Lisa Hirsig, a teacher and essayist, recently published "La grande garderie" (Albin Michel, 2023). In her analysis, she critiques the French government’s approach to educational reform, particularly concerning school schedules and the broader issues plaguing the education system.
Hirsig argues that instead of addressing the fundamental problems within the education system, such as teacher training, the widening gap in educational outcomes due to social inequalities, the declining performance of French students, and the prevalence of violence in schools, President Emmanuel Macron is focusing on the relatively superficial issue of school rhythms, which he grandiosely renames "children’s time."
She mocks Macron’s intention to establish a "citizen’s convention" led by the Economic, Social, and Environmental Council (CESE), an institution she deems undemocratic because its members are primarily drawn from unions and confederations representing specific interests. Furthermore, given the CESE’s lack of real power, Hirsig predicts that a minister will ultimately decide unilaterally to shorten summer vacations from eight weeks to six, citing dubious neuropsychiatric evidence to support the decision.
Hirsig sarcastically suggests that a few years later, another official will likely declare six weeks insufficient, highlighting the cyclical nature of these reforms. She reminds readers of the shift from a four-day to a 4.5-day week in 2013 and the subsequent return to a four-day week in 2017. She paints a picture of countless public servants diligently working on software and plans, convinced they are acting for the common good and fighting against inequality, all in service of the "one and indivisible Republic."
Hirsig questions which politician, institution, or "national democratic college" can possibly claim to understand the specific needs of every school and region in France well enough to create a satisfactory vacation schedule for 12 million students. She emphasizes the unique character of each school, which is embedded in its local community, comprising students, teachers, administrators, and various support staff. She points out that schools, when given the freedom, can cater to children with specific needs or pursue particular projects, citing examples of schools that integrate horses or forests into their curriculum, offer music or sports programs, or specialize in teaching dyslexic students.
She believes that these local communities are best equipped to determine the most suitable organization for their needs. Hirsig proposes that the government should simply set a minimum annual course duration and learning objectives, granting each school the autonomy to propose the most appropriate schedule for families. She suggests that school administrators should also have the freedom to determine the amount of time dedicated to meetings, given that teachers currently spend 108 hours annually on consultations and councils with artificially determined agendas to satisfy the administration.
While many schools would likely maintain traditional long summer vacations and shorter breaks, Hirsig believes that alternative options would emerge, catering to various needs and preferences. She notes that the annual course duration in France is already higher than the European average (864 hours versus 800), yet the results are, to put it mildly, mixed. She questions the value of this extra school time and suggests that focusing on content rather than schedules might be more effective.
Hirsig identifies the real problem as the lack of purpose and engagement among some young people. She argues that the state confiscates a significant portion of families’ income and promises quality services in return. However, she questions the quality of education offered in state schools. She criticizes the recruitment and training of teachers, suggesting that a review of the websites of the national teacher training schools (Inspé) reveals a focus on issues like sustainable development and combating social determinism, even including workshops on "poetic dives into menstruation."
She also criticizes the after-school programs and summer camps offered to children whose parents cannot care for them during the holidays. She describes these programs as being run by nonchalant instructors who preach "living together" while failing to cultivate inner reflection and attention skills in children. Hirsig contends that the apparent free nature of these programs is deceptive, as they are costly to taxpayers and no longer guarantee the safety or education of the children they are meant to serve.
In essence, Hirsig advocates for greater decentralization and local control in education, arguing that schools and communities are best positioned to determine the most appropriate schedules and educational programs for their students. She criticizes the government’s focus on superficial reforms while neglecting the fundamental problems that plague the French education system, and she calls for a shift in focus towards improving the quality of teaching and addressing the needs of individual students and communities. She believes that true educational reform requires empowering local actors and fostering a sense of purpose and engagement among young people. The current system, she argues, is a bureaucratic exercise in futility, failing to deliver on its promises to families and children.
