[ad_1]
How was the discussion in the federal government about the closure of the school? Was there a violent argument?
Of course, it was a compromise between the right to education and the protection of health. We always have several balls in the air and we have to make sure they are all caught again. But there was an argument, not a dispute.
But were there frictions between you and the Federal Chancellor?
No. We both have a respectful and appreciative relationship. Everyone knows what kind of talents they have in others. It’s okay.
One big problem was whether the students finally have the necessary hardware at home.
I notice an interesting contrast between what they hear and what we discover in empirical surveys. There are one, two, three percent of students who are not adequately equipped and for whom we help with the loan of equipment.
It has purchased around 12,000 devices for federal school students. The Länder are responsible for all other schools and, in fact, it is criticized that it did not always perform well. Wouldn’t it have been better to do everything centrally?
It could be that some countries weren’t incredibly active. But when we deliver the fifth and sixth grade laptops for the first time next year, state schools will be included.
So do you also see problems with federalism in the education sector?
Each crisis is like a magnifying glass on specific problems. Federalism is never frictionless. On the other hand, federalism has helped us cope well with local and regional pandemic situations. I’m not one of those who say that everything has to be controlled from Vienna.
Before the second lockdown, even economic researchers warned of the negative effects that the loss of education would affect decades.
But they are already talking about a loss of education for a longer period of time.
