The school was asked as a homework to answer the question: "What is your attitude towards
compulsory 12-year school education ?"
Answering this question, I will try to sort everything out. But a clear answer, of course, will not be :) So ...
Goals
Looking for information about the goals of the subject, I was surprised to find that there are no definite goals. It seems that the Ministry of Education blindly imitates the West and does not report to its actions.
Let us make the banal assumption that in this way the government is trying to take care of the younger generation and raise the average intellectual and cultural level of development of graduates.
')
Let's see what people, who will bring this idea to life, will most likely come across ...
Quantity = quality?
It is believed that children will become smarter if they do not study 11 classes, as now, but 12. I think that this is far from the case ...
The fact is that the basis for increasing the length of study does not lie in a corresponding improvement in the quality of education, that is, training of personnel and reasonable funding.
It is depressing that today many graduates of the 9th grade (due to the inability to enroll in higher education and get a relatively good education) go to pedagogical technical schools (colleges, etc.), finish their studies and start working in schools. It is no secret that during this training, the majority of students are not only unscrupulous about their studies, but also completely forget about whom they actually study. And such people teach children ... Therefore, it is necessary to take this problem very seriously, but we are “closed our eyes” to it.
This is with regard to personnel problems. And now about financing ... What kind of improvement in the quality of education can we talk about when the “meager” budget share is spent on education, a huge part of the money “settles” in the pockets of officials, and sometimes is wasted on things that are not directly related to training? An example of the latter: recently, a new stand with an alphabet was brought to the office of the native language (I don’t specifically mention the language, because I think it’s inappropriate here), and, it should be noted, it is well-designed. Everything would be fine, but the old board, in my opinion, completely fulfilled its functions: after all, the letters on it were read, and it could well have been used by students. Question: why was it necessary to bring a new stand, and overloaded with the original “design”? This money could be spent, for example, on textbooks (except for the alphabet, they also brought a bunch of useless stands) or audio or video materials for viewing in the classroom (they don’t even need to be bought for each student, unlike textbooks). But no ... the new alphabet design is above all! This is just one example of improper disposal of funds allocated to education. And so throughout the country ...
I would advise the government, and especially the Ministry of Education, first of all to think about how much money is allocated to the school (here the word “school” is used as the general name of such educational institutions), how they are spent and look in the direction of a personnel problem, before engage in meaningless "building up" the number of required classes.
To be continued…