(Photo by Capt. Jim Gallagher via Wikimedia Commons/OGL v1.0 DEED)
For many children and young adults across Bosnia and Kosovo, going to school means attending classes with only people from the same ethnicity. In several schools in Bosnia and Herzegovina, students of different ethnicities enter the same building each morning. Yet, they follow different schedules, study from different textbooks, and learn different versions of history. In some buildings, pupils use separate entrances, known as “two schools under one roof.” This dual-education system was present in 56 schools across the country in 2023.
This setup was introduced as a temporary measure after wars in the 1990s, as the Bosnian government aimed at bringing children from different communities back into shared spaces. However, this measure became permanent in post-conflict reconstruction.
In Kosovo, students either attend Albanian-language schools under national governance or Serbia-sponsored institutions. In 2023, Serbia administered and funded over 70 schools in Kosovo, alongside the national institutions. This division stems from the country’s unresolved status. While Kosovo declared independence in 2008, Serbia has not recognized the secession from its territory and thus continues to support parallel public institutions.
(Map by Peter Fitzgerald via Wikimedia Commons/CC BY-SA 3.0 DEED)
In Bosnia and Kosovo, what and how students learn reflects competing political realities. Years after regional wars, education in both countries continues to be shaped by these unresolved issues. In this context, schools are not neutral places of knowledge, but spaces that have institutionalized division and difference for over two decades.
Bosnia: A Peace Built on Division
Both education systems stem from post-conflict agreements that left questions of sovereignty pending. Kosovo, Serbia, and Bosnia, among others, formed the Federation of Yugoslavia, which had rich cultural and religious diversity. In the early 1990s, several conflicts driven by competing nationalist projects and territorial claims led to the collapse of this federation.
In Bosnia, the 1992-1995 war pitted several communities, including Bosniaks, Croats and Serbs, against each other for political control. The conflict resulted in over 100,000 deaths and massive displacement. The war culminated with the Srebrenica genocide, where 8,000 Bosnian Muslim men and boys were killed, and the systematic use of sexual violence, which affected over 20,000 women and girls.
(Photo by Mikhail Evstafiev via Wikimedia Commons/CC BY-SA 3.0 DEED)
The 1995 Dayton Agreement ended the war and created the current state of Bosnia, comprising three entities: the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, with a Bosniak majority; the Republika Srpska, with a Serbian majority; and a third entity under joint control.
Each entity follows its own education curriculum. Within the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the agreement divided the power across “10 mini-states, each of which has almost unlimited power over the education sector.” This structure allowed ethnic political elites to keep influence over school administration and textbooks. As a result, education became closely tied to ethnic identity, explaining why, in some areas, Croat and Bosniak students experience the “two schools under one roof” reality.
Kosovo: Parallel Systems and Contested Sovereignty
While the Bosnian decentralized structure enabled the institutionalization of division, the separation in Kosovo emerged through different systems that developed in parallel, in a context of unresolved sovereignty claims.
After Yugoslavia’s collapse, Kosovo was a province of Serbia, where 90% of the population was Albanian. In this part of the country, sovereignty claims grew, with repression rising along. During the 1990s, Serbian authorities notably dismantled Albanian-language education institutions. In response, Kosovar Albanians established a parallel school system as a form of resistance.
In this context, the 1998-1999 Kosovo war eventually erupted, leading to massive displacement and over 13,500 deaths, of which more than 10,800 were Albanians. The Kumanovo Agreement ended Serbian control over Kosovo and ushered in a period of United Nations administration in the country.
Albanian institutions then became official, turning Serbia-sponsored education into a parallel, alternative system. These Serbian schools remained even after the 2008 Kosovo independence, especially in Serb-majority areas in the north of the newly-founded country. As a result, education in Kosovo remains divided along ethnic lines and by competing claims over the state itself.
In both Bosnia and Kosovo, education systems are institutional legacies of sovereignty conflicts. While the Bosnian system separates students within shared institutions, division in Kosovo is reflected in entirely parallel systems.
Educating in Difference
Across both countries, this fragmented education system generates shared structural issues. Students are educated in ethnically homogeneous environments, with limited opportunities for interaction. The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe noted that the Bosnian double system is “the most visible manifestation of discrimination in the educational systems of the country.”
