In spite of the problems with education statistics in the country and the definition of ‘rural’, we have a clear picture of rural education in Serbia. Based on the data, the main differences between rural and urban education in Serbia can be outlined as follows: in rural schools there are much lower quality of building, infrastructure, resources, equipment, teaching/learning process, and quality of students’ achievements on the national and international tests; there is lower enrolment of rural students; a higher dropout rate in rural schools, particularly at the transition in 5th grade (1-4 grade is whole-class teaching, 5-8 grade is subject teaching); and a lack of the compensatory mechanisms for ensuring quality education for students from remote and poor areas (such as transport to school, scholarships, etc). Rural education is neglected in the education system: there is no sector or professionals in the Ministry of Education dealing with rural education, as well as no other public institution or organization helping rural teachers. However, there are a lot of measures that could be implemented, even in a developing country in transition, as is the case with Serbia. These include specific training of teachers, the concept of extended role of rural school, rural education tourism, and distance learning , for example.

Ivić, I. & Pesikan, A. (2012). Education system reforms in an unstable political situation: the case of Serbia in the first decade of the 21st century. Centre for Educational Policy Studies Journal 2(2), 31-53. Pešikan, A. & Ivić, I. (in press). The sources of inequity in the education system of Serbia and how to combat them. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal Pešikan, A. & Antić, S. (2012). Kada se ukrste obrazovanje, kulturni turizam i razvoj sela: seoski obrazovni turizam (Crossing education, cultural tourism and rural development: Rural Education Tourism). Anthology of Essays by Faculty of Dramatic Arts 21: Management of Culture and Media in the Knowledge Society, Journal of the Institute of Theatre, Film, Radio and Television, Post Conference Anthology, pp.255-274.