An eminent colleague, a professor of ancient history, published an article in this journal in which he openly questions the value of pedagogy. After a series of erroneous statements in my opinion, he concludes his argument with a brutal sentence: “no pedagogue is a teacher”. Well, I present myself here as a colleague, pedagogue and teacher, willing to provide a response to writing.
This article is a perfect example of the survivor bias that affects some nostalgic teachers. For them, the school past is a sort of didactic paradise in which everything worked perfectly: the students learned without difficulty, the teachers were incontestably respected and the teaching methods were infallible. But they quickly forgot the high school dropout rate observed in the 1970s and 1980s, and the fact that many students left their studies without having acquired basic training, in an otherwise undiversified context. To give an example, 35% of girls had not completed primary education in 1970 and in the 1990s only about 11.84% of the population had secondary education and 8.5% had tertiary education.
We quickly forget that education is a right of the people and not a privilege of a few. It would be interesting for us to try to avoid unfounded idealizations based on our experience and to work towards a more inclusive and effective education system, which learns from past mistakes instead of idealizing them.
What fascinates me in this article is the designation of pedagogues as an abstract entity (“they design the study plans”). I understand that it is convenient to blame educationalists for current educational problems, instead of recognizing the didactic immobility in which some have been installed for years. However, educational reforms were not carried out by the group of educationists. The reality is a little sadder: we educators have been largely ignored in decision-making about the education system.
Thus, this evil entity of pedagogues is in reality a diverse professional group that attempts to improve the daily life of education from different contexts. In fact, pedagogy addresses a very broad professional field which is not only dedicated to formal education. Therefore, the statements made about pedagogues, as an evil group, can only come from the great lack of knowledge about what pedagogy is, which is worrying in a teacher.
The author states that “teaching methods don’t work”. It’s like saying medications don’t work. This is a simplistic generalization that ignores the diversity and constant evolution of educational practices, as well as their scientific basis. One may question a certain teaching method or an empty didactic innovation, but it is essential to understand that the teaching-learning process is a complex communication process, in which various methods and resources are used. The educational process itself cannot be separated from a teaching method. It is precisely for this reason that it is important that a teacher not only masters the contents he teaches, but also learns pedagogy, so as to develop critical thinking for professional practice, which allows adequate support for decision-making.
The jargon he refers to (“terms like skills and rubrics”) are fundamental aspects of the educational program that, as teaching professionals, we should all know and know how to use. Ignoring them shows a lack of professional updating and a possible lack of interest in the teaching profession. It is disconcerting and worrying to have to remind a teacher of the importance of being trained in education.
The venerable blackboard that we talk about and which is so missed is still present in classrooms. Whether chalk or digital, unfortunately it is often used in the same way it was 50 years ago. This shows a notable resistance to change and lack of integration of different teaching strategies. Technology has advanced immensely, providing us with interactive tools and innovative educational resources that can enrich the teaching-learning process. However, digital textbooks have been incorporated to do the same thing as printed textbooks, and digital whiteboards are used as simple chalk boards or projection canvases. This is a didactic and not a technological problem. And above all, this is not the responsibility of educators, who are generally not taken into account in political decisions related to educational projects and plans.
The previous eras that we have romanticized will not return. The advancement of society and the complexity of today’s world require well-founded educational strategies that encourage critical thinking and the development of professional skills (yes, skills). Knowing pedagogy is essential for a teacher. It’s not even something I say, it’s something you learn when you want to know more about educational science and study Dewey, Freire or Freinet. We can even find national references in this sense. Carmen Conde, promoter of educational renewal movements and first woman of the Spanish Royal Academy, wrote in 1931 a critique of memorism and repeating dolls without any real educational substance. It is curious that in 2024 we are still questioning the importance of pedagogy and knowing how to adapt school to the demands of the society in which we must live. And no, a current pedagogue is not what he was in ancient Greece. Neither do other professions. The world today is not that of ancient Greece. We must certainly learn lessons from the past, but above all we start from the principle that as educators, our responsibility is to train citizens capable of facing the challenges of their time.
