Student Movements in Myanmar Over the Ages: Aspirations, Expectations and Representation

A. Sim1 | ယခုဆောင်းပါးကို မြန်မာဘာသာဖြင့် ဖတ်ရှုရန် ဤနေရာတွင် နှိပ်ပါ

Cite as: 
Sim, A. (2023). Student Movements in Myanmar Over the Ages: Aspirations, Expectations and Representation. Independent Journal of Burmese Scholarship, 3. https://ijbs.online/?page_id=4220

Abstract

This introduction situates the special issue and its articles within the context of scholarly engagement and public debate on Myanmar’s significant history of student activism. This journal issue is a result of a workshop held in 2016 and the articles and interviews included herein were written over the following six years. Some issue contributors have passed away since their original contributions, while others have fled to liberated areas and foreign countries in the wake of the 2021 military coup. The articles include discussions of student union relations with wider society, detailed revelations of a student uprising at a military college in 2002, and an interview with a student leader from the 2021 anti-coup protests who went on to take up arms against the State Administration Council. Based on the articles in this issue, as long as the spirit of students remains strong and oppression continues, it is likely that more student movements will occur in Myanmar.

Introduction

Student movements in Myanmar have played pivotal roles in the struggles for independence, democracy, and against authoritarianism. Usually one is only enrolled as a student for a short period of a much longer life. However, student movements are important collective actions that challenge authorities and the status quo.

How do activists who participate in student movements in Myanmar imagine their collective student identity and perceive the role of student unions? In which circumstances are students willing to collaborate and cooperate with other social groups, civil society and political organizations, and other movements? Do the scope and structure of student movements change based on the forms of oppression perpetuated by authorities and the prevailing political system? Which international events and global movements impact student activism in Myanmar? Will economic development strengthen or weaken student movements? In this special issue on student activism, current and former participants in student movements answer these and other questions.

Studies of Student Movements in Myanmar

There are relatively few academic works by local and foreign scholars on student movements and resistance in Myanmar. Silverstein’s analysis and comparison of Burmese and Malay student movements is useful but finishes in the 1970s.2 The 2012 edited volume Student Movements in Asia3 includes a chapter on student movements in Myanmar up until 2008 by Win Min, a Burmese former student activist.4 It points out how the nature, scope, and impact of student activities differed depending on the type of regime in power.

As part of her doctoral dissertation, Myanmar-born Nang Mao Lao Rives researched the political movements of university students in Myanmar that took place in the 1980s.5 Rives studied the elite power competition of military personnel, Buddhist monks, and students, traditionally referred to in Burmese as the thar thone thar (three sons),6 and points out three factors that created and shaped student movements in Myanmar in the 1980s.7 The first factor is a “political void” where prominent people in society cannot lead (or initiate) activities against the authoritarian regime. The second factor is the inspiration that different generations of Burmese students received from the thakin8 student activists who fought for independence from British colonial rule. The third factor is the birth of a robust collective student identity and sense of solidarity.

Another study of note is Metro’s discussion of the democratic education movements between 2014 and 2016, which started when the government tried to enact the National Education Law during a period of hybrid civilian-military rule.9 She points out that the differences in the interpretation of democracy and democratic education between authorities and students gave birth to a politically-oriented contentious student movement.

Political Background and History

Although student movements played essential roles in the struggles for independence from colonial rule, democracy, human rights, and against authoritarianism, only a few firsthand accounts from participants in these movements were published before 2012. Myanmar was distanced from the advances in knowledge experienced in much of the outside world from 1962-2012 due to the ruling military’s isolationism. Press censorship restricted student activists from publishing their experiences.

This special issue does not contain articles intended exclusively for some kind of imagined scholarly community. Instead, its articles aim to blur the gap between internal and external knowledge about Myanmar and between older and younger generations suffering under different military-authoritarian regimes. It intends to reduce and contextualize the differences in knowledge and forms of knowledge experienced and held by participants in student movements and developed by analysts studying these movements over time.

By emphasizing local experiences and the reflections of participants, the contributions to this issue resemble memoirs and interviews more than research articles with clear, central arguments aimed at scholars debating politics and activism. Several are firsthand accounts from student leader activists. Presented both in the original Burmese language and English translations, these serve as rich primary source documents for readers and researchers of student movements and related issues.

