Critical statements voiced before the blindsiding procedure in the Stuttgart “Landtag” (state parliament) on 18 April 2012
by Karl Müller
Prior to the legislative amendment of the Education Act of Baden-Wuerttemberg on 18 April 2012 and the introduction of the so-called “Gemeinschaftsschule”, many critical voices could be heard. Gerhard Brand, president of the German Association for Education and Training (VBE) in Baden-Wuerttemberg, considered “all other types of school being disadvantaged” and “the work of all other schools devalued”. The introduction of the ‘Gemeinschaftsschule’ would trigger “a severe loss of professionalism accompanied by a decrease in the overall performance levels”. The new school was threatening to introduce a type of lesson, “which exclusively sets on self-oriented learning, or uniquely on teamwork at the group table, where all students are indeed always ‘occupied’; however at the end of the lesson they do not remember exactly why they have actually done what they did. This is especially true for those who usually require special support.”
“The Basic Law’s concept of man is not that of an isolated, sovereign individual; the Basic Law has actually solved the conflict between the individual and the community in the sense of an orientation and bondage of the person towards the community without touching his or her value.”
The Association of Philologists in the country was no less critical: “All domestic student assessment studies confirm, that the more differentiated a school system is, the less comprehensive schools are there in a state, the better is the state’s ranking. A divided school structure benefits all students, especially children from socially weaker classes, or with an immigrant background. The intended one-sided promotion of “Gemeinschaftsschulen” at the expense of all other types of schools is inacceptable.”
The Association of Cities of the Federal State complained that “at the moment the compass in the state’s educational policy” was missing. And the Association of Municipalities reiterated: “Ironically, with a blink of the eye the green-red government wiped away all rational arguments concerning education.”
Nothing restrained Winfried Kretschmann’s green-red administration from enforcing their most important political project for this term, the introduction of the so-called “Gemeinschaftsschule”, uniquely with the power of their majority of seats in the Baden-Wuerttemberg State Parliament. After all, unlike the reconstruction of the railway station in Stuttgart, the citizens of the country should not be allowed to vote in a referendum on this central political project. So from 18 April onwards the rule is that with the beginning of the school year 2012/2013, 40 schools in Baden-Wuerttemberg are to be run as so-called “Gemeinschaftsschulen”.
“Gemeinschaftsschulen” are schools that merge the secondary modern and the junior high school courses in one single type of school, including special needs students and including a high school course leading to A-levels. But even more important than merging the types of schools is that the Gemeinschaftsschule with its “pedagogical approach” differs radically from previous ways of teaching.
The “Gemeinschaftsschule” which has now been established by law as a regular school was the core of the Greens’ educational election manifesto in the parliamentary elections of March 2011. The “Gemeinschaftsschule” is a descendant of the anti-authoritarian and anti-education pedagogy of the 68ers and matches the previous “Pedagogy of the Greens”. It was however, “enriched” by questionable elements of genetics, which smell of NSDAP. “Individualization” now means for the Greens: the students are equipped – genetically determined (!) – with varying talents and therefore cannot learn the same things.
“Gemeinschaftsschulen” are however also a huge business for companies such as Bertelsmann, which – having the best contacts into the world of educational politics – want to offer and sell expensive learning materials for the “individualized”, “self-directed” learning. For many years, Bertelsmann has been promoting “new” schools that resolve the existing structures and promise a good profit for the company at the same time.
The green-red government wants to revolutionize the well-proved three-tiered school system in Baden-Wuerttemberg and introduce the ‘Gemeinschaftsschule’ throughout the country. This becomes clear when reading the objectives of the amendment. It states that “The separate classes for students in the structured school system must be overcome.” However, the green-red administration in Baden-Wuerttemberg does not want to repeat the problematic situation of the black-green administration in Hamburg and openly top-down-enact the new type of school. Local education authorities must first make the request the new school. The “Gemeinschaftsschule” is praised as a “grassroots school”. But the fact is: The new school is massively privileged by the state government. The state’s teacher training is to be adjusted to the new school in the coming years. Locally, the green-red supporters are mobilized. Small communities, whose schools are threatened to be closed down, are lured into believing their school site could be saved if they establish a “Gemeinschaftsschule” – even though the protagonists of the “Gemeinschaftsschule” are not explicitly concerned about saving schools close to students’ homes. Most of the media in the country have taken the side of government – against the people of Baden-Wuerttemberg who still demonstrate massive rejection of the new type of school, as have shown the polls from mid May 2012 showed.
Principals who had expressed critical concern about the green-red plans – e.g. 60 Baden-Wuerttemberg school principals who did so publicly shortly before the parliamentary elections in 2011 – were reprimanded after the state elections by the new Secretary of Education. The green-red government, which prides itself as grassroots-oriented and willing to talk to the people, does not want to get involved in a genuine discussion on education policy, and definitely not with experts. The responsible administration, from which there came many critical voices, was flatly bypassed by the establishment of an executive department whose leadership is in the hands of a party functionary. And the technique of reprimanding the project’s critics who are school principals still continues.
