[ad_1]
In the middle of the month, at the end of his presentation in front of the Education Commission of the Chamber of Deputies, the Minister of Education, Raúl Figueroa, made a request to the parliamentarians. He asked for their collaboration so as not to install the idea that the government is seeking to return to classes “at any time and at any time.”
Two weeks later, he regrets that, in his opinion, the debate on the conditions to resume face-to-face classes – “where and when possible from a health point of view”, as he repeats several times in this conversation – has become politicized. The minister goes further and accuses the College of Teachers of promoting a campaign of terror, and says that dialogue on the subject is becoming increasingly difficult. And the cost, he warns, is being paid by the students.
“Faced with a reality that is increasingly evident, that the suspension of face-to-face classes generates negative effects on students, a kind of censorship has been generated against even the possibility of talking about an eventual opening of the establishments”, says the Minister. “It is difficult to understand this censorship, because education being so important and having a consensus of so many years about its relevance, today it seems that for one sector education is no longer a priority. Unfortunately, the opposition has had a role in this that is inconsistent with the priority that education has had in the national debate in the last 10 years. From the point of view of the ministry, what we see is that this stubbornness to close the debate around an eventual return to classes where and when possible from the health point of view, is obviously a political action that unfortunately will have costs hard. What one sees today is that the evident costs of the pandemic in the education system require concrete action to be mitigated. And you see that sectors of the opposition that are aware of these costs give the impression that they would be willing to let the students ultimately pay them, ”says Figueroa.
When you ask opposition leaders, what is the response?
What I see is a certain inability to assume the leadership that today various sectors have to assume. That leadership has to be manifested in making decisions and promoting actions that are obviously difficult in this context, but that many are not in a position to tackle. And therefore, beyond the small debate, the politicization of this, I believe that there is a much deeper issue, which has to do with the need that we have today for different intermediate groups to assume their responsibility, that the political sectors assume their responsibility to guide the country in a difficult context.
Wouldn’t it be pertinent for the ministry to create a work table specifically for the return to classes?
We have done an immense job of listening, at the national level and also at the local level, to the teachers, the parents, the supporters, to all those who have something to say in this matter. And what we have designed and what we have worked on has been done on the basis of this permanent listening process. The door has never been closed to anyone who wants to give an idea, an opinion, a position regarding what the country has to face.
But formalizing those conversations, wouldn’t people in turn commit to seeking consensual solutions, to generating that dialogue that is missing?
First, there is a table that is operating, which is the Covid social table, and that debate is generated at that table. I have participated several times and various actors in the system have also participated. Therefore, it is properly channeled, in my opinion. Now, it is also important that when one seeks to work on these matters from a broad perspective, there is a certain community of objectives. And in that sense, what one sees, for example, is that sometimes those who would like a work table of these characteristics do not share the objective for which that table should be constituted. A spirit of working on solutions is required. What one sees in some sectors of the opposition are statements such as “Minister, understand, this year we will not return to classes.” If that’s the way to start the conversation, obviously it’s hard for it to be fruitful.
Do they tell you from the College of Teachers?
They say it, for example, parliamentarians. Just look at the sessions in Congress. It is also pointed out by the College of Teachers, which has placed great emphasis on all the reasons why it would be impossible to open a school and not on those aspects that allow, where and when it can, generate these reopens. There is an issue that is very important: just as it is a mistake to insist on opening schools where it is not possible from the health point of view, it is also a mistake to promote terror campaigns that suggest that where it is possible to open schools, that does not occur .
Do you think that the College of Teachers has promoted a campaign of terror?
If one looks at the statements, their behavior through social networks, everything points to make it clear that as long as there is no absolute control of the pandemic, through for example a vaccine, a reopening of schools is not a real possibility . When we see that, in fact, we already have schools running.
By the way, there are schools in La Araucanía, Los Ríos and Aysén that could be beginning their return to classes and, nevertheless, very few have done so due to opposition from the teachers and also from the parents. Do you see there a citizen concern or the result of a campaign of terror?
Let’s see, there is a justified fear of the public in the face of the possibilities of contagion. Of course we understand that fear and respect it deeply. But we also see how different communities, under the wing of a plan that has safety, health, and voluntariness as its main axes, have also been motivated to recover that school experience. Unfortunately, we have also witnessed how every time a community organizes itself to gradually reopen a school, the next day they are faced with fierce opposition from organized movements through cacerolazos, funas or other ways.
What is the Mineduc plan in case it is impossible to resume face-to-face classes this year?
We have a mitigation plan, which is the one being implemented now, and an absolutely necessary recovery plan for learning. And that happens through curricular aspects that are already underway. We have already made a curricular prioritization thought for this year and the next, with the urgency of having a diagnosis and with a very precise focus on the reinforcement and leveling of the students, segmented by the different needs.
Part of the lessons that many highlight in this pandemic is the need for a stronger state and a more efficient social protection system. What things in the system do you think should be prioritized in terms of the work of the State, judging from what has been seen in this emergency, in a possible constitutional debate?
I think that today more than ever several interesting aspects are in evidence. First: the fundamental role that parents have in the education of their children. I think that should be enhanced. A second element that I believe is fundamental is the value of the local, and the recognition of the diversity of educational projects. Chile has 11,500 educational establishments, all very different from others, with different characteristics, with different projects, with different labels. And that diversity is a value with which we have to know how to work, promote, and that also in my opinion should be recognized. And finally, within the framework of this diversity, what is relevant is that each project can independently count on all the support to be able to move forward in the face of any situation that arises, the logic of greater autonomy, of great flexibility. I believe that these elements have to be strengthened very strongly in an eventual constitutional debate.
You are for the Rejection …
The Constitution that we have today has, in my opinion, a relevant value in terms of precisely recognizing the importance of individual freedom and how through that freedom projects that are tremendously useful for society can be developed.
I mean, reject …
(Nods) I think that upholding those principles is important for the country.
And from what you have seen in the debate in recent years, what worries you about an eventual new Constitution on education?
I think it is essential that Chileans be able to participate in the educational system, and it is always clear that the public is not reserved only for the intervention of the state apparatus. In this sense, I believe that there is an essential value that has allowed the development of an educational system, which is freedom of education. And this is very important: it is not an innovation of the 1980 Constitution, but it comes from much earlier. We are celebrating 100 years of the compulsory primary education law, which is where, among other things, it is enshrined how important it is for everyone to be able to participate in the generation of educational projects. And although, obviously, that may be in the constitutional debate, I think it is important that what has allowed the educational system to develop in Chile for much more than 40 years is also maintained in a constitutional body.
[ad_2]
