her son’s former teacher claims to have never been absent, the minister maintains her version

According to the teacher, Amélie Oudéa-Castéra and Frédéric Oudéa changed their child’s school because they did not agree with his decision to keep him in a small section because of his age.

Published


Reading time: 1 min

The new Minister of Education, Amélie Oudéa-Castera, January 13, 2024. (LUC NOBOUT / MAXPPP)

To justify the private schooling of her three children, on Friday, Amélie Oudéa-Castéra, Minister of National Education, Youth, Sports and the Olympic and Paralympic Games, indicated that she had enrolled them at Stanislas, a prestigious Parisian establishment, due to the too many unreplaced hours suffered by his eldest son in the public. It was in 2009. However, her son’s former teacher told the daily Libération [article payant] have never been absent during the six months that this child was educated in public school.

Monday January 15, the minister’s entourage confirmed to franceinfo that her son was educated for six months at the Littré school, before transferring him to the private sector. Despite the teacher’s declarations, the minister maintains her version, too many absences of teachers not replaced, to justify the change of school.

A dispute over moving to the next class, according to the teacher

The teacher also explains that she was opposed to the little boy, as his parents wanted, she says, moving on to the middle section, since he was not yet 4 years old and that is for this reason. , according to her, that his parents decided to enroll him in the private sector, at Stanislas, where he was accepted into the upper class.

According to Amélie Oudéa-Castéra’s entourage, contacted by franceinfo “the minister categorically denies the comments reported by ‘Libération'” And “we can wonder about the intention linked to these inaccurate, inappropriate and hurtful comments for parents about their child almost 15 years later”. “Like all parents, Amélie Oudéa-Castéra and Frédéric Oudéa have always had the well-being of their child as a priority and implied that they would have made a choice that would go against their values ​​and development. of their little boy hurts them deeply”always according to those around him.


source site-32