Sexta-feira, 1 de Novembro, 2013


Beautiful South, Perfect 10

Serviços mínimos para os exames nacionais, FENPROF, FNE e CONFAP respondem.

Directores, associações de pais e sindicatos sobre as propostas para a educação do guião da reforma dos estado.

Professores despedidos por causa do Facebook recebem Indemnização, colégio Casa-mãe, Baltar

“verdade inconveniente” grande reportagem na tvi – dia 4 de Novembro às 20h00

… a avaliação dos seus efeitos a médio prazo.

Swedish free school system ‘needs tweaking’

Twenty years after Sweden’s school system opened the door for independent profit-making schools and expanded parents’ choice, sliding results have the left-leaning opposition saying the system is a textbook example of privatization gone wrong.

Os links nesta notícia são muito interessantes, nomeadamente este:

Bankruptcy hits major Swedish free school firm

Por cá seria impossível, pois este tipo de empresas em Portugal tem sempre as conexões certas e benção da obra certa. Seja de Deus ou dos homens.

Entretanto, e porque eu não ando a anunciar calamidades sem fundamento:

Sweden’s free schools prompt segregation fears

Swedish education level slips in global ranking

Swedish 10-year-olds’ literacy slips again

E a surpresa das surpresas!!!

Half of principals back re-nationalizing schools

Claro que por cá isto não é transmitido assim, pois não dá jeito confessar o falhanço dos “projectos” que querem implementar por cá, pois o maior interesse não está no desempenho dos alunos, mas no negócio.

Por lá existe a capacidade de admitir que:

Swedish parties agree to major free school reform

(…)

Among other things, the new accord gives authorities the right to force under-performing free schools to hire more teachers.

The four parties that make up the governing centre-right Alliance coalition have been in long and intensive talks about the reforms with the Social Democrats and the Green Party.

“We have solved most of it, but each party has a few questions left they want answered,” the Greens’ Mats Pertoft told the TT news agency.

The education minister, meanwhile, welcomed the negotiated deal.

“This is the domestic policy area where the hardest battles have been fought in the past 25 years,” Jan Björklund of the Liberal Party (Folkpartiet) told reporters.

“It’s a very positive step that we have such a broad agreement.”

Björklund said he believed that most graduates of free schools in Sweden were probably happy with their choice of education, but said there had been cases of poor management. Last year, a licence to run a free school went up for sale on the buy-sell site Blocket, causing a minor education scandal in Sweden.

… como pode ser muito prejudicial a lógica do custo mínimo…

What’s Wrong With Low-Cost Private Schools for the Poor?

… outrora feriado, nos tempos coevos da crise económica, despesismo e ineficiência.

Há demasiada gente a precisar de aprender a ler e a entender o que está escrito em frases manhosas. O que vem no guião do Portas é:

GuiaoEdu7

A ver se nos entendemos: o que é da propriedade e gestão dos professores é o “projecto”. Depois contratualizam o serviço e o uso das instalações…

No que difere isto de um contrato de autonomia? Na prática em muito pouco para os professores. Isto é o que já fazem quando uma escola tem um projecto educativo feito como deve ser, em diálogo interno.

Mas pode significar muito para outros que usem grupos de professores para entrar na exploração dos equipamentos da rede escolar pública!

E reparem no uso do convidar para o procedimento concursal…

Faz favor e Obrigado. Já era!

.

Não podemos, não queremos, nem devemos voltar a tempos de disciplinas excessivamente rígidas em que uns tudo mandam e outros tudo obedecem, sem justificações, só porque tem que ser, é assim, ponto.

Porém, não nos vai ser possível por muito mais tempo continuar a viver nesta selva em que estamos “confortavelmente” instalados.

Vale tudo, chegaremos, a assim continuar, até a valer arrancar olhos, quando a intenção for de facto “claramente” cegar o nosso igual.

O pedir por favor, o segurar uma porta para o que vem atrás passar e não levar com ela – porta – na cara, era o que mais faltava ter que hoje se fazer.

