As regards teaching, which is something that we’re also very concerned about—we’re not the kind to point fingers, but rather we believe that certain things should be done jointly, you know? That solutions must be reached jointly by the primary and secondary levels, with greater articulation. Because there are several deficits in the students entering the first year, and we understand what happens in primary school, but we need to be able to work in a more articulated way with them.
So we… we reflect a lot about primary school, we encourage our teachers to teach applying the perspective of primary school teachers regarding certain matters related to the pedagogical look, so they don’t see contents as isolated, as fragmented, so we can teach in a much more comprehensive way through projects and responding to our students’ interests, taking into account their context and how we can intervene.
In this sense, we consider the current texts that the syllabus design makes available to us, with the authors’ look. Like I said at the beginning of my previous answer, we try to tell teachers to get training and go to certain places that we believe are important and necessary in order to read and to put together a way of teaching. I can only speak for myself, but I mean, we believe that education is not isolated from anything; therefore politics are present in education and we want teachers that have, say, a political look and understand that when they teach a class they’re positioned in a certain political place and that they shouldn’t teach in a naive way, believing that theoretically, what they’re teaching is something, say, pure and apolitical, but rather that, regardless of the teacher’s personal views, he or she should understand the authors’ views, and be aware of them. Teachers shouldn’t teach a class believing that they are just following the syllabus design.