Investing in learning
Whenever the words “reform” or “innovation” appear before the words “educational process,” they set alarm bells ringing. First of all, they set off dramatic reactions from a part of the educational community that is allergic to changes and reform. This is followed by the longstanding complaint over insufficient infrastructure, problematic school buildings, staff that never meets existing needs, and much more.
In general, we would say that it is difficult for something new to be happily accepted since something else precedes it that must be changed – in terms of a practical reality of way of thinking. It is not just the inconvenience of switching to a more or less demanding daily routine. It is also that, for any reform to take root, it requires the necessary preconditions.
But there is also another element. Recently, the Ministry of Education, through the Institute for Educational Policy, announced new curricula for all levels of education, to strengthen schools, “to provide stimuli, directions and principles, incentives and methodological tools for achieving effective teaching.”
By revising the curricula, the institute seeks “the reorientation of school education on the basis of new social conditions and scientific developments,” looking to a society of the future. New programs, new books, with the intention of “shifting from the discipline itself, the teachers and the teaching process, to the students and the desired/expected learning outcomes.”
This will be preceded by the training of teaching staff, while the implementation of the revised methods will begin gradually in the 2023-24 school year.
If one reads all that was written, one is encouraged by the breath of renewal, the understanding of the current social condition that is directly connected with students’ psychomotor learning. Some seem vague and some difficult to understand. It’s to be expected.
But a failure to allow this reform to take place will have a deep impact. Its inception is complex and its influence will be long-term. It is not aimed at immediate political gains. It fights stagnation, indecisiveness, the refusal to participate and, most importantly, fatigue. This soul-destroying shuffling through a political landscape where changes are announced for appearances and not for learning.