Most of the articles in this journal are outcomes of the seminar and workshop organized by the Independent Journal of Burmese Scholarship on 19 November 2016 in Yangon. In the workshop, eight activists who participated in student movements in different periods shared their experiences and perspectives. Then, about 40 student union members from older and younger generations discussed them and gave their feedback. The Myanmar Institute for Democracy, founded by activists from the 1996-1998 student movements, assisted in organizing the event. It was attended by current and ex-student leaders of all ages, from octogenarians to those only in their twenties.

Problems of Representation and ‘Generation’

During the workshop seminars and discussions, several unanticipated themes and questions arose. For example, while discussing the three given themes—Aspiration, Expectation, and Representation—participants noted that their own perceptions were based on the period in which they were students (and, therefore, which ‘generation’ they belonged to). Former student leader Hla Shwe, from the 1962 generation, took a formal leadership position through an official election process. He thus questioned the legitimacy of later-generation student leaders’ claims to represent students, as they assumed leadership positions through means other than elections, including unilateral initiative.

In Phyoe Phyoe Aung’s contribution to this special issue, she points out that governments usually support student unions and leaders who accommodate them and attempt to control those who oppose them. However, for student unions and activists struggling in oppressive political contexts, it is not necessary to be officially elected and recognized as “leaders” to represent students. She claims that displaying leadership skills and vision is more important than being elected to a leadership position.

It is essential to remember that there is no fixed pattern for student activism in Myanmar, and each generation’s interaction between the student body, student politics, and student unions differs. For example, the 1988 generation of students includes activists who protested in the 1988 uprising and also those who mobilized against the military junta in 1996 and 2007. It is up to each individual activist to identify however they choose. Some activists continue to identify themselves as ‘students’ long after they finished studying in educational institutions, while others never want to be identified as students even though they may be enrolled and currently pursuing their studies in colleges and universities.

While it is helpful to categorize participants in student activism by the generation of their struggle (1962, 1974-1976, 1988, 1996-1998, 2007, etc.), intra-generational differences—variations within each generation—were distinct at the workshop, particularly concerning organizational participation and political ideology. Although the workshop used generations as shorthand for identification, no single participant represented a whole generation. This was most obvious in the student generations after 1962, especially those without officially established student unions. For example, while the 1988 generation students played a tremendously important role in resisting dictatorship, two of the most prominent leaders of the 1988 movement, Min Ko Naing and Ko Ko Gyi, did not attend the workshop. One former leader from their generation did speak at the workshop, but did not submit a manuscript for this special issue.

Aspirations and Identity

Whether activists desire to continue identifying as a student later in life depends on their aspirations and expectations. When the National League for Democracy (NLD) government took office in 2016, contemporary student unions and activists from former generations had already participated in collaborative work, such as pushing for amending the National Education Law, protesting for decentralization in universities, and creating the National Network for Education Reform (NNER). In addition, they nurtured the spirit of federalism and democracy by meeting representatives from various states and regions to address federalist issues such as teaching ethnic languages. Three contributors to this special issue of the journal, Soe Tun, Phyoe Phyoe Aung, and Boe Thein (Dr. Min Thein), actively participated in the NNER from its inception.

Such participation in politics and education reform gave shape and scope to contemporary student activism and set its direction. In this new context, students no longer needed to stick to a particular ideology like the older generations that struggled under previous military regimes. The new generations of students were more likely to make demands of authorities based on issues while maintaining a revolutionary attitude and challenging the ruling class.

On that note, the relationship between the student unions and NLD leader Aung San Suu Kyi and her party was precarious even before the NLD government was in office. Leftist politics and Marxist ideas were influential in student movements before 1988. However, ‘left’ and ‘right’ political ideology did not play a dominant role in the mass protests against the 2021 military coup, known as the Spring Revolution. Furthermore, student identity no longer stood out among the many other identities expressed in the revolution. Instead of “students”, the major cleavage was “Generation Z”, an identity based on growing up in times of softer military rule than in the past.

However, since the student identity has long been associated with the fight for freedom and justice in Myanmar, it cannot be eliminated from contentious politics. In most countries with institutionalized democratic systems of governance, student unions, student parliaments, and youth summer camps organized by political parties play an essential role in producing future generations of politicians, activists, and leaders. In Myanmar, where political parties and other institutions do not offer political mentorship due to the repression of the Myanmar military for more than half a century, where youths should look for guidance and example remains an open question.

