In the Hungarian socialist education science several people suffered discrimination in the beginning of the 1950s (loss of job, refusal to obtain a scientific degree), but it was only Árpád Kiss that was sent to the internment camp at Kistarcsa. Kiss' sin, which led to his three-year imprisonment, was also related to scientific diversity and interdisciplinarity since Kiss represented an interdisciplinary-multidisciplinary approach within the Hungarian socialist educational science in contrast to the Soviet-Stalinist model - which denied all diversity. This meant that he cultivated sciences with Western roots, such as sociology and psychology, at least the branches of those related to education science. In the Cold War situation of the early 1950s, this interdisciplinary-multidisciplinary diversity approach, which was also a political stance - in contrast to the Soviet-Stalinist model, siding with the Western model - was equivalent to the most serious crime of the era, the charge of anti-Marxism, which in any case led to exclusion and discreditation.

In connection with this, in one of the directions of our research - on macro level - we examine to what extent diversity, or its opposite, was present in the Hungarian socialist education science between 1945 and 1965. In another line of our research, we also examine how the diversity between educational science and its border sciences appeared in the work and recollections of a member of the Hungarian socialist education science, Árpád Kiss (on micro level).

According to our hypothesis, regardless of the stages of political history within the Hungarian socialist education, let it be the Rákosi era (1950-1956) or the Kádár era (1957-), Árpád Kiss always represented the interdisciplinary-multidisciplinary approach in contrast to the Hungarian socialist educational science, which was only open to interdisciplinarity when it was legitimate in its various phases of political history.

Our main sources for examining the diversity (or lack thereof) of the education sector are the educational policy decrees of the Socialist-Communist Party at the time (Kardos-Kornidesz 1990). In the other line of our research, which analyses Árpád Kiss's relationship to scientific diversity within socialist education science, we use Árpád Kiss's works published between 1945 and 1965 as a source. Also, our relevant source is the Pedagogical Review (Pedagógiai Szemle), the dominant pedagogical journal of the era, since in the mid-1960s, the recollection of Árpád Kiss (1964) were published here together with those of several other Hungarian socialist education scientists (György Ágoston, Sándor Nagy, Béla Jausz, etc.). In order to get to know the Hungarian socialist education science and the life of Árpád Kiss better, we use the pedagogical lexicons (Báthory-Falus1997, Nagy 1976-1979).

Overall, what we can say is that during our study we are interested in how interdisciplinarity-multidisciplinarity appeared in the different and not at all homogeneous stages of the political history of Hungarian socialism. We are also interested in how these macrostructural changes in relation to interdisciplinarity-multidisciplinarity appeared in the life-work of a relevant member of Hungarian socialist education science, Árpád Kiss.

Nowadays, scientific diversity has a puzzling number of meanings, however, in the present study diversity is understood as the interdisciplinary-multidisciplinary approach appearing in educational and pedagogical research (Biesta 2011, Biró-Nagy 2018; Terhart 2016). We analyse the issue of scientific diversity - that is, inter- and multidisciplinarity - and the recollection of Árpád Kiss using the political science approach (Darvai 2021, Sáska 2018). This is also evident in the fact that we analyse the problem of scientific diversity using the following stages of the Hungarian political history (Gyarmati 2011): 1. The period of the establishment of the socialist-communist system (1945-1950), 2. The Rákosi-era (1950-1956); 3. The early Kádár-era (1957-1965). We interpret Árpád Kiss's recollection in the Pedagogic Review as a narrative, so we also use the narrative approach during our research. In our present analysis, we consider all texts that report on events and have temporal and causal coherence as narratives (Hoshmand 2005, László 2008). Among the narrative approaches, we also use the narrative historical perspective (Tamura 2011). Since we examine the history of Hungarian socialist education from the perspective of interdisciplinarity-multidisciplinarity, our analysis also has a sociological science reading (Bourdieu 2005).

