At least 70 teachers got an Education Ministry warrant without any training in ethics or pedagogy, Malta Union of Teachers president Kevin Bonello said yesterday.
The situation, he said, had been ongoing since early 2006 and there were no signs of any changes because the Education Minister remained the only person empowered to issue warrants, he added.
Mr Bonello said warrants could be given to teachers, even to those with no academic training, due to a loophole in the Education Act. This, he explained, allowed the minister to issue warrants to teachers as long as they had a reasonable level of experience. Mr Bonello felt experience should be coupled with the necessary training to ensure ethical practices in the classroom.
“Training is essential to avoid unwanted incidents. We feel that this cannot be overlooked whenever warrants are being handed out,” he said, adding that these were permanent and not subject to renewal.
Questions sent to the Education Ministry on the matter remained unanswered by the time of writing.
Mr Bonello was speaking while announcing his union’s proposals for the upcoming Education Act revision. The main proposals include the removal of ministerial discretion in awarding teaching warrants. Instead, the MUT suggests the issue of warrants be administered by the Council for Teaching Professionals.
The council, he said, should be split into three sub-councils that would handle the warrants issued to teachers, to post-secondary and University lecturers and to educational assistants.
“Ethical training and a warrant for lecturers and all other educational professionals are a must. These affect students as much as they do teachers,” Mr Bonello said, adding that thousands of ancillary educators were working without first receiving any ethics training.
Training is essential to avoid unwanted incidents
The council, he said, should be better supported because many of its executive staff members were juggling other full-time jobs.
The MUT is also expecting the government to take a stand on parental involvement in educational decisions. The union proposed giving teachers the right to make the final decision on educational matters.
“This is similar to what a surgeon does; he has the right to chart out the course of action needed and not the patient. We believe teachers should have the right to make the decisions benefiting students,” he said, adding that, like patients, parents should retain the right to seek a second opinion.
The union also proposed the introduction of a one-size-fits-all disciplinary code for schools as well as guidelines on student-teacher behaviour.
This, Mr Bonello said, should see harsher standards set for disciplinary action. It would be extended to negligent parents in an attempt to combat abuse.
“We feel the new law would provide a legal platform whereby parental input in a child’s educational development is empowered, encouraged and, above all, made necessary,” he said.
Asked about the proposed introduction of banding, Mr Bonello said the union was not averse to the move but called for it to be coupled with constant analysis.
On the recent legal notice obliging schools to hand over sensitive information on students, Mr Bonello said the MUT had not been consulted on the matter.
Pressed for a stand on the issue, he said the union did not condone any invasions of privacy and it still did not understand the aim of the legal notice.