Georgia’s opposition and civil society actors have been ringing alarm bells in recent days as the heavily rigged elections resulted in what they see as an illegitimate Parliament, further undermining Georgia’s struggling democracy. That parliament is constituted exclusively by the Georgian Dream party, whose policies are increasingly more accommodating to Russia. In this context, the apparent changes in the national exams curriculum have touched the raw nerve, raising concerns that the government is trying to whitewash the memory of Georgian resistance to imperial Russia.
On November 25, the National Assessment and Examination Center (NAEC) published the 2025 exam program, which omits some crucial 19th-20th century works by revered anti-imperialist Georgian authors from the Georgian language and literature curriculum. The details of uprisings against Russian imperialism also seem to have been excluded from the history exam.
Is it just media hype, an overreaction to the ongoing political crisis? Is it a mere administrative adjustment, as the education ministry officials were quick to argue? We decided to take a deeper look.
What are the changes?
Comparing the programs of 2024 and 2025 shows that the program of the earliest medieval religious period in Georgian literature and the “golden age” medieval literature remains unchanged. Most modifications relate to the 18th, 19th, and early 20th-century authors, a period that coincides with the “national awakening”—the simultaneous burgeoning of the authors that attempted to reform the Georgian language by bringing it closer to the commoners and also becoming vocally critical of the imperial and national oppression by the Russian Empire.
What’s excluded:
- The 17th-18th century priest, diplomat, author, and educator Sulkhan-Saba Orbeliani transcribed and transformed Aesopean and oriental fables into the book Wisdom of Lies, dealing with statesmen’s morals and general ethics,
- Some chapters of Davit Guramishvili‘s poem Davitiani, an autobiographical text that also dwells on 16-17 century King Vakhtang VI’s (Sulkhan-Saba Orbeliani’s patron’s) decision to side with the Russian Tsar against Persia. Losing this gamble, Vakhtang VI died in exile in Russia.
- The landmark literary battle between the two aristocratic generations, one represented by the Russian army general, poet Grigol Orbeliani, and the other, 24-year-old Ilia Chavchavadze. In their caustic poems – Response to the Sons and Answer to Response – discussed the “father’s” idea of reconciling with the Russian imperial rule in the name of national survival and the “son’s” revolt for national liberation and liberal values;
- Ilia Chavchavadze‘s poems Happy Nation, My Pen, The Hermit, and The Ghost. Especially in the sarcastic Happy Nation in which Chavchavadze castigates hypocrisy and submissiveness to Imperial tyranny and its logical continuation, My Pen, which argues for such frankness as the avenue for national revival.
- Akaki Tsereteli‘s poems Always Uphill, Suliko, and Praise of Praises, where in a more popular language and figurative style, the widely beloved poet the loss and “enslavement” of his “beloved” nation and calls for its liberation.
- Trailblazer humanist Vazha Pshavela‘s works: the patriotic poem Bakhtrioni and his essay Cosmopolitanism and Patriotism. In the latter, the author argues for the intrinsic link between the love to one’s nation, and caring for international concerns.
- Polikarpe Kakabadze‘s play Kvarkvare Tutaberi is a dramatic comedy about an illiterate conman who becomes an autocrat as the revolution unexpectedly sweeps him into power.
- Galaktion Tabidze‘s poem Native Ephemera, written in 1923, after the Soviet occupation in 1921, bemoans the unrecognizable transformation of the country, once strong and proud, now enslaved and weak.
A few other excluded texts do not directly relate to resistance to Russia. It would be an exaggeration to say that all texts that negatively portray Russia have been excluded: this genre’s most critical and important texts remain.
So why exclude some and leave the others?
Education Ministry’s, PM’s Explanation
The Ministry of Education and Science issued a statement on November 26 saying that the new program for the Unified National Examination is based only on the compulsory literature outlined in the National Education Plan “to protect each student’s interests and ensure equal access to education.” They note that just because some texts aren’t included in the final exams doesn’t mean they aren’t being taught.
“We would like to inform the public that a revision of the subject standards is underway, and a group of experts is working on it. During the revision process, the list of compulsory literature will be reviewed and updated,” the Ministry said, arguing that “the formation of national-patriotic values in students” remained their priority.
On November 27, Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze elaborated on the Ministry’s position, saying: “There was a request from students that we should not include in the exam questions topics that are not included in the compulsory program, which is a healthy request.” But he added that some omissions from the compulsory program were “shocking” and blamed the previous administration, which “systemically erased the topics from the national education plan that were instilling patriotic spirit and healthy relation to one’s national identity” focusing instead on “pseudo-liberal values.” Admitting the Georgian Dream administration “should have taken care of this issue during the past 12 years,” Kobakhdze said, “at the personal initiative of [GD patron] Bidzina Ivanishvili,” things were now decisively moving in the correct direction.
Education Experts’ Opinions
Education expert and member of the Freedom Square political movement, Simon Janashia, explained how the ministry shapes the Unified National Exams program in Facebook live broadcast.
- First, the Ministry of Education develops the National Education Plan with education goals for each grade. A group of experts then compiles a list of mandatory texts to achieve those goals in a given subject of instruction. Janashia says many texts whose omission caused controversy haven’t been on a mandatory readings list since 2018, and some even earlier. Janashia stressed that the readings list in Georgian literature is very long, and some texts must be omitted. He also pointed out that the Ministry supervises the experts compiling the lists.
- While developing the examination program for Georgian language and literature, the NAEC prioritizes the mandatory literature from the National Education Plan. Before 2024, most non-mandatory texts were also included. Students often complain if they are tested on texts they have not studied. Considering this complaint to be fair, the NAEC decided to exclude non-compulsory texts altogether.
Janashia sees the problem elsewhere than what caught media and public attention. He considers the schools should be given more freedom to decide what to teach their students, with less intervention from the state.
Revaz Apkhazava, another education expert, agrees the media and the opposition are misdirecting public attention. He cites as key problems the political co-optation and instrumentalization of school principals and teachers by the ruling party, who are increasingly appointed and promoted based on their political views. They also agitate for the ruling party in elections, which disrupts the education process. Apkhazava says public schools are incapable of teaching compulsory programs to pupils, so to pass the national exams, they need to hire tutors, which builds the culture of “studying to the exam,” undermines equal opportunities, and breeds corruption.
For his part, Levan Shatberashvili sees a sinister intent in NAEC’s decision and considers it a “testing out the reaction of people” on bettering relations with Russia. He says that all of the recent developments look a lot like a “Russian-styled special operation” that Georgian society can easily fit into a picture of GD’s attempt to establish pro-Russian authoritarian rule in Georgia.
As for the changes in the history exam, historian Bondo Kupatadze explains that these results are from four years of “ill-considered” reforms carried out by the Ministry of Education. He says that in 2019, on the pretext of promoting patriotism, the ninth-grade history textbooks were separated into world and Georgian history. As a result, in only three school years, pupils have to study twelve textbooks (300 pages each) to pass the exams. He says the NAEC tried to limit the number of questions on Georgian history and trimmed several topics, not only on the uprisings against Russia but also, for example, the entire prehistoric period and the unification of the early medieval Georgian kingdom.
It seems that recent decisions, ostensibly presented as patriotic, have damaged the coherence of the education and examination systems without necessarily improving the level of education.
As NAEC is trying to ease the burden that the Ministry of Education has put on students, trimming examination topics ironically exposes the Minister to the challenge of being unpatriotic.
Also Read:
- 14/12/2023 – Georgian Dream’s Conservative Drift Now Targets Schools
- 05/12/2023 – Teachers on Hunger Strike Against Alleged Political Selection of Principals
