Image: onderwijsgek / cc by-sa-3.0 NL
Confession of a sitting banner. Or: Who decides the future of children?
Today I have to break a lance. FURSE FURS. Maybe they did not know yet: they read here the considerations of a convinced sitting banner.
However, only once again a mentary step back: Last week I traveled from Germany, where I had given the public broadcasting an interview, in the Netherlands. It was full on the train. It was a Friday. And many drove for a weekend in Amsterdam in the same direction.
I had found a seat with Muhe, as I hoard the conversation threesome fellow traveler. It was young study councils, so teachers who talked about the benefits of sitting. One of them, which me wraps against Sab, repeated several times loud and clear: "Stay is meaningless."
I trailed the urge to interfere in the conversation and contradictively contradict; At the same time, but I was glad to finally sit. So I agreed with myself to write at least the topic and let the teachers in peace.
In recent years, there were always discussions about costs and benefits of sitting. Bring the repeating a school year to the person concerned about something? Does it bring the performance of co-schoolers downwards? How much is the whole thing overhead?
In the Netherlands, 2015 published the Buro for the economic policy analyzes (expressively surviving: "Central Planning Buro", But the hat is probably too much to China), an institute of the Ministry of Economic Affairs, the company can cost the company or 500 million euros. On the population of Germany, it was thus 2.5 billion! With reference to a study by the Bertelsmann Foundation from 2009, however, the number of "only" one billion.
It is clear what political demands are attracted to such reports in times of forced resource snapness: abolish! In the Netherlands, the affected schoolmen should catch up in summer schools their performance relief. Also in Germany one discusses the proposal, with the money "Problematic" Individually demanded as they can be obtained for a year.
The background of the economic calculations is very little betrayed. I remember my analysis of illness costs before not too long time (causing mentally ill financial damage?): Result was that these costs exist mainly on paper, or economically elsewhere else iing elsewhere.
Dangerous is in such numbers, above all, that they suggest that the money is easy to save through a management regulation. We do not know in the least, which the society was costing when Schuleren and Schuler not could stay sitting – and in case of doubt just fly from the school.
There can also be a school break off the community expensive to stand. If people do not find work due to poor qualification if they are excluded after several failed attempts excluded if they are more likely to radicalize due to lack of education for manipulation, if they may even radicalize, then that not only causes financial costs. No, the education system also has a social and integrative function.
In addition, the detected benefit of sitting depends on how to test. So it bothered in the psychology magazine brainSpirit in 2013, the "Honorary round" Bring nothing (bad testimony for the honorary round). In the current ie, however, is an appeal to a reprintage long-term study of more than 1300 schoolers and with the involvement of the Ludwig-Maximilians University Munchen: "Sitting remains often positive from a psychological and educational point of view."
Yes, what now? Until this question is clarified, I urge all educational politicians to leave the fingers from sitting! Which reform has been successful since the Pisa shock, including Bologna (Funfzehen Bologna explanation – a polemic)? That these decisions are from above for the affected dramatic effects, one is probably hardly aware.