Home Elements for a Diagnosis of the Spanish Educational System
7 - Conclusions and recommendations (continued)


Previous Table of Contens Next



The teachers opinion of the syllabuses and teaching methods

  1. As the success or failure of the legal provisions related to the syllabus depends greatly on the attitude the teachers have to them, as they definitively are the people who implement them, the Specialised Committee in charge of diagnosing how the students are taught decided to concentrate on them as the main source of information. As a means of access to this, it used not only the questions in a survey that was amply and carefully designed, but also formed diverse Diagnosis Groups in which, in a more informal, relaxed way, the teachers had the chance to explain their points of view. The methodology used by the Committee seemed adequate, as the objective was not to initiate a process of reform in the present syllabuses and the methodological orientations set up around these, but to check to what extent the teachers accepted them and how they interpret and apply them.
  2. We are aware that this is not the only possible approach when diagnosing the syllabuses in force. Other means would have been practical and full of interest: adapting the syllabuses to future orientation of the students (surveying, for example, teachers in higher secondary education, university professors, entrepreneurial and trade union agents, etc.); adapting Spanish syllabuses to the prevailing syllabus lines at the same level in developed countries, especially those in the European Union; internal criticism of the content according to the prevalent objectives, etc. However, considering the resources and time available, it seemed that exploring secondary school teachers' opinions could provide a sufficiently expressive view for the moment.


FROM THEORY TO PRACTICE

  1. The first conclusion one may perhaps emphasise in the work is the preferably positive attitude of the teaching staff to Obligatory Secondary Education - a teaching staff, as one knows, which comes from two now different syllabus lines: General Basic Education (EGB) and Secondary Education (BUP and VT) - as to the objectives, the fundamental areas, the cross-curricular themes and, to sum up, the general design established by the LOGSE for this educational level. The assessment the teaching staff theoretically make of the design of ESO is, in general terms, high, although there is criticism and doubt as to the model being applicable in specific school and classroom situations.
  2. On the same lines, the fundamental planning instruments introduced by the reform - the School Educational Project and the Syllabus Project - also receive a mainly positive theoretical assessment by the teaching staff, although it is made clear that their use in practice is much below the positive appreciation they seem to have. The Educational Inspectorate has repeatedly pointed out in its latest Reports, as we have seen in chapter 1, the threat of the bureaucratic risks of such documents. The diagnosis now confirms that observation: "The Syllabus Project nowadays - as were the Lesson Preparation Notebooks or the Long and Short Subject Plannings - have become an administrative requisite: they are prepared, sent to the relevant body, approved and then ignored. These instruments do not seem to respond to a heartfelt need." However, as to the School Educational Project, the Report on School Operation shows the notable degree of participation the members of the School Council state they have in its preparation and, what is perhaps the most significant, the even more notable degree of participation they wish to have in its participation. Although the groups with which Committees II and IV do not completely coincide in definition, the results may suggest a certain difference of attitude between the School Educational Project and the Syllabus Projects, so that the first may indeed perhaps constitute a "heartfelt need", at least for some of the teachers.
  3. The gap between assessment and application, between theory and practice, becomes particularly visible as to the teaching resources normally used by the teacher. Although those proposed in the reform documents are rather well considered, they are clearly relegated to second or third place (or are even inoperative) in the specific teaching tasks, in which traditional resources prevail, most notably text books. The truth is that the most highly valued resource mentioned is "own materials", although such materials are mainly taken from text books. Thus, the weight of text books in Spanish syllabuses is confirmed once more as an unarguable factor.
  4. A last point of comparison, this time in greater detail, between theory and practice, that one should point out, is the reference to student evaluation and promotion. There also seems to be a prevalent theoretical acceptance of the principle of continuous evaluation and automatic promotion, with reference to the ESO, although always accompanied by explicit recognition of the formal difficulties involved in such evaluation and promotion. It definitively seems that the teaching staff has its doubts, in this sense, as to what would surely be desirable, and what would be prudent and realistic. It also seems, in any case, that the evaluation methods and techniques used are not up to the standard required for such needs.


