Kevin Bonello, the President of the Malta Union of Teachers recently referred to the religious curriculum in our schools. This was not a casual reference and a section of the press used it to fire its tirades against the lessons of religion in our schools.
Among other points MUT suggested that some religious lessons should be scrapped in primary school and replaced by a new subject: practical skills, meaning entrepreneurial skills.
How does one translate practical skills still needs to be defined but if Government really wants to teach entrepreneurial skills to its students, it just needs to check absenteeism and soon it has unearthed budding entrepreneurs who skip school to help out and work with their 'entrepreneurial' father or mother.
Irrespective of topic, I do not think that issues of curricula should be a matter for discussion by a union of teachers. No union should enter into management matters unless administrative decisions are having a negative effect on the workers, in this case, teachers. Furthermore, I do not believe that issues of curricula are affecting adversely the conditions of teachers.
On the other hand, the teaching of religion has become a sensitive topic these days. Teaching religion in our schools goes beyond work ethics or improvement of teachers' condition. It is now part of an ideological war that has been going on in the field of the humanities for the past decades with disastrous results. No union of teachers should be part of these 'wars', unless it has hidden motives and wants to take sides for ideological reasons.
For this reason, it is more than legitimate to ask why did Mr Bonello decide to pick on the religious curriculum and not on any other curricula at our schools. Is this the only curriculum that needs to be questioned or revamped? Are the curricula of English or Maltese acceptable at the moment? I don't think so, if one looks at the problems that we have in Malta with illiteracy or the deplorable state of both English and Maltese. Are the curricula of the sciences acceptable? Even here, I have my doubts since few are the pupils opting to continue studying maths or other science subjects. Incidentally, government primary schools lack a holistic science curriculum. On the contrary, at church schools, science is taught already from primary level.
Therefore, what is the hidden agenda behind Mr Bonello's comments? Does his union favour the abolition of the teaching of religion from our schools? If so, he should have stated this very clearly. Mr Bonello explained that this is not his intention. He just wants the religious syllabus to be pruned from irrelevant details but in the process, the number of lessons will be reduced.
As someone who has made history his professional career, I only see the continuance of a pattern where established topics, which incidentally, successfully contributed in the past towards the building of our nation state, are being undermined. History was earmarked to undergo this same treatment, which is now being harvested for religion. History was going to be scrapped from Government schools in the name of "diversity" and "inclusion". But following pressure from many quarters, these reforms are on hold.
At this stage there is no further need for Government to continue meddling in the curriculum of the Humanities. Till now, all the proposals made were for the worse and not for the improvement of our educational system. If the Education Ministry takes up the MUT proposal, (which I expect it will) to be in line with the present "Realpolitik" in Europe, the Ministry will only compound the mess of our present system. It seems that depriving our children of what worked so well only contribute to further deprive building and giving a solid backbone to our upcoming generation. More is the pity.