In Myanmar, student participation in politics is continually weakened or outright crushed by those in power. For example, after the 1996 student movements in Myanmar, the ruling military junta ceased or postponed undergraduate courses being taught at main university campuses and sent military-graduated officers to attend postgraduate courses in civilian universities. Due to these actions, students faced difficulty mobilizing near campuses; military lecturers were produced to teach specifically in military academies, and students were weakened as a force for change. It can be said that the military regime killed three birds with one stone.

Even when an elected government is in office, there is the chance that student activists will follow other paths if opportunities are not provided to pursue their political interests. Due to the need to earn a living, most former student leaders cannot participate in activism in their middle and advanced age. Some student activists who participated in the 1988 revolution became leaders of political parties, intellectuals, journalists, and businesspeople. Others left politics and activism entirely, especially after the 2021 coup d’état. Some former student activists emerged as military lobbyists supporting military rule.

Student identity intersects with other identity claims such as nationality, gender, ethnicity, religion, and class. This can be seen in Sai Kyaw Nyunt’s article in this special issue, which portrays the intersection between student and ethnic Shan identities. In contrast, Zay Yah Oo’s article highlights the conflicts between student and soldier identities.

This particular tension was also present in the formation of the All Burma Students’ Democratic Front (ABSDF) following the 1988 uprising, which is not directly discussed in this special issue. However, Kaung Sithu’s interview with Min Han Htet touches on the formation of the new Student Armed Force, which students formed following the military’s lethal crackdown on peaceful protesters after the 2021 coup. Whether this new student army will fare better than the ABSDF remains to be seen.

Aung San Suu Kyi, de facto leader of the NLD, decided to work under the military’s 2008 constitution and was elected to office in the 2012 by-election. The NLD Central Executive Committee then turned down a proposal by more than 20 1988 generation student activists who offered to run under the NLD in the 2015 general elections. In this way, Aung San Suu Kyi’s democratic government created a dilemma for 1988 generation students and dimmed their political aspirations and expectations. Although the NLD party adopted the “fighting peacock” symbol long associated with students as its party logo, it failed to meet expectations for national education reform—core aspirations of student activists—during its time in parliament. When the NLD was, cooperation between government and civil society organizations and other political parties weakened, and state-student relations deteriorated.

In planning the 2016 workshop for this issue, participants were asked specific fundamental and philosophical questions such as: What does being a ‘student’ mean? Why do student movements emerge? Why are students quick to mobilize? What are the impacts of certain student movements? Such questions guided many of the contributions to this special issue, and we hope the authors here offer part of the answers to the questions above. Students can follow their aspirations, better create their expectations, and work for better representation only if they understand the history of student activism and the evolution of student identity in Myanmar.

The Evolution of Student Movements in Myanmar

After the first Anglo-Burmese war of 1824-1826, parts of lower Burma were incorporated into the British Administration of India. After the second Anglo-Burmese war of 1852-1853, the British took all of lower Burma, cutting the ruling Burmese monarchy off from the sea. After the third Anglo-Burmese war and full annexation of the country by the British on 1 January 1886, Burma came to be influenced more by Western education systems than by the traditional monastic education systems common in Buddhist areas. British colonization led to the slow introduction of Western education across Burma. It was well established within the country by the early twentieth century, along with other colonial administrative systems.

However, the colonialist British government did not establish a peaceful and just education system. There was always inequality, repression, discrimination, and inducements to maintain loyalty to the British. One example is the 1903 order by John Van Someren Pope, a Director of Public Instruction, requiring high school students to perform the shikho10 and pay respect to teachers and education officials.11 High school students, their parents, and students from Rangoon College were not pleased with Pope’s “order to bow down”. Students gathered in front of Victoria Hall and protested against the order. This came to be known as the first ever student activist event in Myanmar, implying there was little known student activism before 1903, at least in the Western sense of the term.

Before the imposition of Western education in Myanmar, monastic schools teaching Buddhist literature were the primary educational institutions. Because the teachers were Buddhist monks and the pupils were younger monks, novices, and children, they were bound by the rules and regulations called vinaya. This explains why there were no major student movements in the secular sense before then, because the sangha12 operated through laws and regulations established by the Lord Buddha, and most students were of primary school age.

Anti-Colonial Student Movements

The first major student movement was initiated by more than 50 students from Rangoon and Judson colleges on 5 December 1920. The students protested against controversial parts of the draft of the University of Rangoon Act to upgrade Rangoon College to Rangoon University College. The British government enacted the Rangoon University Act without considering the public’s objections. Consequently, college students went on strike on 7 December 1920.

