The New Guidelines 2025 Nursery School and First Cycle of Education were
presented, in the title, as Materials for Public Debate. They are 154
pages, which will replace the Guidelines for the 2012 curriculum, which
had the merit of providing slightly more concrete indications and in
"just" 69 pages. ---- I will immediately try to summarize my point of
view in 250 characters or so, spaces included, as mockingly suggested in
the questionnaire on the New Indications distributed to schools: "The
document stinks of mold: pedagogical activism, personalization of
teaching, cult of "talents", hymn to the superior "Western
civilization". There is no shortage of references to the School as an
important institution of the Republic and the usual magic and bipartisan
words, inclusion and welcome".
Most of the substantial document falls squarely within what can be
defined as a discourse on the school that is independent of the material
conditions in which students and teachers work, in which real problems
are solved with petitions of principle, in which that magma that
incorporates positive and negative elements and which, at this moment,
is the school (complicated, confused - not only complex) dissolves into
an idealized vision of the role of the Teacher, who transmits "in the
first person, a passion for what he is teaching because, in the
classroom, nemo dat quod non habet". It remains a mystery how to arouse
such passion in teachers who are burdened by increasingly onerous
working conditions, underpaid, socially undervalued and finally - let's
face it - closely followed by an Administration that intervenes more and
more often by sanctioning them.
The key words of the introductory pages, in my opinion the most
important, are "talents" (4 occurrences), "freedom" (16), "person" (38!)
identity (10) "inclusion" (8). The cultural references cited are many.
The first to be called into question as a founding father is Giorgio La
Pira: despite an undoubted originality of position within the Christian
Democrat party, he is not the first thinker to help us these days. The
thought of Emmanuel Mounier (explicitly cited only in one note) is very
strong, the Catholic philosopher who founded the magazine Esprit in the
1930s, and who hypothesized a "third force" and a "community
personalism" that exalts the person, who should not be confused with the
individual, as a unique spiritual reality aimed at transcendence.
Certainly, among the authors of the document there are followers of
Mounier and the initial pages, in addition to being characterized by the
good feelings of other times (and one is surprised by the Cerberus-like
attitude held by Valditara on more than one occasion) insistently
propose aspects of pedagogical personalism. Always explicitly cited is
pedagogical activism, which originated at the end of the 19th century. I
would find nothing wrong in referring to schools of thought so distant
in time, if it were not for the fact that some passages of the document
appear to be in open contradiction with such theoretical declarations.
I will allow myself a long quote, in my opinion among the most
significant passages: "The educational principle that underlies school,
starting from childhood, is the centrality of the student who is an
active subject of his own learning and who, thanks to school,
progressively learns to govern the inestimable good of freedom. Freedom
is the most important characteristic value of the West and its
civilization since its birth, which took place between Athens, Rome and
Jerusalem. And it is the beating heart of our democracy. Understanding
what freedom is and above all what it means to be free (also through
comparison with those who are not free, in many parts of the world),
facilitates the understanding of what a Western democracy is and the
connections existing between the latter and the system of rights and
duties of citizenship conquered by Europe, even at the cost of terrible
wars, in the first half of the twentieth century." These lines bring
into focus the apodictic trend of the New Indications, which excludes
doubts and which is not at all concerned with the implementation of what
it affirms. What does it mean that the student is "central" at school
(pedagogical personalism returns)? Could a school exist without
students? How can a child be an "active subject of his own learning" and
govern "the inestimable good of freedom"? Here the only freedom that
triumphs is that of words, connected to each other by a sort of
lyrical-sentimental inspiration, which is independent of the real
problems of today's school. Also impressive is the return of
Eurocentrism, which makes the words "democracy" and "Western" an
inseparable pair, thus wiping out, with a stroke of the sponge, a
century and more of anthropological studies.
And yet something is learned: I had never reflected on the fact that
Jerusalem, with Rome and Athens, constituted one of the three vertices
of the West. I had always placed it, Jerusalem, in the Near East, close
to and in dialectical relationship with the West. And now I find it
associated with Rome and Athens, which, moreover, have very little to do
with democracy as we understand it after the French Revolution. In
short, this is a very long speech, but the shortcuts chosen by the
Commission that produced the New Indications - that is, celebrating the
alleged values of a classical and Christian West - seem deplorable to
me. For the sake of my country, I will ignore the superficiality with
which the issues of new technologies and AI are addressed; and I will
also ignore the many inconsistencies that dot the text. I will limit
myself to observing that the skills required of a child at the end of
the first cycle of education for me, if he possessed them, could be
worthy of a graduate from a prestigious university (read to believe).
Furthermore, after several pages of spiritualist tirades we discover
that the child must have digital skills (and the WHO recommendations
aimed at keeping little ones away from evil screens?) and also - horror!
