The “good school” is a step forward for the Italian educational issue. It has been placed by the Prime Minister at the center of the country’s development, of the economic and employment growth in Italy. This data has been recorded for the first time in many years. The government has invested several billion euro on this reform, which acts a B stage in the implementation of the law on school autonomy, allowing to practice one’s own autonomy, relying on a balance of responsibilities between the duties of the principal, the Council of the teachers and the one if the school.
As always the autonomy requires the presence of teachers and principals able to manage with the challenge they face, and therefore it is based on the ability to fully implement the work of which the newly adopted law is only the starting point. There is a great investment for the reduction of precariousness with 100,000 assumptions, attention to the relationship between school and work, there is a revival of the evaluation.
But not everything is defined and “closed”, indeed. It is a law that gives many powers to the executive – nine, to be precise – and that will need many legislative decrees and implementing rules. Just because it pushes forward with great incisiveness and speed, it also has elements that will create some problems. I believe that the wisdom of the government should be represented by the ability to incorporate, in their implementation phase, suggestions on any critical point, in order to correct what is wrong. It would be a mistake to entrench one’s self in the exercise of the delegation.
This bill between House and Senate has undergone significant changes. But I think it needs some further adjustments, primarily on the relationship between the permanent staff and those I call the 50 shades of precariousness that exist. There are concerns for those who have been working for years in the world of school and are expecting a definite answer, in terms of peace and security. Regarding temporary workers, respect to the duties of the principal or the assessment.
As for the parliamentary vote, I think that if there is a ministry which has to stand outside political concerns is that of education, because there is no school of right or left; it is the future of Italy and of our children. There may be considerable debate on the merits, but it can never be put at the center of a political battle with the afterthought to make of it a field of acquisition of consent. Respect for colleagues who voted in whatever way, but I think there are a thousand ways to be able to cope without making teaching the soil to plant flags of ideological contrast. I’m saying this to everyone: to the government, to the majority, to the opposition, to the minority within the majority.
I wondered for a long time – having been involved in the formation of this law – whether to vote or not in the end. Then I thought, because of the belief that school is a heritage unavailable, that only with the participation of building a future. I voted because I believe this is the beginning of a process, which can and must still be shared and modified. The school reforms are not made “on” school but “with” school. Now the law has passed, but it should be implemented.
A final consideration. I agree on any hypothesis of fighting racism, discrimination of religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation; but I believe that we must ensure that the fight against discrimination does not become the emanation of a culture of gender. I believe that Parliament before deciding to vote on issues that provoke debate within the same family with different opinions, should allow the holding of a referendum where the Italian people is called to say clearly whether explaining or not to our children in elementary schools that nature makes us men or women, but then the imprinting can make us become something different. This vigilance must be total.
Translation provided by Maria Rosaria Mastropaolo