Faith-Based Schools in Post-Soviet Turkmenistan

     One cannot overlook the influence Fethullah Gulen has had in creating faith- based schools.  Clement (2011) writes, the schools have been consistently successful in Turkmenistan because a secular curriculum partnered with a strong moral framework (terbiýe) appeals to parents and students without threatening the state.  I am sure that the state suffers somehow – perhaps with enrollments, perhaps with revenue.  Her paper argues that Turkish schools have flourished because the community preserves a modern, secular curriculum.  It was alarming to read that she went on to say that the success of Turkish schools in Turkmenistan and the appeal of their pedagogical methods as a means of gaining a quality education in a country where public schools have little to offer is becoming the norm.          
     “Cemaat pedagogy: Temsil and terbiýe.  At the core of all the administration, donation in time and in kind, planning, preparation, and pedagogy lay the concepts hizmet (service to community) and terbiýe (upbringing). Terbiýe or edep-terbiýe refer to etiquette or upbringing of youth  that is based in historically, culturally defined Islamicate morality, though at no point is there instruction in Islam in the schools.  Some authors refer to cemaat schools as “Gulen” schools. This is misleading because it implies that Gulen plays an active role in the functioning or oversight of the schools. In fact, Fethullah Gulen’s role has been limited to inspiring good Muslims to establish schools around the world and sharing his ideas about teaching methods”   (p. 77).  The author clearly supports the establishment of Faith-Based Schools in Post-Soviet Turkmenistan.  She further elaborates to say that some authors see the schools as a covert means of the Gulen movement’s reaching for power in secular societies. Sonar Cagaptay (2010) describes the Gulen movementas “a conservative movement aims to reshape secular Turkey in its own image, by securing the supremacy of Gulen’s version of religion over politics, government, education, media, business, and public and personal life.” While Cagaptay is concerned primarily with the state of society in Turkey, his analysis of the Gulen movement has implications for the school networks around the world.  Of course this is from one perspective. 
     One final point the author makes is that Westerners often refer to the Turkish schools as “elite” schools.  She defends her position by saying that although children of some elite families attend these schools, entrance is merit-based with a vigorous entrance examination.  Parents, children, and school officials should work together to find the appropriate learning environment.    
     While I agree and accept that choice is critical, her statement that the Gulen movement is providing Turkmenistan’s youth with opportunities to prepare themselves as they transition to the post-Soviet world, is purely her perspective.  Only time will tell.