- entrepreneurial skills. The drafters of the document, it is clear, did
not have too many problems and produced a concoction whose ingredients
are in open conflict with each other and coexist only on the written page.
https://www.sicilialibertaria.it/
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S N E W S S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
presented, in the title, as Materials for Public Debate. They are 154
pages, which will replace the Guidelines for the 2012 curriculum, which
had the merit of providing slightly more concrete indications and in
"just" 69 pages. ---- I will immediately try to summarize my point of
view in 250 characters or so, spaces included, as mockingly suggested in
the questionnaire on the New Indications distributed to schools: "The
document stinks of mold: pedagogical activism, personalization of
teaching, cult of "talents", hymn to the superior "Western
civilization". There is no shortage of references to the School as an
important institution of the Republic and the usual magic and bipartisan
words, inclusion and welcome".
Most of the substantial document falls squarely within what can be
defined as a discourse on the school that is independent of the material
conditions in which students and teachers work, in which real problems
are solved with petitions of principle, in which that magma that
incorporates positive and negative elements and which, at this moment,
is the school (complicated, confused - not only complex) dissolves into
an idealized vision of the role of the Teacher, who transmits "in the
first person, a passion for what he is teaching because, in the
classroom, nemo dat quod non habet". It remains a mystery how to arouse
such passion in teachers who are burdened by increasingly onerous
working conditions, underpaid, socially undervalued and finally - let's
face it - closely followed by an Administration that intervenes more and
more often by sanctioning them.
The key words of the introductory pages, in my opinion the most
important, are "talents" (4 occurrences), "freedom" (16), "person" (38!)
identity (10) "inclusion" (8). The cultural references cited are many.
The first to be called into question as a founding father is Giorgio La
Pira: despite an undoubted originality of position within the Christian
Democrat party, he is not the first thinker to help us these days. The
thought of Emmanuel Mounier (explicitly cited only in one note) is very
strong, the Catholic philosopher who founded the magazine Esprit in the
1930s, and who hypothesized a "third force" and a "community
personalism" that exalts the person, who should not be confused with the
individual, as a unique spiritual reality aimed at transcendence.
Certainly, among the authors of the document there are followers of
Mounier and the initial pages, in addition to being characterized by the
good feelings of other times (and one is surprised by the Cerberus-like
attitude held by Valditara on more than one occasion) insistently
propose aspects of pedagogical personalism. Always explicitly cited is
pedagogical activism, which originated at the end of the 19th century. I
would find nothing wrong in referring to schools of thought so distant
in time, if it were not for the fact that some passages of the document
appear to be in open contradiction with such theoretical declarations.
I will allow myself a long quote, in my opinion among the most
significant passages: "The educational principle that underlies school,
starting from childhood, is the centrality of the student who is an
active subject of his own learning and who, thanks to school,
progressively learns to govern the inestimable good of freedom. Freedom
is the most important characteristic value of the West and its
civilization since its birth, which took place between Athens, Rome and
Jerusalem. And it is the beating heart of our democracy. Understanding
what freedom is and above all what it means to be free (also through
comparison with those who are not free, in many parts of the world),
facilitates the understanding of what a Western democracy is and the
connections existing between the latter and the system of rights and
duties of citizenship conquered by Europe, even at the cost of terrible
wars, in the first half of the twentieth century." These lines bring
into focus the apodictic trend of the New Indications, which excludes
doubts and which is not at all concerned with the implementation of what
it affirms. What does it mean that the student is "central" at school
(pedagogical personalism returns)? Could a school exist without
students? How can a child be an "active subject of his own learning" and
govern "the inestimable good of freedom"? Here the only freedom that
triumphs is that of words, connected to each other by a sort of
lyrical-sentimental inspiration, which is independent of the real
problems of today's school. Also impressive is the return of
Eurocentrism, which makes the words "democracy" and "Western" an
inseparable pair, thus wiping out, with a stroke of the sponge, a
century and more of anthropological studies.
And yet something is learned: I had never reflected on the fact that
Jerusalem, with Rome and Athens, constituted one of the three vertices
of the West. I had always placed it, Jerusalem, in the Near East, close
to and in dialectical relationship with the West. And now I find it
associated with Rome and Athens, which, moreover, have very little to do
with democracy as we understand it after the French Revolution. In
short, this is a very long speech, but the shortcuts chosen by the
Commission that produced the New Indications - that is, celebrating the
alleged values of a classical and Christian West - seem deplorable to
me. For the sake of my country, I will ignore the superficiality with
which the issues of new technologies and AI are addressed; and I will
also ignore the many inconsistencies that dot the text. I will limit
myself to observing that the skills required of a child at the end of
the first cycle of education for me, if he possessed them, could be
worthy of a graduate from a prestigious university (read to believe).
Furthermore, after several pages of spiritualist tirades we discover
that the child must have digital skills (and the WHO recommendations
aimed at keeping little ones away from evil screens?) and also - horror!
- entrepreneurial skills. The drafters of the document, it is clear, did
not have too many problems and produced a concoction whose ingredients
are in open conflict with each other and coexist only on the written page.
https://www.sicilialibertaria.it/
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S N E W S S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten