The Minister for Education and Merit Giuseppe Valditara It was strongly rejected by the high school teachers, those of the proposed technical-professional supply chain and the high school “Made in Italy”. A largely predictable failure, almost announced what the minister stubbornly sought. This year the priest always told us that the teachers did it in their silence on his side of a courageous and reforming minister. A kind of silent agreement. But now the teachers have spoken out and overwhelmingly rejected the minister's two flagships: the Made in Italy high school and most importantly, transforming technical institutes into a paid professional supply chain.
There are many reasons that led the class councils of 95% or more of the institutes to reject the rambling and frankly embarrassing ministerial proposal, which has also been presented several times on this blog. Now the minister has two exit strategies. He may say that the teachers did not understand the reasons for his suggestion. Minimal solution. Or a new enemy is invented, the teachers who are children of the culture of 1968 and do this knowingly boycotted. Given that the post-Missina right is always based on pre-industrial fears and nostalgia, I believe that this will be the path chosen by the Latin American and sovereigntist minister: he will place the responsibility for the rejection of his bizarre project on the “conservatives” roll off. teacher, with a completely false reconstruction of the use and consumption of his applauding circles.
Among other things, the Valditara supply chain project would also have been rejected by families because it extends the route by a year and pays for the last two years. We provided information about why the teachers were united a dry disappointment A lot was said in Valditara. A reform that is flawed, incomplete, confused and un-resourced. Even anticipated by a decree bypassing Parliament, which is now an annex to the government. Valditara was clearly in a hurry to dig his proverbial grave. A headmistress, who offers five high school economics courses at her institute and was therefore at the forefront of the Made in Italy high school experiment, confided to me that she had no desire to continue because she literally didn't know what This must be communicated to families when registering. The Made in Italy high school is an empty box full of rhetorical nonsense, and this also applies to the reform of technicians and professionals. Therefore, the ideology of 1968, if it still exists in the school, has nothing to do with it: the reasons for the failure are practical and operational.
But here I am interested in another aspect, let's say the method. Who did the minister speak to to envision and plan his reform? Surely did not involve the teachers and the world of school in general. The Supreme Council of Public Education also found so many deficiencies that it asked the minister to pause for thought. The sovereignist minister continued and ended up in the ditch. Certainly not the school unions, who only saw the proposal as final: take it or leave it. The actual interlocutor was Confindustria, as can be seen from the enthusiastic tone of the articles in the business newspapers. The renewal of the school for industrialists brings with it its distortion: more internships, certificates from entrepreneurs and less teaching. This is how Italian family capitalism strives to shine in new splendor on international markets. Is this the way to economically revive Italy, which has been struggling for decades?
You can take a look here a transformation, I would say anthropological regression of both the right and the industrialists. Until a few years ago, the underlying vision was different and even conservatives of all stripes focused primarily on general education. Given a rapidly evolving economy, it said, key skills need to be cross-cutting rather than specific, which are changing rapidly. In short, a plastic student capable of absorbing the new and not becoming entrenched in a specific training that quickly becomes obsolete. This was also the meaning of Moratti reform of 2003, who wanted to legalize the world of technical and vocational training in his own way. Now Valditara and the right have taken the opposite path: the student's true calling is professional practice, which can be expected as early as the second year of high school. That's why the conservatives have put education at the service of the economy.
But what business and what economy are we talking about, that is the question. With the waves of innovation coming higher and closer together, we need to provide our young people with a comprehensive and solid education, or an education based on something that will be achieved in four to five years completely different? The conservative Valditara preferred to look to the past, the conservative Moratti looked to the future. Ultimately the choice of early professionalization it contradicts the logic of the knowledge economy in which we live. Teachers did well to reject Minister Valditara's harmful traditionalism for society and the economy.
Valditara went against the teachers and tried to subordinate the school to the more narrow and short-term interests of the business world. If we were in a presidential regime, the one that Meloni likes, a minister so sensational failed he would be immediately removed from office for obvious incompetence. But we are sure that this will not happen in the Italian party system. In fact, the right will make a new enemy: left-wing and conservative teachers. These conservative teachers who said “no” to Valditara are neither right nor left, but simply professionals who try to do their job despite many difficulties and who should instead be thanked for saving what little or much of quality , which still protects the high school from the follies of ministers, the new ones, but also the old ones (not all of them).