This week we had the controversial decision of the Commissioner for Education within the Ombudsman's office. The Commissioner issued a recommendation claiming that the Foundation for Educational Services acted illegally when it refused to allow two children to leave the education centre early as requested by their foreign-national father, who, however failed to produce the pick-up card required for the release of children.
Upon the issue of the recommendation, the MUT expressed disagreement with the Commissioner and affirmed that the decision endangers children. I will not go into detail about this specific case but I will try to give an overview of the measures taken by schools and centres to protect all children.
Whilst the school day involves strict supervision measures by educators to ensure that all children are safe, the arrival and dismissal of students is a critical time for schools. During arrival, the responsibility of parents or guardians passes to educators who act in loco parentis for children. The student arrival in schools is a well thought-out process that includes structured supervision, designated routes and arrival areas.
A registration process ensures the timely logging of attendance followed by electronic measures to inform parents or guardians about children who do not turn up on the day. This process, which has been reviewed along the years, is not risk-free but it served us well with no major reported incidents. Parents and guardians know very well the process and have their mind at rest that their children are safe.
The dismissal process is more complicated. Educators need to ensure that children leave school with the 'authorised' adult. In the past, this process was fairly straightforward, especially when children attended school in the same locality and everyone knew each other. The same adult, often a grandmother, aunt, sibling, mother, guardian or even a neighbour was tasked with the collection of children from the school. Educators knew well the individual and they trusted the person, often without the need for any documentation, passes or verifications.
The situation changed drastically in recent years. With the participation of both parents in the labour market, the collection of children was often delegated to another adult, often a relative. Authorisations and identification measures became a requirement for the collection of children. Being a parent or a grandparent was not sufficient to collect children from schools. This was due to the increase in the number of broken families leading to custody issues between parents and court decrees giving the custody to one parent and not to the other.
Educators had to be extra cautious to follow such court decrees and to release the child only to the legally authorised parent. Difficulties in marriages gave rise to other situations, which affected schools. Partners of separated parents became involved in the collection of children. Educators had to ensure that a partner, who is not a relative of the child, is authorised to collect the child. Disputes in this process became common caused by rifts between parents and respective partners.
The dismissal of children from schools became more complicated with the influx of foreigners. Very often children start attending school when the school year has already started owing to the arrival of their family in Malta. Foreign children and parents or guardians coming from different school structures often take time to get accustomed to our school system. Language is very often a barrier in ensuring that instructions reach children and parents. Dismissal time is not just a bell at the end of the day, it's a critical part of school safety and student well-being. At times parents of foreign students send a colleague or a friend to collect their children from school owing to work commitments. Educators would not know the parents let alone the adult who shall collect the child so they need to ensure that there is authorisation.
A further complication to this dismissal structure - and this was central to the recommendation of the Commissioner for Education - is brought about by after school programmes, in this case Klabb 3-16. These centres operate in school premises but they are run by a separate team of educators. Educators at Klabb 3-16 are often not linked with the educators who provide teaching and learning in the morning in the same school. Furthermore, children attending Klabb 3-16 come from different schools and localities.
The Foundation for Educational Services which runs the service introduced protocols for the dismissal of students, owing to the situations described earlier and the experience gathered in the centres and in schools. The use of a pick-up card is mandatory for the collection of children from these centres. Those who use the services of Klabb 3-16 or who render services in these centres are well aware about it. Educators in these centres are directed to adhere strictly to this protocol and to request the pickup card before the release of children. Klabb 3-16 educators are using these protocols every day and the absence of incidents related to dismissal of students from these centres proves that the system works very well.
An attempt to dismantle the dismissal system by the Education Commissioner baffles all of us who work in the education sector. The dismissal system in place across schools and centres has protected children very well, at times even from their parents or abusing adults. A dismantling of the system, even at the recommendation stage, is a disservice to all children and a slap in the face to all educators and professionals who work tirelessly to protect children. Educators require support from all institutions including the Ombudsman's, and deserve a Commissioner for Education who is grounded in the educational sector.
Marco Bonnici is President of the Malta Union of Teachers