Rather than looking together for intelligent ways to become lucid about the effects of schooling Diploma of IT, the actors present freeze on their most intransigent positions. The teachers and their associations refuse any evaluation of the Diploma of IT and seek the alliance of left-wing parties to denounce the stranglehold of the economy and neo-liberal forces on education. Faced with this resistance, sure of its right, the culture of evaluation imposes, with less and less care, data collection, expertise, audits, controls.
The current balance of power is favorable to those who want to evaluate everything all the time, “objectively” or “scientifically”, to demand regulation. In the most brutal contexts, we see local authorities closing non-performing schools without appeal, or massively replacing their teaching staff. In more civilized systems, the pressure of surveys and indicators increases, the data is published, the press seizes it and accuses ministers, teachers, researchers.
Part of the political class and economic circles
The economic and political context favors a culture of evaluation which does not emanate from all. The players, but is imposed on them by part of the political class and economic circles. Even if the intention is defensible – to lucidly evaluate the effectiveness. The educational action -, the mode of imposition of the instruments and analyzes makes them stakes. In the balance of power rather than working tools for all. To the political and sometimes methodological blunders is added a suspicion. About the intentions of those who need statistics to privatize the Diploma of IT or justify new budgetary restrictions.
Contrary to what technocrats imagine, the culture of evaluation that is taking hold risks producing more opacity and less regulation, through haste, lack of intelligence, lack of respect for complexity and diversity, fascination instruments. It is time to understand that lucidity must be a collective good and that if evaluation is a weapon in the hands of a few, it will bring about the opposite of what it claims to seek.
The ten avenues outlined here certainly do not cover the multiple levers on which action should be taken. One could envisage the networking of establishments, the use of new diploma of information technology and distance education, the development of various partnerships between establishments and their environment, new forms of assessment, the transformation of curricula towards more links between disciplines or a stronger skills orientation. My goal was not to mention all the potential transformations of the school, but. Those that must be combined to make it more effective .
Making schools more efficient is certainly not the only challenge of school reforms. It is also a question of making it more relevant with regard to the evolution. Knowledge, practices, culture and society. Perhaps it would be time to link these two logics more explicitly. It is indeed difficult to increase the efficiency of the education system. Without questioning its aims, if only because it is impossible to democratize training without defining priority objectives.
The distance of each other from the school culture
Conversely, no curriculum reform should avoid the question. Who benefits from the change, given the way in which the new programs will modify. The distance of each other from the school culture. It would even be appropriate to anticipate the possible perverse elitist effects. Curricular reforms full of good intentions, but sociologically, such as certain communicative. Approaches to language, certain aspects of interdisciplinary or intercultural or the 180° turn towards the skill bases.
Any major reform of the education system can make it more or less efficient, more or less. Equitable, whether or not this is its stated intention. It would therefore be reasonable to analyze each education policy in. This register and to ask whether and how it contributes to progress along the ten lines outlined above.