DL 36 Teacher Training – Education 2.0

Image_pdfimage_print

We are now two weeks away from 30 June, the deadline defined in the PNRR for Parliament’s approval of Decree 36 on a range of strategic issues for the extension of teaching: First education between university and school, Professional qualifications and Recruitment; continuous training; Career is based on the development and articulation of skills and professional functions. Efforts are also being made in other European countries to make work in schools more attractive in order to attract the best graduates, in order to counteract the shortage of professions in the teaching profession. These are issues that concern not only the conditions of the teaching staff, but also the quality of school functioning: Schools, as we have seen very well during the pandemic crisis, need not only didactic but also organizational innovations. All of this has been discussed for years, and at least since the introduction of school autonomy, many sensible and feasible reform proposals have been worked out, which are becoming increasingly urgent in the face of exacerbating long-standing problems, including the continuous recurrence of gigantic precariousness (approximately 200 thousand precarious teachers), the lack of teachers in certain professional fields, modesty of initial salaries and their evolution, the trust in an unrecognized professional volunteer of the quality of teaching and school organization. But if, as today, it is finally necessary to intervene in this range of issues, both with the provisions of the PNRR and almost simultaneously with the renewal of the national collective agreement, the proposals of the parties, of the government on the one hand, of the professional Representatives, on the other hand, have very serious boundaries, gaps, shortcomings: of economic resources in place, of ideas, of the ability to set up and manage a constructive confrontation. Of method and merit, as it was once said. To the point that even before launch, there was a strike in the category without an organic and understandable platform, and today it is still not clear how a landing can be achieved, both in terms of the decree and the renewal of the Contract. With the result that apparently at least old vices and prejudices prevail: the demand without innovating enough resources, the misunderstanding that the precariat can only be solved with amnesties, the refusal, the impact of the population deck in the school to consider, including the school. bizarre belief that continuing education may not be a duty as well as a right. Sectoralism and corporatism, but also serious shortcomings, in those who are required to present them, of far-sighted and appropriate proposals. The problem could be abruptly stated with a sentence such as: all the unresolved knots come to a head, but here is the risk that many energies, which over the years continue to produce significant experiences and underline the top, once again to suffocate. – Reducing the centralization aspects of the functioning of the school institution, definitely sanctioning the disappearance of the values ​​and potential of school autonomy, which today are instead a guarantee of equality and inclusivity in education and training.

Trying to put the problems in line, it seems useful to start by identifying the nodes that need to be resolved in advance.

  1. Provisions for the school according to the PNRR philosophy are included “the Pact for Innovation in Public Works and Social Cohesion“From 10 March 2021 and must therefore be contextualised in the context of public administration reform, see under the dual aspect of the working conditions of those who work there and the quality / quantity of all those” services “the social pacts, Characterizing citizens. ‘Rights and welfare provisions.
  2. The distinction, as far as school work is concerned, between the subjects of parliamentary competence (because it is a modification of the legal status of the teachers concerned, and in particular of the “function of the teacher”) and the subjects, belonging to the place. to the agreed definition between the social partners, which are therefore of trade union competence

The difficulty with which the school unions reconstituted a united front for the strike of 30 May was highlighted precisely in the variety of slogans that were uttered on that occasion and which are hardly summarized in a platform on which there are points who qualify. narrow negotiations. Out of these difficulties, but trying to exercise some form of cautious vigilance on what is being “prepared,” we list here in the form of questions the problematic aspects, but essential to the future of the school, in the elaboration captured and concerned expressions from the points of view of many insiders. These are some questions that address the education of qualified protagonists of the debate, accompanying the path followed by the decree on the adoption of implementing rules.

  1. What changes might still be possible by the 30th deadline in the proposal phase?
  2. What could be the fate of the dual channel in the recruitment of teachers, which actually remains, but which according to the decree should be reabsorbable with the elimination of structural precariousness?
  3. What could be the effect of demographic decline in staff planning and salary evaluation?
  4. Does the decree express a vision and a perspective for the long-term school system? If so, what are these prospects?
  5. What is the weight of the constraints and resources placed by the PNRR in a political phase that seems to reduce the role of the development of political forces, social forces and cultural institutions?

Unfortunately, without a vision of what the school needs to do, without strong ideas about what our society wants to be in the near future, any law intervention in the school risks being a disruption that cancels out or slows down as much as a few years ago another political Majority trying to achieve. In particular, competition between schools or between teachers or students risks being the keystone of quality, and this can only harm the overall climate and slow down the growth of individuals and communities.

The government decree, at the heart of the quality of teaching staff, however, seems to lack a vision shared by a recognizable political majority in a serious analysis of the responsibilities of the institutions that are now solving the problems they themselves have. want. generated. The reference to universities is obvious. The idea of ​​setting up a new wagon for the higher education of teachers in the service is highly questionable.

There is an urgent need for a serious rethinking of those who develop hypotheses in the school system and reflexively disseminate them for improvement, seriously: our magazine wants to stop critical contributions that are not too much due to the emergency climate. it overwhelms us for every aspect of life.social.

Editorial Board

Leave a Comment