Much is said about the need for a substantive change in the education of children and young people. So much so that today there is a need for a paradigm shift, which is defined as: “A theory or set of theories whose central nucleus is accepted without question and which provides the basis and model for solving problems and advancing knowledge”.
The time has come to question the theories that underpin the current model of education.
The closure of face-to-face education and its consequences in terms of lack of socialisation and deterioration of coexistence provide us with empirical evidence of the role played by the school in these aspects. But it is not enough to return to face-to-face classes to remedy this. We must take on the implementation of socio-emotional education with determination.
A project developed by Fundación Semilla in conjunction with a company that uses students who have graduated from technical-vocational schools consulted with the direct bosses of these young people about what they lacked in order to perform well in their first work experience, and the response was not surprising. “They acquire the technical specificity of our work with us in the workplace, but they lack life skills”.
It was based on the theory that it was good for the development of the country to put an end to illiteracy. In 1929 it was increased to six years, in 1965 to eight years and in 2003 it was extended to basic and middle school; always with an emphasis on knowledge rather than socio-emotional aspects and life skills.
The current paradigm gives pre-eminence to knowledge and “the cognitive” and therefore universal pre-school education is not a priority in public policy. A new paradigm should prioritise the contributions of pre-school education: the development of thinking, comprehensive and expressive language, social understanding and interaction, emotional development and movement skills. Article 28 of the General Education Law No. 20.370 lists in detail the skills to be achieved in the pre-school population.
In Chile, only about half of the population up to five years of age regularly attends a nursery, kindergarten or establishment that has a transition level (Pre-Kindergarten and kindergarten). Low attendance is not due to lack of interest, but to lack of available enrolment. Preschool coverage will not accelerate until the old paradigm is changed.
Looking deeper into the figures, the State’s great debt is at NT1 and NT2 levels (transition, pre-kindergarten and kindergarten levels) where public education, free by definition, offers only 31% of the available enrolment while 69% is offered by private and subsidised private establishments.
Those who have the privilege of attending pre-school, either by choice and/or by availability of enrolment, start their lives at a significant advantage over those who do not. Challenging current paradigms in education is not an ideological issue; it is putting the best interests of children and young people first.
