Teachers will remain without the necessary legal backing to take disciplinary measures against misbehaving children if the new National Curriculum Framework fails to address this important issue, according to the Malta Union of Teachers.

“Today, the head of a school has to think twice before disciplining a child since there is no legal backing or guidelines... The new curriculum does not address the acute problem that schools, including Church and private schools, are facing,” said union president Kevin Bonello.

Although the new college system introduced the prefects of discipline, he said, there were only four for the 10 colleges.

Mr Bonello was speaking during a press conference in which he outlined the MUT’s reaction to the proposed curriculum framework.

The long-awaited document, which is still a draft, will replace the 1999 version. The consultation process started in May and comes to an end this month. The next step is for a new version, that has considered the feedback, to be presented to the government for approval. It is expected to come into force next year.

The MUT’s reaction was drawn up following an internal consultation process. It hinged around the concept that, while the revision of the curriculum was a positive step, there had not been enough consultation among all teaching grades.

Mr Bonello said the draft was based on several assumptions, such as that all students were motivated to learn and all teachers were experts in all subjects.

It did not define what was meant by inclusion in the classroom. Total inclusion required the allocation of more time to allow the teacher to coordinate services to reach all children.

The head of a school has to think twice before disciplining a child since there is no legal backing or guidelines

While the union agreed with having mixed-ability classrooms, such classes required additional resources and fewer students — which were not catered for in the new framework.

With an emphasis on inclusion, the draft curriculum was not catering for high achievers who were being left behind, he said.

It did not explore the option of having co-ed schools, where boys and girls were mixed, even though they were proven to be successful.

The draft seemed to ignore working hours agreed to in the sectoral agreement signed between the union and the government as it proposed longer working hours.

He said teachers also disagreed with the way that sciences – physics, biology and chemistry – were being renamed and taught as core science. This could discourage students from specialising in one particular subject.

There was also no indication regarding the way in which the new core science subjects would affect the transition to the post secondary and tertiary sectors. And there were no indications about the way in which Matsec exams would be revised to cater for this new subject.

The union also disagreed with the decision to reduce the number of lessons in foreign languages from four to three lessons a week.

Mr Bonello added that although most teachers were in favour of the change being brought about through the new curriculum, they felt it was happening too fast and they were not properly trained for it.