Dizer simplesmente obrigado, quando alguém se comporta civilizadamente connosco, quando nos tratam com cordialidade, quando nos são simpáticos – correctos! – era o que mais faltava.

Já era, já não se usa, é uma banalidade, o faz favor e o obrigado. Para quê?

Os outros animais, aqueles que pensam bem menos que nós, não o fazem e safam-se, para que haveríamos nós, humanos, de ter que o fazer?

Talvez a baixar assim, cada vez mais o nível, os animais de estimação que muitos têm, se venham a conseguir portar bem melhor que os seus donos, e seremos pelos ditos animais ensinados a dizer uma vez mais, faz favor e obrigado. Esperemos que não, tarde de mais!

Augusto Küttner

Agradecendo a referência à Anna P.

China’s 10 new and surprising school reform rules

(…)

Reduced standardized tests and homework and no tracking. These are some of the new actions China is taking to lessen student academic burden. The Chinese Ministry of Education recently released Ten Regulations to Lessen Academic Burden for Primary School Students for public commentary. The Ten Regulations are introduced as one more significant measure to reform China’s education, in addition to further reduction of academic content, lowering the academic rigor of textbooks, expanding criteria for education quality, and improving teacher capacity.

The regulations included in the published draft are:

  1. Transparent admissions. Admission to a school cannot take into account any achievement certificates or examination results. Schools must admit all students based on their residency without considering any other factors.
  2. Balanced Grouping. Schools must place students into classes and assign teachers randomly. Schools are strictly forbidden to use any excuse to establish “fast-track” and “slow-track” classes.
  3. “Zero-starting point” Teaching. All teaching should assume all first graders students begin at zero proficiency. Schools should not artificially impose higher academic expectations and expedite the pace of teaching.
  4. No Homework. No written homework is allowed in primary schools. Schools can however assign appropriate experiential homework by working with parents and community resources to arrange field trips, library visits, and craft activities.
  5. Reducing Testing. No standardized testing is allowed for grades 1 through 3; For 4th grade and up, standardized testing is only allowed once per semester for Chinese language, math, and foreign language. Other types of tests cannot be given more than twice per semester.
  6. Categorical Evaluation. Schools can only assess students using the categories of “Exceptional, Excellent, Adequate, and Inadequate,” replacing the traditional 100-point system.
  7. Minimizing Supplemental Materials. Schools can use at most one type of materials to supplement the textbook, with parental consent. Schools and teachers are forbidden to recommend, suggest, or promote any supplemental materials to students.
  8. Strictly Forbidding Extra Class. Schools and teachers cannot organize or offer extra instruction after regular schools hours, during winter and summer breaks and other holidays. Public schools and their teachers cannot organize or participate in extra instructional activities.
  9. Minimum of One Hour of Physical Exercise. Schools are to guarantee the offering of physical education classes in accordance with the national curriculum, physical activities and eye exercise during recess.
  10. Strengthening Enforcement. Education authorities at all levels of government shall conduct regular inspection and monitoring of actions to lessen student academic burden and publish findings. Individuals responsible for academic burden reduction are held accountable by the government.

The Ministry of Education received nearly 6,000 comments from the public in August. Based on the comments, the Ministry revised the Ten Measures and solicited public comments on the revised draft between September 6th and 18th. There are two noticeable and significant changes.

First, the Ministry backed off a bit on homework, from “no homework” to “decrease the amount of homework.” The revised version still calls for no homework for grades 1 to 3 and allows homework for grade 4, but the amount must be no more than one hour a day. This change was made mostly in response to parents’ concerns about the impracticality of no homework and teachers may find ways to assign homework to parents anyway.

Second, the revised draft went further on limiting testing by eliminating English language from the subjects allowed for standardized testing for 4th grade and up. The Ministry added: “student test scores and rankings shall not be published as part of school quality evaluation.”

Henricartoon21

(c) Henrique Monteiro