In Kosovo, representatives of the University of Pristina addressed the European Union with a letter stating Serbian students in Kosovo are “subjected to discrimination […] and denial of opportunities critical for education due to the actions of Albanian representatives.”
Having separate school systems also leads to teaching competing historical narratives rather than fostering pluralism. Curricula remain shaped by ethnonational perspectives, with distinct interpretations of the past, depending on ethnic groups. A member of the European network of history teachers, Euroclio, underlined that “there is not even a consensus on what to call the war in Bosnia: civil war, war of aggression, war of religions.” Similarly, analyst Shkelzen Gashi explained that Kosovar- and Serbian-sponsored textbooks “show only the other side’s crimes, presenting themselves as the victim and the other as the aggressor.”
Students are not only physically separated but are also socialized into different understandings of statehood, identity, and legitimacy. Researchers underline that this educational division limits the development of a shared civic identity, which requires the recognition of diverse views.
Persisting Divisions
In Bosnia, attempts to reform the educational system continue to face significant political resistance. But recent political developments make it even more difficult to contemplate reforms. In 2025, the Republika Srpska leader Milorad Dodik was convicted for contesting the authority of the jurisdiction supervising the implementation of the Dayton Agreements. This condemnation reveals how parts of a political elite still contest the very foundations of the post-war order. This event also prompted renewed calls for this entity to secede from Bosnia, reducing prospects for change in education policy.
For Serbian leaders in Republika Srpska, greater centralization with harmonized curricula or the closing down of segregated schooling practices could fit the secessionist rhetoric of a threat to autonomy. As a result, education policy becomes a site of political contestation reflecting the absence of consensus on the structure of the state itself.
In Kosovo, discussions about education policy have increasingly focused on the future of the Serbian institutions. In 2025, closures of these parallel structures have intensified, as the Kosovar government seeks to reassert authority across the country.
These efforts have been met with resistance from local Serb communities, especially in the north of the territory. For many, Serbian-funded schools are symbols of political belonging and security. In December 2025, local elections reinforced the political influence of Serbia-aligned representatives in municipalities, making attempts to close Serbian schools a politically sensitive topic.
Youth Voices and Everyday Bridges
While education systems in Bosnia and Kosovo often reinforce division, young people are not always passive within these structures. In Bosnia, some mobilized against plans to further open mono-ethnic schools, arguing that division was imposed on a generation that did not necessarily identify with it.
Across both countries, initiatives have emerged to create spaces where students can meet. Programmes using sport or art bring together young people from different backgrounds, offering opportunities for interethnic contact. As journalist Idro Seferi noted, these projects are often “the only places where youth could meet outside of their immediate environments” in Kosovo. These initiatives aim to foster dialogue and the sharing of experiences to challenge dominant narratives. Yet, the initiatives remain fragile and limited in scale.
(Photo by J. Idrizi, UNESCO, via Wikimedia Commons/CC BY-SA 3.0 IGO)
As Engin Avci, a member of the United Nations Youth Task Force, observed, “we have so many prejudices in our communities, but many of the people that hold those prejudices have never even interacted with people of other communities.” In this context, even temporary spaces of meeting can challenge perceptions. As Seferi suggested, when young people engage around shared concerns, they “won’t care about ethnicity or religion.”
Education and Unfinished Peace
More than twenty years after the wars that reshaped the Balkans, education systems in Bosnia and Kosovo remain deeply tied to unresolved political questions. Schools reproduce competing visions of the state, ethnic identity, and history. In Bosnia, where separation occurs within the same building, and in Kosovo, where parallel institutions exist, students are educated differently depending on their origins. These divisions shape children and young people’s understanding of difference and limit the existence of common narratives.
As long as pending sovereignty questions remain unsettled, the population and the governmental elites could perceive attempts to reform education as a risk of losing their identity or as a political threat. In a context of growing far-right ideologies promoting hate rhetoric, it is even more important to create a shared civic space where the youth can interact. Until then, the legacies of conflict will continue to shape the future.
Edited by Gabrielle Andrychuk
