On January 18, the Riigikogu held a debate on the topic “Strong rural schools and a strong school network” in the context of a very important national issue, where the chairman of the culture commission, Heljo Pikhof, gave the opening speech.
Let’s talk again about teachers, that is, about the sustainability of good and up-to-date education. That’s right, because what could be more important for a small country than an educated nation!
If only there wasn’t a strike in this forest! To tell the truth, this strike is useful for something. It’s not just about the missing 10 million euros or this year’s teacher pay rise; we are not even talking about a long-term agreement with education workers and giving them a sense of security.
The position of school teacher must regain its dignity, dignity in the broadest sense.
As long as the teacher is pushed and shoved by every self-conscious and slandered parent on social media, as long as his or her child fights for better grades – with his or her own wisdom or with the help of a lawyer – then why an intelligent, kind-hearted person do you want to work in a school?
Not only those who solve educational problems every day and whose decisions depend on the reform of the school operating model, but public opinion as a whole will begin to understand it better. If we want to survive as a country and nation, our goal is not to educate young people with shiny certificates who have not learned to think for themselves or work.
Compared to other European countries, our contribution to the education system is very significant: so far we have talked about 6% of GDP. However, this does nothing to improve the lives of teachers or to ensure that every child and young person receives the best possible education. Money disappears like a grain of sand. Why? Our school network is unbalanced. The differences between rural and urban schools, between small town schools and big city schools are too great. A simple but telling example: around 25% of Estonian students attend rural schools, while rural schools make up half of all schools. This leads to the fact that teachers in the countryside are often underemployed, that there are more unqualified teachers in the countryside than in the cities and their share grows even more.
Unfortunately, the educational gap based on income and family values is also widening in Estonia, and rural schools are often in worse conditions than schools in larger cities. We have not been able to keep up with the times, to adapt with sufficient flexibility neither to demographic changes, nor to the acceleration of the era, nor to the development of the digital tiger. Estonia has decided not to invest centrally in technological tools, which is why digital use in school work is now much less than it could be. Modern methodologies are rather school and teacher based. Yes, organizing the school network is inevitable, but this does not have to mean the total closure of small schools. The loss of rural schools would be disastrous not only for Estonia’s regional development, but for the economy as a whole, for defense capacity and for Estonia in general. We need to find a new business model suitable for Estonia.
Reorganizations cannot happen overnight, just for the sake of ticking off a sheet of paper, but must be based on the analysis of data and trends, on comparison and on social and community agreements. Measure nine times, cut once, especially for such an important field on which our future depends. At this point, I would like to recognize the work of our Center for Development Monitoring. The think tank’s research and proposals provide a good basis from which to start.
Maybe it’s time to abandon the idea that a home school equals a school building? After all, maintaining each school box is incredibly expensive.
One of the solutions for scattered areas could be a multifunctional and energy-efficient community building, where a small school is located close to home and where other providers of important services for people can also be accommodated. There may be a library, seminar and culture rooms where school events and village festivals take place, but which can also be rented out so that the community house can earn additional income.
Related to this idea is the question of how practical it is to furnish separate science classrooms, chemistry labs and robotics classes in all small municipal schools – and in some places could there be more than one finger on one hand? Especially since they cannot be provided equally well everywhere. If each community center specialized in a specific topic, cooperation between schools would be achieved. The idea of whether and how two or more municipalities can operate a common school certainly requires discussion. Taking into account the place of residence of the children and the reasonable duration of the journey to school – which, for example, according to the Development Observatory study is 25 minutes by car. It turns out that the most suitable places for schools are often close to the borders of several municipalities.
Currently the municipalities regulate among themselves through the capitation system if a child from another municipality attends the school of a neighboring municipality. Solutions should also be developed so that local governments can build common schools or community buildings at the top of the pile.
We talked a lot about the teacher shortage and the shortage of teachers with appropriate qualifications for school work. But these concerns do not go together at all. There is a shortage of teachers in big cities, especially in Tallinn and also in Tartu, and due to the transition to Estonian language education and inclusive education, this shortage will increase even more. On the other hand, in many rural schools, the teacher does not get the full load and has to limit himself to teaching a small group of students. 2022/2023. during the academic year, in 17 municipalities in Estonia there were 1.4 times or more teachers than the number of posts. In fact, almost all municipalities far from large cities have a rather high number of teachers compared to the actual level. An effective level can be considered 10-15 students per teacher.
This constitutes a waste of teaching staff and goes against the maintenance of qualifications. Nor is it easy to rebalance the regional surplus and deficit of teachers. Closer cooperation between local schools and municipalities could help a little: sharing teachers with each other, as well as implementing online learning, when otherwise the logistics of harmonizing lesson plans and organizing teachers’ movement would become overwhelming. Online learning, in turn, requires the necessary IT solutions and should not be passive, but more inclusive for students.
It is known that the younger population tends to move from the countryside to the city. Forced by the crisis, in some places career changers or local parents who have not studied to become pedagogues or are still studying are recruited as teachers. The problem is that rural areas often lose young teachers to centers with all kinds of opportunities and temptations. After all, studying to become a teacher requires settling in Tallinn or Tartu, where people of age to start a family often stay. If teacher training were available closer to home or through cycling and distance learning, the best-educated young pedagogues would likely remain in their home country.
What worries me most is the growing educational gap, mainly due to the different socioeconomic status of families. Rural schools are mostly at a disadvantage. In Estonia there are schools where the average family income is 4,500 euros per month and also schools where it is less than 1,000 euros per month, and this is where the lion’s share of subsidies comes from. Studies have shown that income has a direct relationship, for example, with final exam results.
Studies conducted in other parts of the world confirm that, at the student level, background accounts for approximately 20% of educational outcomes. In turn, the influence of background can be divided into two: the influence of family attitude towards education, valuing education and material support for studying. The latter means allowing the formation of interests, as well as cultural events and trips, a broad cultural palette and, why not, even private teachers.
Most developed countries have adopted different methods to alleviate the weakness of origin, because the educational choices and the general life path of a young person depend on it. So how can we help students from poorer families? We don’t need to reinvent the wheel. In Europe, the approach of funding and sharing school places is largely combined. We have a good opportunity to learn from their experiences to avoid mistakes that can lead to stigmatizing a student from a disadvantaged family.
The compensation model for regional and special educational needs has its roots in the financing of Estonian education. Even weakness arising from the social context can be corrected if additional resources are provided promptly. Whether and how to help the shortage of students due to their background: a very serious debate is needed on this topic. After all, we don’t have a child too much to spank him.
The recent results of the Pisa test have shown that in our schools there are still teachers who educate children with their hearts and minds. After all, we are all very proud of the best achievements in the world. But will we still have good teachers tomorrow? Of the 15-year-olds who took the test, only 2% responded that they would consider teaching in the future. Therefore, the only thing left is to readjust the school system to rapid changes and bring the teaching profession back to glory.
2024-01-21 11:29:42
the-position-of-school-teacher-must-regain-its-dignity-social-democrats