The minds of children and young people are so crucial and fragile that politicians should not centrally find what content they are expected to absorb at school. Leaving these decisions in their hands is damaging: it hinders rational debate and the programme is detached from reality and ignores students' needs and interests.
Even the most lazy government will make changes in 1 area – the programming basis. This is usually not the adjustment of the curriculum to the current social and economical conditions, but another effort to make a fresh citizen according to organization ideals. Changes are limited to replacing unpopular authors on the list with the authority of the ruling party.
The minds of children and young people are so crucial and fragile that politicians should not centrally find what content they are expected to absorb at school. Leaving these decisions in their hands is damaging: it hinders rational debate and the programme is detached from reality and ignores students' needs and interests.
Does the government should be liable for the programming basis?
Defenders of the centrally planned curriculum frequently presume that it creates national cohesion. Is that truly so? This argument fundamentally only applies to any of the school subjects – no 1 will tell me that common cognition of biology or mathematics magically creates a nation. In fact, this view concerns only history, Polish language and civic education. But in these areas, does the school truly build cohesion among children and young people? I dare uncertainty it – possibly students will read the same readings (although they are frequently alternatively summaries), but they like to read completely different publications. The canon of youth culture differs from the canon of school books – there are no popular rappers or fantasy authors. 1 can even hazard saying that the school reading set is far from real experiences of Poles, it does not affect their contemporary problems.
Instead, we are dealing with a collection of texts aimed at cultivating a citizen surviving in martyrdom and suffering of the nation. Similarly, with the ineffectiveness of imposing narratives through lessons of past or civic cognition – actions specified as "Young people vote" indicate that students are very diverse in view. To specified an degree that they can confess completely different truths and lies about the imagination of the world.
Despite this ineffectiveness, the programming basis exists and its opponents are considered radicals. Governments have the perfect toy to show they're doing something. However, the serious problem is that politicians are frequently separated from the needs of average people – then the programming basis becomes a tool for ideological friction between parties. Usually, this conflict only concerns the list of readings or changes in past teaching. It was rather easy to announcement this phenomenon in the case of a proposal to deplete the programme base in 2024.
The full discussion was based on arguments about removing part of reading or changing in teaching history. specified world-view conflicts obscure more serious problems – the program's basis was besides depleted for speech therapy exercises and statistics. fewer people were curious in the fact that students would talk little and interpret data less. The most crucial is the number of texts of the top Polish writer: John Paul II. Unfortunately, that is what the debate about the programme basis is all about – real skills do not matter.
What alternatively of basics?
At this point it is worth considering how you can get out of status quo. The problem is that we do not know what educational model would be the most effective. Of course, we have many inspiring examples of alternate approaches to education, but it is hard to choose 1 good for everyone. For this reason, decentralisation of education and autonomy can be a reasonable solution.
In fresh years, this view has spread – let us make a list of the most basic cognition and skills that students must acquire, and let regional governments be liable for the rest. What is more, possibly schools should have more autonomy in selecting content and forms of teaching? Further in Polish education there are real teachers from vocation and passion, who could frequently bring much to teaching. Unfortunately, they are now limited by a rigid framework of the programme base. expanding autonomy can besides be an perfect chance to empower students – their participation in reading could make teaching more interesting and closer to young people. In addition, it would be a learning of engagement, which in the future will besides translate into participation in politics and education into freedom.
It's not a extremist idea. On the contrary, unlike central planning, it is based on the realistic presumption that politicians do not have the competence to plan education in detail. Politicians simply do not know their teaching issues and are far from the problems of the disciples. Ultimately, this situation leads to unnecessary conflicts of view. Decentralisation offers a chance for real improvement – a student-friendly school, a fun and learning school and an innovation school.