The first student strike significantly impacted Myanmar’s politics and education. It gave birth to nationalism in Myanmar and national schools inculcated “nationalism” in parallel with British public schools. Then, the second and third student strikes arose, even within the Rangoon University campus. The third student strike gave birth to nationalist political leaders who opposed colonialism, including General Aung San and most of the 30 comrades who fought against the British with Japan.

The first, second, and third student strikes, or the student movements of the colonial period, were conflicts with the British colonial government. Because these three student movements related directly or indirectly to the country’s struggle for independence and opposition to British rule, they were considered mandatory subjects in school history textbooks after the country gained independence. Therefore, every citizen educated by the state system in Myanmar knows at least a rough outline of the student movements of the colonial period.

Students, Mass Movements and Resistance

Whenever authorities in Myanmar, regardless of governance system or ideology, begin to behave dictatorially, it has usually been students who resist and revolt. As a youthful force with high aspirations, expectations, and potential for long lives to come, they push to initiate movements even when it seems difficult for ordinary citizens to rally against injustice. Student movements generally occur in countries under authoritarian regimes where there is much injustice. Injustice exists even in countries with institutionalized democracies and is often protested against by student movements.

University students, and sometimes high school students, are particularly attracted to progressive ideologies.13 They are open to adopting new ideas as they learn about themselves and discover who they want to be. During the postcolonial nation-building period in Myanmar, students were fundamental members of the knowledge and occupational elites working for the country’s future.14 In many countries, students rarely work and are often supported by their families. Some argue this predisposes students to initiate social movements.15 Moreover, it is common for students to gather freely in places they frequent, such as schools or university campuses, dormitories, etc.

In Western countries, the word “student” has often been associated with the word “rebel” due to the student campus revolts of the 1960s.16 Phrases such as student politics,17 revolutionary students,18 and university rebellion,19 which suggest that students are rebels, soon appeared in different contexts. Since the colonial era, most of the popular movements in Myanmar have been initiated and led by students and workers, with farmers also starting some movements. However, students have always supported and joined the workers’ and peasants’ movements. Although the 2021 anti-coup movement was not a student-led movement and was mobilized by different classes of people across the country, students played a significant role. Many of the young people involved, constituting the vanguard of resistance, were students, but did not participate under the official banners of student unions.

Education Reform as the Origin of Student Politics

Since independence, Burmese students have struggled for an education system on par with other nations. Despite this, the various authorities in power have often ignored students’ interests and promoted insular education policies, resulting in continued disgruntlement. This is the background to student politics in Myanmar, where movements usually arise in reaction to both chronic and acute efforts by authorities to restrict and suppress student rights and identities.

One of the most egregious actions military authorities carried out was in 1996. They lowered the country’s standard of higher education by opening ‘Universities of Distance Education’ and producing cohort after cohort of ‘illiterate graduates’. Moreover, they also prioritized new universities in the peri-urban outskirts of big cities to avoid student mobilization. These policies reduced opportunities for students to meet and organize, let alone make new friends from Myanmar’s different states, regions, and cultures.

Independent Myanmar has only enjoyed a taste of democracy, the first period from 1948 to 1958, then 1960 to 1962, and the second from 2011 to 2020. The military continued to interfere in politics during those periods, hindering the institutionalization of democracy, civil society, and the nation’s intellectual development. Even the Rangoon University Student Union building, which hosted the founding fathers of Burmese independence, was blown up by the military. Long-entrenched military regimes have strived to prevent student unions from forming and organizing in various ways. However, students carried the spirit of the unions from generation to generation and worked hard to test the limits of authoritarian rule up to 2011-2021, when many student unions reemerged.

Forgotten Student Movements

Different generations of students led movements over time despite being oppressed, yet the many student movements which took place after independence are not mentioned in national curriculum textbooks. Under different military regimes, books and articles related to these movements were not allowed to be published. Even literary works such as poems and novels deemed to be indirectly associated with these movements were censored by authorities.

In August 2012 pre-publication censorship was abolished in Myanmar, allowing books, articles, and journals related to the various student movements after independence to be printed freely after being banned for over half a century. Most of the freshly published books and journals included topics such as historical timelines, reviews and experiences of the student movements, autobiographies, eyewitness accounts, and interviews with student activists.20

Philosophies of Student Movements as Written by Students

Expecting student activists to write analyses of their own political experiences for a scholarly audience is unrealistic. Many activists were educated in an isolationist, insular educational system that did not encourage critical thought in the humanities and social sciences. Furthermore, some student activists were imprisoned for their politics and cut off from the outside world for lengthy periods.

