The student world splits in half on the issue of failures at the end of this school year. Against all odds, slightly prevails those who take sides with the MI, which does not seem willing to repeat the “safe conduct” of 2020. The reason? For 68% of them, those who engage in school can also do it in Dad. Among those who would like certain promotion, 48% point the finger at the emotional difficulties of the period, 30% against the “limiting” mode of online lessons.
It is almost certain that, at the end of this school year, the failures will return. After the ‘all admitted’ of 2020, due to the long spring lockdown and the traumatic transition to distance learning, the fate of the students returns to the hands of the class councils. But kids, unlike adults, don’t seem to make a big deal out of it. Indeed, most of them are in favor of restoring some form of selection. This was reported by a survey carried out by the Skuola.net portal on 2,500 middle and high school pupils.
In reality, what emerges is an almost clear split. It is as if, within the institutes, two parties are facing each other. In advantage, as mentioned, there are those who follow the line adopted so far by the Ministry of Education: 56% (but in middle school it goes up further) agree on the return of failures. To face them, not far away (44%), those who oppose this scenario. The fact remains, however, that the obstruction of the MI’s decision is not as compact as one might have expected following the debate in recent days. Far from it.
It is above all the enhancement of commitment that is the aspect that pushes so many young people to take sides in favor of real year-end ballots. For more than two thirds of them (68%), in fact, those who wanted to study continued to do so even during the difficult coexistence with Dad and, therefore, it would not be fair if the same treatment were given to all students without distinction. Even harder 16%, according to which stopping the pupils most in difficulty could be almost a good, to help them recover the gaps accumulated in the last year. While for about 1 in 10 it would be a mistake to promote everyone because Dad did not impact so deeply on performance this year compared to twelve months ago.
Thus Daniele Grassucci, director of Skuola.net: “Dad, with all its limitations, has been carrying out the work of students and professors for at least a year. It is understandable that those who have given their best want to see it recognized. We know, however, that not everyone has had the same chances in these difficult months: connection problems, lack of space or devices, family problems or problems related to the health emergency cannot be ignored. It would be right, therefore, to give schools and teachers the opportunity to decide independently on the end-of-year outcomes, not precluding the way of any exceptions on the admission requirements to the following year such as those that are already provided, for example, for the graduation exam”.
The theses put forward by those who oppose rejection, on the other hand, revolve in particular around the psychological implications linked to the sudden closure of schools and, in general, at the moment we are living: for 48%, in the last year, we there were too many difficulties from an emotional and mental point of view to lead to an objective judgment on the part of the professors. For 30%, however, the fault lies with distance learning, which prevented them from performing as they would have done in the classroom. 18%, however, broadens the discussion and calls into question those who managed the emergency so that, now, they do not want to risk paying for responsibilities beyond their control.
Voices, the latter, which could still be heard. In theory, the Ministry would have time to issue an ordinance that re-proposes collective promotion. News that, at that point, would also be welcomed with joy by many students in favor of failures: 55% hope that it will end like this (although they are skeptical that it could happen), another 10% are even sure that there will be an afterthought. Only 1 in 3 would continue to strongly argue that failures are necessary.