#3 YOUNG PEOPLE AND SCHOOL REFORM

Hi reader,

today I want to talk about some ideas that my staff and I discussed about possible reforms to improve the Italian education system. We hope that this will become the first of a series of articles and discussions about education and policies for the young and that you will help us by giving us your opinion about the proposal I’m going to present and about other ideas that you would like to see discussed here (or implemented out there!).

First of all, we must say that, even though for us young school is the centre of our lives and our thoughts, and also of our reflections on what is wrong and how it could be changed, the school has actually been at the margins of public discourse for quite some time. The substantial lack of interest on the part of the general public about the structure of school makes sure that nothing of real importance has been done to modify the Italian education system, which has remained unchanged in its fundamental components since the Gentile reform during the Fascist period. The only issues which inflame the general public on the topic of school are the superficial and fundamentally sterile ones (think about the recent discussion/mockery of the decision by the Italian Education Minister to equip the new single desks, which must be adopted because of the pandemic, with wheels), which too are quickly put on the back burner when more urgent matters come to mind. This, in turn, arouses in the bulk of people, also students, a sense of immutability of the current structure of the school system. Any serious reflection about a possible change is discouraged, as even the most hated things of our school years seem components of a system that is and will always remain the same, something that cannot be changed but has to be accepted as it is.

Unfortunately, the declining age profile of the Italian population makes sure that politics tends to seek the approval of an ever-older electorate, while young people, who are gradually becoming a minority, as all minorities tend to be ignored. Their needs are put aside to promote proposals for an ever-older majority, even when those proposals reveal themselves as fundamentally unproductive, if not harmful, in the long run. The poor foresight which culturally distinguishes Italy, in the thoughts of the average Italian as well as in political projects, creates a system that tends to reward parties and politicians that offer short-term gratifications to satisfy the older generations.

In the meantime, nobody worries about the ever-larger education cuts or about the fact that there are no policies to revive Italy also, above all, through the young. There are no policies to encourage young people to study and become leaders of the active population, and no proposals for reforming an education system full of flaws and that still leaves too many students behind.

That’s why we think it is important to start a serious discussion about this topic, a discussion which creates a more widespread interest, and which will hopefully bring you and others to actively work to promote a change. We want to start by talking about some of our proposals, hoping to create interest around them and arouse reflections in you, and we look forward to reading your proposals and comments, which surely will enrich the debate and will also give us new food for thoughts.

One of the problems that have drawn our attention the most has been the problem of being forced to choose one’s high school at the too young an age of 13 years, as it is an important step in a child’s life because it will not only mark the subjects in which he/she will specialize, but also the environment and the people he/she will be around for the next five years. Furthermore, these five years are a fundamental period of the child’s education and growth, for he/she goes through many changes becoming the adult who will be part of the active population. For this reason, we think that having to make such a decision so soon and without an effective guidance program is one of the things that can be most harmful to someone's educational path. Those who were certain of their path, or those who were lucky enough to choose the right one, may not see this issue as really important. However, it is a very common problem to have to change school and lose years, because of the unsuited subjects of a hostile environment, or to become aware of the error too late and to be forced to make do with an educational path that, at that point, becomes sterile, if not harmful, for the child’s will to learn and discover new things.

The problem is not simply the too-young age at which the decision is made (even though we are talking about a period in which even one or two years can radically change how a young person perceive the world and him/herself), but mostly the fact that students do not really know what they are up to choose. The possibility of getting a hands-on experience of the distinctive subjects that make up the diverse high schools’ curricula is not actually given, thus children choose a very important educational path on the basis of impressions and vague stereotyped information, if not of parents’ preferences.

Thus, an important reform for the school system could be made here, changing the division of the school years to give more information to students before they make their choice.

Following partially the school model of other countries, our idea is based on taking the first two years of high school and turning them into two “training” years. Instead of choosing at the end of the three years of middle school, students would enter these two “transitional” years in which subjects would be divided into two categories:

• “compulsory” subjects, that is the subjects common to the various current curricula coupled with some subjects that we believe to be fundamental for somebody’s growth and that should thus be incorporated as compulsory subjects since elementary school (for a total of 8 compulsory disciplines: Mathematics, Italian, English, History/Geography, Sciences, Civic Education/Law, Informatics, Physical Education). These would be taught as if they were the first two years of the current five-year curricula.

• subjects “of the student’s choice”, 5-6 subject among the “specialized” ones (Greek, Latin, various foreign languages, Philosophy, Physics, Economy, History of Art, Arts, Technical Drawing, Music, etc.) which students could choose, with the possibility of changing their decision each trimester. These would be taught as to give knowledge similar to the first two years of current high schools, but also as to be able to try what it really means to study those disciplines which will form their following studies.

This would enable them to have a practical experience of the subject they have never studied, finding out if they are really interested in the topics and if they can follow them efficiently.

Hence, in a try-and-fail process, the students who already have an idea of what curricula they would like to choose could try the subjects of the school they want to attend, while the insecure ones could try lots of courses and try to find their path without the fear of going wrong. In the event that they choose the right path straight away, they could attend them to complete the first two years exactly as they would have done with the old system, otherwise they would have the possibility to try other courses without losing time.

At the end of this period, the “real” high school would begin, and those last three years would be turned into “specialization” years in which the students would then start the three years of high school as they are in the current system, with again all compulsory courses.

We understand that this would mean reforming the divisions and cycles of the school system, and another problem at this point could be the teacher figure: usually, it is really the teacher's ability to get students excited about the subject that determines their interest in it even in the future.

This phenomenon would become very delicate if courses became optional, as an inadequate teacher could seriously jeopardize the student’s choice. That’s why another fundamental step for us is a reform of the teacher selection system, as they should be evaluated not only through an exam of their specific expertise, but also with an aptitude test to understand their teaching abilities. Furthermore, with a larger salary or benefits and career opportunities for the biennium teachers, we could guarantee a high average quality of teaching also for the subjects of student’s choice, creating the conditions for a really conscious choice of the students.

These are some of our ideas, which can surely be thought of more deeply and organized more thoroughly, and we hope that they will be improved also thanks to your proposal and critiques. We know that this is a drop in the stormy ocean which is the topic of young people, education, and the poor attention directed to them, but we hope that this will be the first step to build a debate on the topic which transcends even our ideas and which surprises us with new and innovative proposals, from you and other readers.

Thank you for your attention,

Davide Bertot

Mail: ctzn.eu@gmail.com

Facebook: @ctzn.eu

Instagram: @_ctzn.eu_

Twitter: @ctzn_eu