From this perspective, the goal of the study was to highlight the phases in the history and evolution of the Career Centers, by comparing different law perspectives on the career counseling activities in their „modus vivendi“. Furthermore, the results of focus groups and interviews with former and present employees of Universities’ Career Centers were analyzed. Data and information supporting the analyses were identified by consulting web resources and websites of the targeted institutions. The study aims to review and analyze the main legislative provisions related to Career Counseling as part of Romanian higher education system, regarding the impact and effectiveness over the development of Career Services. This article is a review over the status of career counseling services, as a part of Romanian higher education system, in terms of their evolution over the last twenty-five years, from the author’s point of view.

The analysis of post-socialist changes, both as real and imagined processes, leads us to conclude that the Romanian education transition should be seen as a complex process which has followed unanticipated trajectories and has led to multiple destinations (Silova, 2009). We will thus investigate the contrasting perspectives expressed by scholars, teachers, and in policy documents, as well as the hybridized ideas which together result in various visions of reform.

They also refer to “self-assigned” or “reclaimed” autonomy, which every teacher can adopt “in their own class, once the doors are closed.” Significantly, most agree that the latter type is essentially the same as in the communist period, prior to the 1989 political changes. In line with the recent history of these reforms, most interview participants view 1998 as the peak of real “institutional autonomy,” followed by a decline or even a slow recentralization in subsequent years. With the emergence of discourses on modernization and a “return to Europe,” Romanian political culture has offered a complementary, legitimizing base to the decentralizing reform of administration and education. These reforms should be seen in the context of larger trends toward marketization (McGinn & Welsh, 1999). Drawing on policy analysis and in-depth interviews and focus groups with teachers and school administrators, the findings reveal contrasting perspectives and hybridized ideas about the meanings of decentralization reforms in Romania. The main purpose is to examine the circulation of decentralization reform in what is generally considered to be a highly centralized country. This chapter focuses on meanings of decentralization in the context of post-socialist reforms in Romania.

Liliana Ezechil 60 by Claudiu Langa