We are still sinking into a troubled period in education in Quebec. Those who experience school on a daily basis would however need a stable horizon. But the minister is preparing to resist what he calls resistance to change. How do you explain to him that what he considers to be resistance to change is rather the fact of assuming the responsibility to act to ensure the protection of the living and learning conditions of the students?
The new Bill 23 shakes up out of hand those who have forged links with the community over the years (Higher Council of Education, among others) in favor of a new body that wants to lead the way, while immediately (National Institute of Excellence in Education). All this with increased superpowers for the minister and an intense thirst for statistics supposed to guarantee educational success.
Once again, children, young people and school staff would be at the service of all those who are in principle in position to support them.
Once again, they would be used to validate pedagogical choices, marked out by administrative exercises, most often far from knowledge of the real needs of the environment and which would harm their careers, their commitment as well as the development of their skills.
The question that emerges: how to protect students and school staff from this persistent ignorance that leads to abuses that are erected into a system?
First: a clarification is necessary considering all that the pupils hear and feel
Dear students, wherever you are in your school career, someone must tell you that you are not responsible for all the problems you hear about. This is true no matter who you are or what environment you are in. We are experiencing a system problem and it is the adults who have the responsibility to ensure that this system gives you the best possible conditions. It remains a privilege to be with you on a daily basis, don’t forget that. That said, that in no way excludes your responsibility, which is to do your best for you, with the necessary efforts and with those who accompany you.
Second: the creation of a distinct voice is necessary to take into account the expertise of actors in the field
For too long, this voice has not existed for school staff. Basically, our system is therefore not inclusive. For example, in a parliamentary committee, the 1er, June 2, 6 and 7, even if the teachers are represented by their unions, it would have been necessary to hear them directly. They have the field experience to testify to the precise perception of the pitfalls that arise and to bring relevant proposals to remedy the situations that arise on a daily basis. Unfortunately, we have got into the habit of speaking for them, too often choosing what to say for them. Is it any wonder that many feel they are seen as performers? Should we be surprised that some leave the profession or think about leaving it, also aware of the damage that is being done and in which they participate despite their deep convictions and their commitment to students? This may be their way of resisting the changes needed to improve conditions for exercise.
Thirdly: it is also necessary to recognize initiatives and successes in the field, to make them known and to draw inspiration from them.
It would be wise to also take an interest in what is going well in the schools. All that we do not know for lack of voice is what makes an environment vibrate in unison around the students and a common project, which leads to an overtaking, a consented effort of those who participate, which which creates belonging, which instructs and educates at the same time. If we released this voice, we would see that the examples are multiple and inspiring. If we dwelled on it, we would understand that we must recognize and protect this commitment. If we were inspired by it, we would help the environment to breathe better. If we took the time, we would collaborate rather than control.
Among those called to the parliamentary committee, some are already taking the time to understand the issues in the communities by establishing respectful and informed collaborations. It is therefore possible, dynamic and greatly appreciated.
The authoritarian way of imposing Bill 23, without consulting the communities, shows us the inescapable urgency of reframing the mode of management and the very vision of education in Quebec. He confirms to us that this cannot be done in a vacuum and that it is imperative to bring together all the expertise to focus on the students. Failure to do so would drive the system into ever more desolate degradation with unenviable long-term consequences for all of our future.