Le parole sono cavalli. Si cavalcano. Prendiamo la parola me-ri-to-cra-zia. A destra e a sinistra, quando si parla di pubblico impiego, oggi, in Italia, non c'è parola più alla moda. Ogni politico italiano se ne riempie la bocca. Pietà, non ne possiamo più.
Anche quando si parla di scuola. Per me è un evidente riflesso condizionato di un'impostazione di società e di scuola tipicamente economicista: lo Stato- Azienda, la Scuola-Azienda. In questo Berlusconi ha fatto scuola. La formulazione è lapalissiana: dare più soldi e prestigio a chi lavora meglio, darne meno a chi lavora peggio. Crea consenso. Perché non c'è persona che io conosca che pensi di essere tra quelli che lavorano meno o peggio. Quando poi si inizia a indagare su cosa sia il meglio o il peggio, soprattutto nella scuola, le cose si complicano.
Prendiamo i docenti. Don Milani, Loris Malaguzzi o Gianni Rodari, oggi, sarebbero considerati meritevoli? O, piuttosto, facinorosi? Il dibattito è aperto. Simile discorso vale tra gli studenti. Per dare merito ai meritevoli, occorre avere idee chiare sul merito. Nella nostra scuola obbligatoria le idee non sono certo clear, if the politicians in 20 years have forced a dozen times to change the way teachers assessing their students. Therefore, it is worth the pupil more obedient or as ordered? The more specific? The most creative? What I studied more? Or the one that gets easier with the results? Or the more disciplined?
I say mine: the assessment is so delicate and complex issue, particularly among children and in the process of learning, apply the dark of the meritocracy on the head of a child may often make a preliminary assessment of the pupil and his family even before it gets in full swing at school. I'm not saying that the assessment should not be done, but it's something that is in progress. And you put all the emphasis on his supposed objectivity pigeonholed, at six or seven years, in the cage and in the silence of a numerical rating and not a trial and open discourse, it seems to me not only exaggerated but wrong.
Why do not develop self-assessment process? Impossible. At least judging from the test driving Invalsi, the National Institute of Assessment, that teachers are forced to 'give' to their students annually. More or less in the dark by their parents. More functional tests to pollsters and children. It is no coincidence that the same does not take into account Invalsi test results of children with disabilities not to damage the media. For example, my current fifth grade are organized by groups of schoolchildren in five years and proceed in education through the collaborative method. In addition to achieving results, it estimates how much and how children can work well together. As they speak in turn, listening. How much and how you compare and share their own choices.
For example, if a team finishes first job, but within that group there are disputes, we do not work together, maybe someone crying, someone else wants to leave the group does not give the word to everyone, there is always someone who always wants control, etc., the evaluation certainly can not be good. This way of assessing the ministerial pollsters, politicians, ministers, managers Invalsi, something interesting? And the actual quality of the school? Who can understand that our children and our children are not just numbers, costs and problems today is that so hard? Possible that the right to study and removal of barriers that restrict equal opportunities are now considered an almost unbearable burden rather than an asset and an investment in their future and the future of the country we live in?
0 comments:
Post a Comment