SCHOOL/Teacher prestige and recruitment: what's needed to address the unions' problems?
Teachers' authority is undermined primarily by their low social prestige. Why perpetuate the system's flaws instead of turning the page?
Current events, which increasingly depict episodes of aggression towards teachers , are prompting Minister Valditara – and with him the most qualified observers of school affairs – to raise the issue of the social role of the teaching staff and the lack of prestige that unfortunately characterizes the position.
Nothing new under the sun, but it seems the ministry—within its remit—is moving with greater determination. This perspective explains, for example, the recent legislative approval of regulations regarding what, some time ago, were defined, using an older term, as "conduct" grades, but which today fall under the more current category of "behavior."
As is known, they affect the school credit for the state exam and the "6" requires a make-up test, before the start of the new school year, which, if failed, would prevent access to the next class.
The issue of civic education has thus assumed central importance, and it is clear that it has direct and indirect consequences for the recognition of the teaching role and, in particular, its authority . However, while it is obvious that the issue of low prestige far transcends the scope of ministerial decisions, it is not superfluous to observe that the political strategy for a possible reconstruction of the image of the teaching profession draws its foundation precisely from the school environment.
In other words, the regulatory choices made within the educational system represent the sine qua non for the social recovery of professional prestige. At this point, it's useful to consider the situation in a country like Finland, where the professional role of teachers is comparable to that of professionals like doctors and engineers. How is a reputation so different from ours possible?
I note, first of all, that in that country, teacher training and continuing education are part of paid working time and represent fundamental practices, implemented within professional communities. This is a different world from what happens in our country, where continuing education, despite being mandatory under Law 107/2015 ("Buona Scuola"), was until recently entrusted to teachers' councils for hourly calculations, which obviously imposed minimal requirements so as not to offend the sensibilities of union-hostile colleagues.
Today it is completely marginalised and compressed, since it has acquired a residual nature within the number of hours dedicated to activities of participation in class councils and those relating to colleges, meetings with families, etc.
Of course, the national sectoral agreement doesn't state that all training must be limited to that remaining time, but established practices now limit training to those hours only. At this point, it's worth asking: Since all professional activities, as such, require more or less constant mandatory training, how can we retrain teachers without including adequate training of this type?
However, what is striking when comparing our school system with the Finnish one is the selection process for teachers . Their initial training is highly selective and includes a five-year master's degree.
Candidates are rigorously selected for admission to the faculties of education, and only 10-15% are admitted. The evaluation also includes interviews assessing motivation, aptitude, and interpersonal communication skills.
Upon completion of their studies, graduates undertake a long-term and structured internship, aimed at developing critical and highly autonomous professional skills. Hiring is then decentralized to meet the needs of individual schools and the local area.
Here too, we can see a world different from our own. Obviously, Finnish society as a whole somehow embraces the values of the centrality of education (whose importance for economic development is recognized) and the meritocratic values regarding professions.
Instead, the Italian reality, as Sabino Cassese suggested in the Corriere della Sera of August 5th, considers the public administration as a welfare system , to the point that, in schools, "regularization" procedures for the placement on roles have prevailed up to now.
I believe Minister Valditara has attempted to restore some dignity to competitive exams by reinstating their selective nature, even though the overall results are not available on the ministry website in aggregate form, but only those published by regional education offices. I believe, however, that the minister's intentions are undermined, at least partially, by the role of some universities, whose financially advantageous choices broaden the scope of access to training courses.
I'm not entirely sure (precisely because I don't have a comprehensive statistical overview), but I don't think I'm wrong in stating that some universities (certainly not the most prestigious ones, public or private), lacking an adequate number of applicants, have opted for general admissions, which are unlikely to be followed by highly selective tests. I'm referring, for example, to support training courses (TFA).
The fact remains that the first step towards the professional reevaluation of the teaching staff and the acquisition of renewed authority requires adequate selection, aimed at recognizing and promoting professional quality. From this perspective, I doubt that centralized competitions can work and that the ranking system for substitute teachers can guarantee such quality.
The solution, in my opinion, is to strengthen autonomy , allowing schools to understand and interpret local needs. However, its revision also entails reforming the delegated decrees from over half a century ago. I hope the minister finds the courage to implement these reforms, despite the unions' total and pernicious opposition.
— — — —
We need your help to continue providing you with quality, independent information.
İl sussidiario
