The recent MUT Council election may have had its undignified moments, but it was an important eye-opener to teachers’ perceptions of the state of education in Malta.
Although the turnout was less than half the Malta Union of Teachers’ membership, the photo-finish between the two contenders for the post of president – only six votes separated them – indicates that teachers are in two minds on the direction their union should take.
The programme of the just-defeated candidate amounted to a rejection of the 2006 education reforms that among other things ushered in the colleges, quality assurance and the removal of segregated secondary schooling.
The programme of the new MUT president, Marco Bonnici, was not quite so radical and was premised on ‘continuity’. In his first interview he indicated that he shared teachers’ pessimism over the present system. But he was cautious about making any statements that might jeopardise the long-delayed sectoral collective agreement for teachers. He displayed the kind of savvy discretion one would expect from the leader of a major union.
On the other hand, both contestants’ written and oral statements were striking for what was not said. They shared no vision for the improvement of learning, for the reduction of structural inequalities in education and the promotion of higher attainment by all learners. Both focused exclusively on the betterment of teacher working conditions.
But the MUT has always prided itself on its dual role as a trade union and a professional body. Even in the 1960s and early 70s, the MUT leadership had a principled position on the harmful effect of streaming on learners. This was well before the professionalisation of teachers in 1988, and in spite of its members’ preference for the status quo.
Later, after the trials and tribulations of the 70s and 80s, it even employed educational researchers and published important educational resources and primary research on teaching and learning. There was always a sense that the MUT leadership could be relied upon to promote an educational vision that transcended the daily trade unionistic grind. This sense has been fading since the 2007 collective agreement that implemented the 2006 Education Act. It is known that this agreement unleashed an internal tsunami of dissent by the rank-and-file. They perceived, correctly, that their union had conceded more in transformed practices and structures than they had gained in improved remuneration and promotion prospects.
Since then, the MUT leadership has been constantly trying to row back on that agreement. Many teachers point to the ‘fact’ – there is a dearth of public data on the relevant performance indicators – that the reforms did not bring about the hoped-for changes. Certainly the partial removal of segregation in State secondary schooling proved to be a harder nut to crack than originally thought. It is now exacerbated with mixed-gender teaching and the increase in schools’ multicultural realities.
There are many reasons for this, not least the lack of decisive policy leadership just before 2013 and lack of continuity thereafter. These meant that the crucial fine-tuning and pruning of reforms did not take place. Other initiatives took precedence, such as the setting up of middle schools, that diverted energies and have yet to prove their worth. Meanwhile, the crucial reforms embodied in the Learning Outcomes Framework are still in limbo. The framework runs the risk of suffering the same fate as Konrad Mizzi’s power station, and be postponed yet again.
Today the MUT is faced with the daunting challenge of not just improving its members’ conditions of work, but of developing an authoritative critical voice on the way forward for Malta’s educational system. It is not enough for Mr Bonnici to state that his role is simply to represent his members’ wishes.
He needs to lead his union into taking a principled stand in favour of learners. He needs to recapture the professional ‘voice’ that distinguished the union’s contribution to educational development in the past. Improved teacher conditions should come as a consequence of this. He should not place the cart before the horse.