The “Gemeinschaftsschule” is a sham. It is extolled as “powerful”, “socially just” and “particularly bound to democratic values”. The papers of the Ministry of Education distributed for those who want to introduce a “Gemeinschaftsschule” contain guiding principles like “solidarity”, “responsibility” and many more beautiful phrases.
And what will reality be like ?
Take, for example, the concept of self-directed learning. Students in the “Gemeinschaftsschule” should – due to their individuality – be able to learn autonomously.
The concept has long been a subject of research. In a meta-meta-analysis (“What works”, 2009), John Hattie, Professor of Education at the University of Auckland, New Zealand, and currently in Melbourne, Australia, collected empirical findings on the factors that influence learning and achievement at school. Among the factors students, parents, social background, school as an organization, curricula, teaching and teachers, the influence of teachers was by far the most influential factor. Teachers need to be directive, influential and caring and be actively engaged in teaching and learning.
The quality of the teacher-student relationship, the quality of instruction as well as correcting and giving feedback are among the most influential factors.
– Teachers need to know what they are aiming at with their lesson;
– they must know how to assess the success of their teaching, i.e. know their success criteria ;
– they need to know how well they achieve them.
– The subject matter must be based on prior knowledge and requires targeted instruction.
– Teachers need to know their students’ levels and knowledge in order to give adequate feedback and assess progress accordingly.
The crucial factor, which is irreplaceable, is the dedicated teacher,
– who knows his subject and resonates the enthusiasm for the subject and the teaching of a class
– who provides well-structured lessons and knows his children or adolescents,
– who gives clear directions (and contains classroom disturbances)
– while at the same time showing a professional ethic of caring,
– who does not withdraw, but actively and in a committed manner designs the classroom activities
– and who is in close relation with his students.
In the “Gemeinschaftsschule”, however, class community is no longer necessary, no more lessons guided by teachers and the teachers are to withdraw largely while the students remain left to themselves and their expensive learning materials: democratic values will thus fall by the wayside.
The second example is the alleged commitment to democratic values.
After the Second World War it was known that democracy requires democrats and that the citizens need to be citizens.
Therefore the education for democracy was included in the states’ constitutions. Schools were assigned an outstanding role in this educational task.
The core of democratic education is to develop a social sense and to practice pro-social behavior. This corresponds with the view of man in the German “Grundgesetz”, which was formulated by the Federal Constitutional Court as follows: “The Basic Law’s concept of man is not that of an isolated, sovereign individual; the Basic Law has actually solved the conflict between the individual and the community in the sense of an orientation and bondage of the person towards the community without touching his or her value.”
The actual contribution of the school to the training and promotion of community orientation and pro-social behavior depends on various factors. The teachers’ personality, the quality of teacher-student relationship and the opportunities for students to learn and practice pro-social behavior are of great significance. Therefore teacher-guided lessons in the classroom provide the best conditions. Classroom instruction offers the trained teacher the opportunity to develop positive interpersonal attitudes in the child and to guide and promote his social behavior. Learning together with peers offers the greatest possible opportunities to jointly cope with tasks, to learn from each other, to mutually assist each other as a good team and strengthen each other to practice a sustainable social intercourse – which are all qualities that are of priceless value for the entire life. The teacher’s task is to seize and promote positive approaches, to help the children overcome their deficits and shortcomings, and to counter any tendencies of anti-social behavior.
The Swiss private school entrepreneur Peter Fratton – nota bene not a trained teacher or even educational researcher – who acts as promoter of the Baden-Wuerttemberg “Gemeinschaftsschule” movement and who is going to train 56 so-called ‘facilitators’ (learning companions) for these schools in the coming school year, disapproves of all the mentioned factors of good schooling. His wife is said to run an interior design firm that has already pinched exorbitant sums from entire school communities for interior renovation of all classrooms: Tax revenues that are missing elsewhere. In 2008, at the occasion of a hearing of the Greens’ parliamentary faction on the subject “The School of the Future. How does individual promotion work?”, Fratton said that he would oblige the ‘facilitators’ of his schools on the alleged “primal pleas” of students: “Do not teach me anything. Do not explain anything to me. Do not educate me. Do not motivate me.”
It is to be feared that the so-called “Gemeinschaftsschule” will dramatically worsen the problems associated with insufficiant education of children and young people. Most likely more such “communities” will emerge, which can only be described as hierarchically organized gangs. Directed against democracy, a young generation will grow up who is not capable of democratic behavior, because the essential prerequisites are missing. The “bosses” of such “gangs” may go in for quite a career later on ...
For years, we have been witnessing an illegitimate School and University International at work, with PISA and Bologna, with the OECD and the EU. Their goal: “flexible people” with a patchwork knowledge and without regard to national educational traditions. In other words, we are threatened by an advancing wave of conformity and globalization with more than questionable niveau. •
1 A type of school where ability-mixed and age-mixed groups of pupils learn together, however in an individualized manner, i.e. every one with his own special teaching aids.
|
The international journal for independent thought, ethical standards, moral responsibility,