PROBLEMS REQUIRING A SWIFT SOLUTION

  1. The teaching staff considers an especially relevant problem to be the timetable assigned to each of the areas. Of course, the approaches are fairly different according to the subject taught by each teacher. Although everyone has a relatively high appraisal of all the areas foreseen (even the less valued ones, such as Technology and Music), when requesting more time, this is requested above all for their own area. In any case, there is great agreement as to requesting more time for the basic and instrumental subjects, specifically Spanish Language and Mathematics. It is foreseeable that the clearly unsatisfactory results obtained by the students in these subjects reinforces this opinion, which is already present among most of the teaching staff.
  2. The optional subjects also give rise to peculiar problems at schools, in some cases due to excessive offer, and at others due to difficulties to attend to the demand. The latter depend on whether the teaching staff is properly qualified to teach them, as well as on the resources to be assigned to them, and the greater or lesser convenience or opportunity to organise them.
  3. There are two methodological problems the teaching staff especially notice. One concerns heterogeneous classes, the model the ESO reinforces by also applying it to students aged between 14 and 16; it seems clear that extending the model without having adequate resources may be a source of conflict and cause a drop in quality. The second problem is the difficulty the teachers from the previous Secondary Education have to adapt to the ESO students; this is a problem that is closely related to the deficiencies in the initial training and ongoing training that are also reported by the teaching staff, which is abundantly discussed in the part of the diagnosis on the teaching profession.
  4. The ways forward to diversity are also, within the context of the present laws, a fair dilemma to the teaching staff. Most specifically, the teaching staff does not consider that the syllabus diversification and compensatory vocational education programmes provide an efficient solution for a great number of studies, partially due to their being minority and inadequate, and partially because it is offered too late. The opinions seem to be in favour of opening up wider channels for diversification, perhaps facilitating greater opening in the syllabus options, especially in the 2nd cycle of ESO; other teachers clearly suggest forming differentiated groups, of the itinerary kind, in 3rd and 4th, or at least in 4th grade.
  5. In general terms, the teaching staff considers that the Educational Authorities and their supporting bodies grant insufficient attention and orientation to the role they play.
  6. The lack of definition there seems to have been, since their creation, among some important bodies to support schools is also considered as a problem that should be solved as soon as possible. Specifically, this affects particularly the Orientation Departments. According to the teaching staff, which in any case values the novelty of its existence, one would have to clearly define its functions and specific its scope of action and obligations from a more pragmatic viewpoint. For the present, the position they occupy and the activities they carry out vary significantly from school to school.


DIFFERENTIATED SITUATIONS AND POSTURES

  1. A comparative approximation to the attitude of state and private schools to the reform provides initial signs of a more favourable attitude among private sector teaching staff. To provide some examples, the teaching staff at state schools does not have a positive opinion of the planning formulas introduced in the reform, nor does it have a high opinion of the performance evaluation procedures set; on the other hand, it frequently notices the practical difficulties as to integration of students with special educational needs. At private schools, on the contrary, these matters do not give rise to so much argument and, in general, a greater tendency to act according to the rules of the reform is noted.
  2. It is also interesting to observe certain difference in attitudes between male and female teachers as to the reform. In general, the latter seem more innovative and have a better appreciation of some of the principles of the LOGSE. Male teachers, on the other hand, have a more conventional, traditional viewpoint as to academic reality, perhaps a more pragmatic one.
  3. There seem to be few differences between Autonomous Regions as to valuation and acceptance of the theoretical components of the reform. However, as to use of teaching techniques and resources, or to the specific way to apply certain principles (for example, that of integration of students with special educational needs), the differences are sometimes considerable and deserve more detailed study.
  4. The most significant differences as to the Syllabuses and Teaching Methods may be noted in those related to the two groups of teachers now assigned to ESO: those from the body of General Basic Education (EGB) teachers, and those from the body of Secondary Education teachers. The viewpoint of both groups as to the different matters concerned differs substantially, and undoubtably this could give rise to certain conflicts in the years to come, however much this is, pursuant to the laws, a transit situation.

Previous Table of Contents Next


© Instituto Nacional de Calidad y Evaluación (INCE)
calle San Fernando del Jarama, 14
E28002 MADRID
Tel: +34 91.745.9200
Fax: +34 91.745.9249
email: info@ince.mec.es