Nicolas Bouzou is an economist and essayist. In particular, last September, he published
L'amour augmented, Nos enfants et nos amours au XXIe siècle
(editions de l'Observatoire.)
Many parents are rightly concerned about a provision in the bill against separatism.
The one which provides that, from the start of the 2021 school year, education will be compulsory from 3 years old, home instruction being limited to children suffering from health problems.
In fact, it is difficult to see the link that exists between the two subjects.
Read also:
Sexual freedom, PMA for all ... Will the 21st century kill love?
I have not seen any studies which showed that the 50,000 children (many of whom attend state-approved distance learning courses) who were educated at home showed particular signs of Islamist radicalization.
Conversely, in public school classes, the group effect can lead to a teacher who evokes secularism, gender equality or the Shoah being put in difficulty by several students who are likely to 'convince others.
Nothing shows that suppressing family education can be of any help in the fight against radical Islam.
Worse, such a ban poses two types of problem: a problem linked to the individual well-being of children;
a problem related to the overall performance of our school system.
Some children do not support groups, the eyes of others, school organization quite simply
Some children are simply not suited to the school system and it would be tragic to stigmatize them.
The National Education is a gigantic and highly centralized organization.
This is understandable as the French egalitarian promise is to provide all children with the same education.
Quite simply, some children do not support groups, the gaze of others, or simply school organization.
School phobia, it exists.
Is it too much to ask that to leave in place the loophole that allows you to learn at home for a while?
Should we also remember that, according to UNICEF, 700,000 students suffer from bullying in our country?
12% of primary school students!
Sometimes returning to the family, which mainly concerns the youngest pupils, is the solution.
The Government refers to a
necessary
"
socialization
" of children.
Read also:
Should we ban home schooling for all because of the excesses of some families?
Yet it seems to me that families know as well as the state the extent to which children need to be "
socialized
".
In addition, family education does not mean being locked into the family.
You can travel, discover the world, play sports or music, and make friendships elsewhere than within the strict school framework.
It is hard to understand why a liberal president accepts such statist arguments worthy of the left of the early 1980s.
A liberal president could also understand that competition allows the emergence of new educational practices, the dissemination of which can prove to be positive for society as a whole.
This is the reason why out-of-contract schools are so important.
The Government is entirely right to facilitate the closure of those who would place themselves at the service of radical Islam, just as it is right to want to better control family education.
Whether the programs and examinations are national does not pose a problem of principle.
That the school organization is organized is one
But, in educational matters, France would benefit from liberating rather than restricting.
This is what the United States did with chartered schools or the British with free schools (these free schools, founded by teachers or parents of students, which have great educational freedom).
Economists know that a monopolistic market increases costs and decreases the quantity and quality of services rendered.
Conversely, competition regulates costs, increases quantities and quality.
The school is no exception to this model.
Whether the programs and examinations are national does not pose a problem of principle.
That the school organization is it is one.
All the studies show that our school system is as egalitarian in words as it is in reality, that the level in French, mathematics and language is decreasing dangerously.
It is not a question of throwing a stone at the National Education, but of underlining that letting a little alternative formats emerge cannot hurt.
Read also:
These parents who want to continue school at home
The subject of academic freedom is epidermal in France.
Apart from the fact that the government strategy is fundamentally open to criticism, it is terribly lacking in political sense.
Why alienate families when our country is already suffering from multiple traumas?
Why make an implicit link between home education and religious radicalism that leads to terrorism?
By difficulty in attacking radical Islam with precision and efficiency, we penalize a large number of families who ask only to offer the best to their children. The Government must correct its poor copy.