Student activists tend to write in a subjective, experiential way, although they sometimes strongly argue certain postulates. They often prioritize emotion over striving for objectivity, omit details and contexts, assuming that Burmese readers are aware of these, and repeat themselves in lengthy sentences. Much of the latter can be resolved in the editing process. The publications that materialized in the most recent decade without press censorship, and those in this special issue, are vital works for scholars researching student activism in Myanmar and the ideas and concepts born out of activists’ lived experiences (expériences vécues).

The issue editors were careful when editing and presenting each of the contributions in this special issue to refrain from altering the authors’ ideas and opinions. One example is the definition of “Generation Z” by Lay Lay Mon in her contribution to this issue, first written in 2016 when Aung San Suu Kyi and the NLD party formed government after their landslide victory in the 2015 elections and dominated parliament. In criticizing Generation Z at that time, Lay Lay Mon characterized them as a “zero generation” which could not live without digital devices such as computers, smartphones, and IT technologies and was merely replicating political revolutions from the past.

Certainly, if we look back at the past decade (2011-2021) with the hindsight of the military coup in 2021, we can say that the people did benefit from a “decade of liberalization and access to the internet and social media” as described by Jordt et al.21 But, the definition of Generation Z has shifted in post-coup Myanmar, since it now refers to the generation that led the demonstrations against the military coup, in support of the Civil Disobedience Movement, and in some cases, armed resistance.22 Therefore, it can be said that Generation Z is not merely replicating revolutions from the past but is applying technology, building on past trajectories, and creating new ones. Therefore, Lay Lay Mon’s analysis is best understood in light of the changes in the political landscape.

Articles and Interviews in the Special Issue

In this special issue, readers learn about the personal experiences of Burmese student activists of all ages from 1962 to the present day, as well as analyses of ideas emerging from these experiences. Boe Thein’s (Dr. Min Thein’s) contribution chronicles the year-by-year history of student activism to remove unwanted, oppressive, and discriminatory restrictions on the education system, although the article stops short of covering the firsthand experiences of the author, who served as the vice president of the All Burma Federation of Student Unions (ABFSU) from 1960-1961.  

Tin Aye Kyu’s article accounts for the oppression of the military junta and student movements in the 1970s and discusses why student movements arose in that decade. In addition to discussing the relationship between social and economic issues and student movements, the author endorses a contentious claim: that Burma was the most prosperous country in Southeast Asia before the 1962 military coup.

Sai Kyaw Nyunt’s reflective contribution describes his firsthand experiences during the 1996 student protests. Written in an autobiographical style, he describes how his student activism turned into participation in the peace process and party politics. The author’s detailed descriptions of his detention by military intelligence and his experiences during interrogation are significant.

Zay Yah Oo’s article about the 2002 student revolt at the Military Technological College in Pyin Oo Lwin is momentous. He delivers a personal account of the first and last student movement in a military college during the State Peace and Development Council military regime. The author took a leadership role in the protests, which resulted in close to a full revolt, and he was imprisoned for his activism. This movement was more complicated than the many civilian student protests readers may be more familiar with. The public could not easily learn the truth about this incident due to censorship, misinformation and disinformation.23 Rather than focusing on the mismanagement and strict orders of the military officers running the school, the article reflects on those officers’ mental states and grudges.

The journal is proud to present an interview with Hla Shwe, which includes a record of ABFSU activities from 1950-1960. Readers learn about the union’s work representing students, and its mobilizations on campus, within the nation, and abroad during the height of the Cold War. Like Sai Kyaw Nyunt, Hla Shwe also suffered under interrogation after he was captured in battle fighting for the Communist Party of Burma. However, Hla Shwe’s interrogation experiences were not as harsh as Sai Kyaw Nyunt’s. This suggests the question of why the treatment of political detainees has worsened after the 1988 uprising. It is also noteworthy how ‘student union spirit’ and examples of justice and morality have been passed down from generation to generation among students.

Phyoe Phyoe Aung’s article discusses the secret reorganization of the ABFSU in 2007 and its relationships with other university student unions; with proxy unions organized by university authorities; and with the ruling government. She also notes how union members strived to keep the ABFSU relevant among the public.

