms are expected to improve teachers’ financial and professional situation and the cooperation between the actors involved in education (teachers, students, parents, and administration), as well as to improve teacher training and reduce the administrative burden. A strategy based on a realistic assessment of the situation of education can be built on a modern needs-based strategy, the implementation of which is expected to lead to an improvement in the international benchmarks of Hungarian education.