According to our results, the attitude of the Hungarian socialist education science to the interdisciplinary-multidisciplinary approach was determined not by the professional-pedagogical logic, but by the image of science of each era of political history. Because in the Stalinist phases (1950-1953; 1955-1956) of the so-called Rákosi era (1950-1956), the interdisciplinary-multidisciplinary approach was illegitimate, while in the de-Stalinization periods (1953-1955; 1956) it became legitimate. Then, in the Kádár era, interdisciplinarity became legitimate once again, even if only through the filter of socialist ideology. Furthermore, the interdisciplinary approach was interpreted not only as a professional-pedagogical issue, but also as a political one, since the appearance of the interdisciplinary approach also meant the acceptance of the Western pattern in contrast to the Soviet-Stalinist model. Throughout the entire socialist era, Árpád Kiss represented the interdisciplinary-multidisciplinary approach in his education scientific-pedagogical attitude, unlike the majority of the Hungarian socialist education science. Because of this, Kiss became discredited from the science of education during the Stalinist era. Árpád Kiss’ interdisciplinary approach only became legitimate during the period of de-Stalinization, which is why he could only be a legitimate participant in Hungarian socialist education science after 1957. However, he had always been an odd one out with his "western" approach within the profession of education science, even if his professional achievements were recognized. We see the main characteristic of the educational science of the Kádár era in the latter phase, that is, in the fact that the founders of the Hungarian socialist educational science in the early 1950s had to work together with those who suffered discreditation at the time, but who were rehabilitated at the end of the fifties and were therefore able to return to the field of educational science – Árpád Kiss’s case is a good sample for that.

Báthory, Z.– Falus, I. (1997) (eds.). Pedagógiai Lexikon. [Pedagogical Lexicon I-III.] Budapest: Keraban. Biesta, G. (2011). Disciplines and theory in the academic study of education: a comparative analysis of the Anglo-American and Continental construction of the field, Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 19:2, 175-192, DOI: 10.1080/14681366.2011.582255 Biró Zs. H. & Nagy P. T. (2018). Az oktatáskutatás inter- és multidiszciplináris jellege [Interdisciplinar and multidisciplinary nature of the educational researches]. Educatio. 27:1. 84-100. Bourdieu, P. (2005). A tudomány tudománya és a reflexivitás [Science of Science and Reflexivity]. Budapest, Gondolat. Darvai, T. (2021). Makarenko-értelmezések Magyarországon a hosszú 1950-es években [Makarenko-interpretations in Hungary in the long 1950s]. Iskolakultúra, 31(5), 27–40. Hoshmand, L. T. (2005). Narratology, cultural psychology, and counseling research. Journal of Counseling Psychology. 2005/ 2. szám. 178–186. p. Kardos, J. & Kornidesz, M. (1990) (eds.). Dokumentumok a magyar oktatáspolitika történetéből. [Documents from the History of Hungarian Education Policy. 1954-1972.] Tankönyvkiadó, Budapest. Kiss Árpád (1964): Életemről, munkámról [About my life and my work]. Pedagógiai Szemle. 3. 295-305. László J. (2008): Narratív pszichológia. [Narrative Psychology]. Pszichológia, 28, 4. 301-317. Nagy, S. (1976-1979, eds.). Pedagógiai Lexikon.[Pedagogical Lexicon.] Budapest, Akadémiai Kiadó. Sáska, G. (2018). Igény az igazság monopóliumára. A politikai és világnézeti marxizmus-leninizmus a sztálini kor pedagógia tudományában.[Demand for the monopoly of truth – Political and Ideological Marxism–Leninism in Pedagogical Sciences of the Stalin Era]. Gyarmati, Gy. (2011): A Rákosi-korszak: Rendszerváltó fordulatok évtizede Magyarországon, 1945-1956. ÁBTL-Rubicon, Budapest. Tamura, Eileen: (2011). Narrative History and Theory. History of Education Quarterly. 2011/2. 150-157. p. Terhart, E. (2017). Interdisciplinary research on education and its disciplines: Processes of change and lines of conflict in unstable academic expert cultures: Germany as an example. European Educational Research Journal, 16(6), 921–936. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904116681798