Lay Lay Mon’s account of participating in the Dagon University strikes during what came to be known as the 1996 student movementis unique in that it focuses on the generational gap between students of different ages. Therefore, it provides an opportunity to learn about the situation of students around 2016 when the NLD government came to power.

Two interviews round out the special issue. The first, with Soe Tun, also vividly sketches the conditions and causes that led to the 1996 student movement. Soe Tun describes how the military junta diverted university students’ attention away from politics, how it spread fear among the students, and how the students of the 1996 generation mobilized. The second interview is with Min Han Htet, who was President of the Dagon University Student Union during the nationwide uprising after the 2021 military coup. He covers his role in mass protest, contextualized by his personal background. He explains how his famous speech, “We must instill fear in the military”, came about. The reverse strategy of instilling the fear that previous military regimes generated in students back into the military and its regime is powerful. That speech gained a reputation as an inaugural slogan of those fighting against the State Administration Council since the 2021 coup, inspiring anti-coup resistance so that the military still, at the time of printing, cannot effectively govern the entire country.

Closing Remarks

Political events are dynamic and there are many known and unknown factors to consider when analyzing them. Therefore, just as it is hard to interpret and draw conclusions from the past, it is also not easy to make accurate predictions about the future. In one survey conducted during the mass protests and uprisings after the 2021 coup in Myanmar, it was observed that students were an important group among the protesters (some of whom were student union members). In an interview conducted in August 2021, a female student answered, “I am a student union member. I have an obligation to fight against injustice, which is the union’s historical responsibility”.24 According to these responses, it is likely more student movements will continue to emerge, as long as the student union spirit remains strong and oppressions and injustices continue.

Acknowledgments

First, we would like to express our sincere thanks to everyone who participated in the 2016 workshop in which this special issue was conceived. Second, we would like to show our gratitude to all the student activists of old and new generations that contributed their manuscripts and interviews. Last but not least, thanks to Sa Waw Thang, who assisted with research for this introduction and copyedited the original Burmese manuscripts. We would also like to thank the three unnamed artists who contributed the cover artwork and illustrations for the special issue.

Endnotes

1 This is a collective pseudonym. The issue editors for this special issue are anonymous for security reasons. Please also note that the English and Burmese versions of this introduction article do not correspond 100 percent to one another and were in part written for different audiences.
2 Silverstein, 1968; Silverstein, 1970.
3 Weiss & Aspinall, 2012.
4 Win Min, 2012.
5 Rives, 2014.
6 Soldiers, monks and students are called sit thar, phaya thar, and kyaung thar respectively, hence thar thone thar (three sons).
7 Rives, 2014.
8 Thakin in Burmese means master. Members of Dobama Asiayone (founded in 1930) took up the appellation before their names as an act of defiance against the British colonial rulers who established themselves as the ‘masters’ of the colonies.
9 Metro, 2017.
10 Making a gesture of respect by putting the palms together and raising them to the forehead.
11 Turner, 2014, p. 115.
12 The Pali word for a Buddhist monk community.
13 Altbach, 1982, p. 174.
14 Pinner, 1971; Rootes, 1980, pp. 475-476; Schubert et al., 1994.
15 Weiss & Aspinall, 2012, p. 5.
16 Quinn et al., 1972.
17 Lipset, 1967.
18 Lipset & Altbach, 1969.
19 Lipset, 1971.
20 Some of the books published during this period can be found in the references list.
21 Jordt et al., 2021.
22 Independent Research Network, 2022; Su Mon Thant, 2021.
23 However, one journalist wrote about the incident in 2016, following the student activism workshop (Kyaw Phone Kyaw, 2016).
24 Su Mon Thant, 2021.

References

Altbach, P. G. (1974). Student Politics in America: A Historical Analysis. McGraw-Hill Book Co.

Altbach, P. G. (1987). Higher Education in the Third World: Themes and Variations. Stosius Inc.

Aspinall, E. (2012). Indonesia: Moral Force Politics and the Struggle Against Authoritarianism. In M. L. Weiss, & E. Aspinall (Eds.), Student Activism in Asia: Between Protest and Powerlessness (pp. 153-180). University of Minnesota Press.

Independent Research Network. (2022). The Internal Struggle: The Fight for an Inclusive National Identity in Myanmar.

