MUT general conference - an inspiring event

I attended the conference recently and the word which describes it correctly is "inspiring" - as there was so much to learn from the papers read and comments from the floor.

Introducing the conference, MUT secretary general Franklin Barbara stated clearly the aims of the conference and described how it was going to address these aims in a disciplined manner. To hear Mr Barbara, a new and young trade union secretary general, one would have thought that he had been doing this work for several years.

First to take the podium was Joseph Fenech, MUT vice-president and educator with several years' experience who has seen the evolution of different generations of children. Mr Fenech managed to put together the problems and progress of education in Malta, not hesitating to commend what educators see as positive or to castigate the lethargy and rigidity of the establishment wherever necessary.

The next speaker was Kevin Bonello, also vice-president of the MUT, who took the baton from Mr Fenech and spontaneously mentioned present-day problems often inherited year after year by educators while identifying solutions to problems related to the future of education in Malta.

At one moment, one of the delegates said his school suffered from a security problem and that this problem had been there for several years.

How can any educator be expected to think, teach and deliver when half his mind is occupied with the nagging problem of insecurity at his place of work?

I believe that the teaching warrant is not sufficiently protected by law. A person who attempts to practice a profession without being covered by a warrant is in serious breach of law. However, it is possible to practise the teaching profession at home and elsewhere without being in danger of attracting the ire of the law.

Next on the podium was Ron Smith, president of the European Trade Union Committee for Education (ETUCE).

With great clarity, Mr Smith described the problems and progress of education in Europe, mentioning tendencies in the organisation of the teaching profession.

The first of Mr Smith's comments was that an educator does not work in a vacuum. Indeed it is wrong for a member of any profession to mix only with confreres without ending up talking continuous shop.

Educators cannot look at their place of work as an extension of their home situation. They must be aware of what is happening around them. This includes social changes such as the decline of the family and the increase of poverty, inequality and crime.

A realistic educator must not be blinded by the perception of prejudiced members of society regarding young people. These do not necessarily tend to be selfish and unambitious.

Mr Smith confirmed that most teachers in Europe would have a Masters degree.

In Malta many teachers are reading for an MA or PhD related to social realities.

In his usual inimitable serious and witty style, John Bencini, president of the MUT, described the problems he has been encountering in schools and among educators. He gave concrete examples explaining why he had reason for pessimism or optimism according to specific cases.

One worrying reality was the fact that the teaching profession is finding less and less people willing to embrace it. Next October primary schools will have a shortage of about 70 teachers. Shall we solve the problem by filling the gaps with substitute teachers who do not hold a teacher's warrant or shall we find solutions to make the profession less unattractive?

At present there are about 130 BEd students at the Faculty of Education preparing to become teachers in primary education. Only nine of these are males. These numbers are simply not enough and remind one of the medical profession. Haemorrhage away from the teaching profession is explained by the fact that much more remunerative jobs are available to teachers who decide to leave the profession.

Finally, Mr Bencini mentioned a phenomenon which can exist in the entire public service.

A staff member of a school publicly criticised the lack of cleanliness in a class and was sternly asked by his employer to provide an explanation. Why does the public service have to censure the freedom of expression of those who wish to point out what is wrong in this or that area? How can things improve unless employees working close to problems identify and speak out about them? There is indeed a close correlation between the solution of a problem and a maximum publicity given to it.