Cultural Education from Infancy. Part 6: Culture at School

Before Christmas, the Ministry of Education presented its vision of what the plan should look like for the adoption of the curricular reform in schools, which is to be financed in large part from the Recovery Plan. At this moment, we have available the document titled “Starting Points for Changes in the Curricula of Primary Education”. Denník N in its article “There is a threat that the next education reform will end in fiasco. Experts debate over the way to divide the primary school” states that more than 300 experts collaborated on the reform. The Ministry of Education started working on it two years ago, and the goal was to “radically redo the overflowing and outdated curricula.” Experts proposed changing the current division of primary education into two levels in the reform. In the new system, there are three educational cycles planned, 1st to 3rd year, 4th to 5th year and 6th to 9th year. The second cycle should serve students to consolidate basic knowledge, or rather skills, that they acquired in the first three years of study.

This model of studies should bring the possibility of greater inclusion of students with various specific educational needs, whose percentage is growing, but the ability of schools to dedicate space and time to them is decreasing with expanding curricula. It is no news or secret that children with any social, economic, psychological, physical, mental handicap do not have the opportunity to integrate and often end up excluded from mainstream education. In this way, unwittingly, without any fault of their own, unfortunately, they find themselves on the sidelines, which of course reduces their opportunities to be employed in the labour market and in society later, in the future. Likewise, there is no room left for talented and skilled students, who actually also often have specific needs and requirements for education. It is like an unsolvable puzzle to connect various children into a whole, to enable them to advance in education and to respect individual learning needs.

The experts’ draft abolishes some of the existing structures. For us who have gone through standard education, unchanged for several generations, it is difficult to imagine such “novelties”. The second cycle (4th and 5th year), where the established position of teachers would change, appears to be a problem. Currently divided into first and second level, with their division being related to their specialization in pedagogical education. How to redistribute their competences when they suddenly have to work together in the 4th and 5th grades? Do teachers have the appropriate education for this? Then come practical problems – space, textbooks (or finances allocated for textbooks designed, commissioned according to the current division). And with the lukewarm attitude of the current Minister of Education, when he sees one year up or down as a purely technical matter, the fate of the reform is almost sealed.

We at Via Cultura looked at how the position of culture and art is perceived in the document. Culture and art are seen here as a separate educational field that absorbs music, visual and dramatic arts. Culture is further perceived cross-sectionally in the area of language and literacy. We are used to the fact that culture has its own ministry, its own institutions. In our time-space, education is an instance firmly separated from culture. However, two difficult covid years showed us something that we pushed to the side. Educators and psychologists sound the alarm. We have hurt the children. We discovered that school is not just a kind of place where knowledge is “fed”. It is a place where children experience the full range of contacts, emotions, encounters and experiences, where the social interactions necessary for their psychological health and well-being are developed. Where they create their own cultural environment. If children do not feel comfortable and safe, they will not absorb the information and knowledge provided. Therefore, the relevant question for the upcoming reform is: Will our children feel better? Will they get more time for building friendships, for communication, for social interaction, for play? Will teachers have the capacity to devote themselves to mental health in addition to the material being studied? Will they live socially, culturally and healthily?

What can culture bring to education? In culture, we have been mapping social benefits for years. Already in 1997, the European Working Group for Culture and Development defined the socio-economic benefits of art and culture in the document In from margins. For the purposes of the article, I will provide a definition of social impacts.

Direct and indirect social impacts:

 Arts and culture provide “socially valuable” leisure activities, “elevate” people’s thinking and contribute positively to their psychological and social well-being and increase their sensitivity and empathy.

 Art enriches the social environment with the support of stimulating or pleasant public facilities.

 Artistic activity, by stimulating creativity and not respecting established models of thinking, increases the rate of innovation.

 Works of art and cultural products represent a collective “memory” for the community and serve as a reservoir of creative and intellectual ideas for future generations.

It is culture that really contributes to the better well-being of society, by its very nature it allows us to process traumas and create a more positive environment. We are in a situation where we should ask whether we should not place culture and art at the center of the entire educational process. If the proposed plan allows this (even if it is not explicitly written in it), that is, if teachers and learners will have space to focus more on what they are interested in, and if they will have space to focus on each other, then we should consider whether it is not worth a try? We have to change something. We should show the next generation that we care about them, that we are at least trying to make a difference. I wonder what we have to lose. They may not know as much as we imagine. But they do not really know it at this point either. In international comparisons, we rank lower than our neighbouring countries.

We know we want to achieve inclusion and increase health, critical thinking. Will this reform help? Experts sought support for their proposals in experiences from abroad. For now, opponents argue with domestic, pragmatic issues. Perhaps operational considerations really prevail. Maybe there will be a will to hold a debate, and we really hope so. If we really do not change anything, what kind of signal are we sending to the studying generation?

 

Jana Javorská

The Kultúrny kyslík (Cultural Oxygen) project was supported from public funds by the Arts Council (Fond na podporu kultúry) as the main partner.