Jordt, I., Tharaphi Than, & Sue Ye Lin. (2021). How Generation Z Galvanized a Revolutionary Movement Against Myanmar’s 2021 Military Coup. Trends in Southeast Asia. https://www.iseas.edu.sg/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/TRS7_21.pdf

Kyaw Phone Kyaw. (2016, December 19). The Forgotten Mutiny at Pyin Oo Lwin. Frontier Myanmar. https://www.frontiermyanmar.net/en/the-forgotten-mutiny-at-pyin-oo-lwin/

Lipset, S. M. (1967). University Students and Politics in Underdeveloped Countries. In S. M. Lipset (Ed.), Student Politics (pp. 3-53). Basic Books.

Lipset, S. M. (1971). Rebellion in the University. Little, Brown and Co.

Lipset, S. M., & Altbach, P. G. (Eds.). (1969). Students in Revolt. Houghton Mifflin.

Metro, R. (2016). The University Student Protests in Burma/Myanmar, 2014–2016. In J. Millican (Ed.), Universities and Conflict: The Role of Higher Education in Peacebuilding and Resistance (pp. 205-218). Routledge.

Pinner, F. A. (1971). Students: A Marginal Elite in Politics. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 395(1), 127–138.

Quinn, E., Lilienfeld, R., & Hill, R. (Eds.). (1972). Interdiscipline: A Reader in Psychology, Sociology, and Literature. Free Press.

Rives, N. M. L. (2014). University Student Activism in Burma/Myanmar During the 1980s [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Kansas.

Rootes, C. A. (1980). Student Radicalism: Politics of Moral Protest and Legitimation Problems of the Modern Capitalist State. Theory and Society, 9(3), 473-502. http://www.jstor.org/stable/656878

Schubert, G., Tetzlaff, R., & Vennewald, W. (Eds.). (1994). Demokratisierung und Politischer Wandel. Theorie und Anwendung des Konzeptes der strategischen und konfliktfähigen Gruppen [Democratization and Political Change. Theory and Application of the Concept of Strategic and Conflict-capable Groups. LIT.

Silverstein, J. (1968). Burmese Student Politics in a Changing Society. Daedalus, 97(1), 274-292. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20023809

Silverstein, J. (1970). Burmese and Malaysian Student Politics: A Preliminary Comparative Inquiry. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 1(1), 3-22. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20069843

Su Mon Thant. (2021). In the Wake of the Coup: How Myanmar Youth Arose to Fight for the Nation. https://eu.boell.org/en/young-voices-myanmar

Turner, A. (2014). Saving Buddhism: The Impermanence of Religion in Colonial Burma. University of Hawaii Press.

Weiss, M. L., & Aspinall, E. (Eds.). (2012). Student Activism in Asia: Between Protest and Powerlessness. University of Minnesota Press.

Win Min. (2012). Burma: A Historic Force, Forcefully Met. In M. L. Weiss & E. Aspinall (Eds.), Student Activism in Asia: Between Protest and Powerlessness (pp. 181-204). University of Minnesota Press.


ဗမာနိုင်ငံလုံးဆိုင်ရာကျောင်းသားသမဂ္ဂများအဖွဲ့ချုပ် (တရားဝင်)ဖြစ်မြောက်ရေးကော်မတီ၏ပထမအကြိမ်ညီလာခံ ၂၈.၈.၈၈ ၊ (၂၀၁၆)၊ ယဥ်မျိုးစာအုပ်တိုက်။

၇၄၇၅၇၆နိုင်ငံရေးအင်အားစု၊ (၂၀၁၃)၊ ၇၄-၇၅-၇၆ မ.ဆ.လ အာဏာရှင်ဆန့်ကျင်ရေးအံတုလှုပ်ရှားမှုများ ၊ ရွှေပြည်တန်စာအုပ်တိုက်။

ကျော်သူစိုး(ကလေး)၊ (၂၀၁၆)၊ ကောလိပ်သူပုန်စစ်အာဏာရှင်လက်ထက်တွင်ပထမဆုံးနှင့် နောက်ဆုံးသောတပ်တွင်း ကောလိပ်တော်လှန်ရေး ၊မြန်မာ့ခေတ်စာပေ။

ခင်မောင်ကြီး၊ (၂၀၁၃)၊ မေ့ပျောက်နိုင်စရာမရှိတဲ့ အမျိုးသားနိုင်ငံရေးနှင့် ကျောင်းသားလှုပ်ရှားမှု ၊ ယဥ်မျိုးစာအုပ်တိုက်။

