The most useful by-product of the unfortunate saga of the teachers’ strike has been a revival of the debate about the quality of education in Bulgaria.
Prime Minister Sergei Stanishev and his education and finance ministers, as well as other voices, have been correct to make the point that the question of salary increases cannot be discussed in isolation from the questions of whether staffing numbers in the education system, and the quality of education, are appropriate.
Those who have taken a long hard look at the education system have come to the conclusion that it is like the curate’s egg – good in parts. The issues are profound, because not only are some schools, and for that matter universities, better than others, but there are serious issues of some schools facing issues of discipline, drug and alcohol usage, and inadequate resources.
For Bulgaria to be competitive, all of its places of learning need to be places of the best quality education, free of negative influences, and in the words that have been used in Government circles by those with a vision for education, with a computer on every desk.
The Government has admitted that teachers are not adequately paid. This is an important part of the problem, but not one that will be solved by simply throwing money at everyone. This would be tantamount to throwing good money at the good and the bad.
Further, at the recent government-business meeting, the point was made that the staff complement of teachers in Bulgaria will become increasingly out of kilter with actual population numbers. This is why Government figures are correct in saying that consideration will have to be given to staff reductions. This seems a suitable opportunity for a review and audit of the skills and qualities of teachers, with a view to cutting out the deadwood. It would seem a worthwhile suggestion that a one-off voluntary retrenchment scheme, while it may have a short-term substantial impact on the fiscus, would pay off in the long-term. However, it may be added that such an exercise should be conducted in such a way as to ensure that good teachers do not quit the system.
Once the strike is over and some form of compromise has been reached, and it is to be hoped that this point is reached sooner rather than later, momentum should not be lost. The Education Ministry should proceed immediately to coming up with a review process examining the quality of education at individual schools and inspecting, preferably in situ, the work of individual teachers and headmasters. At the same time, a professional review should be done of the resources available at schools and the deficit in meeting the needs of each school. This needs to be followed through with an immediate and determined process of rationalisation. As part of this process, the notion that has gained currency of encouraging expatriate Bulgarians to return should be extended to include recruitment of well-qualified people to assist the education system. The financial resources, scarce as they may be, that will be freed up should be used to improve the financial packages of teachers and to improve the resources available to individual schools.
Naturally, this process will not be easy. A further reason to proceed swiftly with it is to conduct it well away from the period of a run-up to an election, to minimise the unhelpful distraction of the process being warped by partisan political considerations.
In the end, if handled objectively, professionally and with firm determination, carrying out the reform of the education system that the Government appears to want will make Bulgaria stronger and more competitive. It comes down to a question of quality.