ဇနိယ၊ မောင်၊ (၂၀၁၅)၊ ​ဗိုလ်အောင်ကျော် (၁၉၃၈-၃၉ ကျောင်းသားလှုပ်ရှားမှုသမိုင်း) ၊ ယဥ်မျိုးစာအုပ်တိုက်။

ဉာဏ်မောင်ချစ်၊ (၂၀၁၄)၊ ရန်ကုန်တက္ကသိုလ်ကျောင်းသားများသမဂ္ဂ သမိုင်းအစ ၊ မလိခစာပေ။

တက္ကသိုလ်ကျောင်းသားသမဂ္ဂများ (ရန်ကုန်)၊(၂၀၂၀)၊ ပထမကျောင်းသားသပိတ်သို့ ဦးညွှတ်ခြင်း ၊ ရန်ကုန်လမ်းမများစာပေ။

သံချောင်း၊ဖိုး၊ ရဲဘော်၊ (၂၀၁၃)၊ ကျောင်းသား၊ထောင်၊တော်လှန်ရေးသမား။ ယဥ်မျိုးစာအုပ်တိုက်။

ဘိုးသိမ်း၊ (၂၀၁၆)၊ တက္ကသိုလ်များဗဟိုချုပ်ကိုင်မှုလျှော့ချရေးနှင့် တခြားတက္ကသိုလ်ရေးရာ၊ကျောင်းသားသမဂ္ဂရေးရာဆောင်းပါးများ ၊ ဧကရာဇ်စာပေ။

မင်းသိမ်း၊ ဒေါက်တာ၊ (၂၀၁၃)၊ ကျောင်းသားသမဂ္ဂအဆောက်အအုံဖောက်ခွဲဖျက်ဆီးမှုတရားခံဘယ်သူလဲ ၊ အောင်ပင်လယ် စာပေတိုက်။

မင်းသိမ်း၊ ဒေါက်တာ၊ (၂၀၂၀)၊ ကံ့ကော်တောမှ ဒေါင်းပျိုခွပ်သံ (ရန်ကုန်တက္ကသိုလ်ကျောင်းသားလှုပ်ရှားမှုသမိုင်း) ၊ လွင်ဦးစာပေ။

ထက်အောင်ကျော်၊ (၂၀၁၃)၊ သူပုန်ကျောင်းသားတစ်ဦးရဲ့ မာရသွန်ခရီး ၊ Dawei Watch စာပေ။

ထိန်ဝင်း (ဓာတ်ပုံ)၊ (၂၀၁၄)၊ ၁၉၇၄ ဦးသန့်အရေးအခင်း။ထိန်ဝင်းစာပေ။

ယဥ်ထွန်း၊ (၂၀၁၃)၊ 7th July အရေးတော်ပုံမှတ်တမ်း ၊ ယဥ်မျိုးစာပေ။

လှကွန့် (စုစည်းတင်ပြ)၊ (၂၀၁၃)၊ အရိုးတွန်တဲ့ဇူလိုင် () ၊ ဇင်ရတနာစောစာပေ။

ဝင်းမောင်သန်း၊ မောင်၊ (၂၀၁၂)၊ ​ကျောင်းသားအရေးတော်ပုံ (၁၉၅၃-၅၄) ၊ သံလွင်ငြိမ်းချမ်းစာပေ။

အောင်ထွန်း၊ (၂၀၁၂)၊ မြန်မာနိုင်ငံကျောင်းသားလှုပ်ရှားမှုသမိုင်း (၁၉၀၃-၁၉၆၂) ၊ ပဉ္စဂံစာပေ။

အောင်ဒင်၊ (၂၀၁၄)၊ နွေတစ်ညမှ အစပြု၍ ၊ ခေတ်ပြတိုက်စာပေ။

အောင်ဝေး၊ (၂၀၁၃)၊ ကိုဗဟိန်းမှသည်ကျော်ကိုကိုအထိ မြန်မာနိုင်ငံကျောင်းသားလှုပ်ရှားမှုသမိုင်းအကျဉ်း (၁၉၀၃-၂၀၀၇)၊မြန်မာ့ခေတ်စာအုပ်တိုက်။

အောင်သာ (PPP)၊ (၂၀၁၆)၊ ခေတ်ပြိုင်မြန်မာ့နိုင်ငံရေးနှင့် ကျောင်းသားလှုပ်ရှားမှုအဆင့်နေရာ ၊ ယဥ်မျိုးစာအုပ်တိုက်။