The school Olympics are at the center of a debate that raises questions about the future of these competitions. The National Council of Students asks the Ministry of Education for urgent reform measures, after a series of notifications regarding the lack of transparency and unclear evaluation procedures. In parallel, professor Doru Căstăian comes with a different perspective and proposes a deeper discussion: about the purpose and function of the Olympics.
The National Socio-Human Sciences Olympiad, the point from which the debates started
It all started from the notifications made by students and teachers after the National Socio-Human Sciences Olympiad held in Iași. Several participants complained about irregularities in the evaluation process, the lack of clear explanations for scores and difficulties in exercising the right to appeal. Out of almost 400 participants in all disciplines of the Olympiad (Economy, Sociology, Philosophy, Psychology, Social Education, Logic), 89 filed appeals. Only one was admitted: in Sociology.
Students also talked about tense experiences during the test itself, including inappropriate attitudes from members of the evaluation committee. “Read your paper again to see what aberrations you have written”a teacher would have said to a student who later obtained 9.20 and mention in the country, Edupedu says.
At the same time, the regulation was also interpreted differently, depending on the supervising teachers. In the Social Education discipline, the specific regulation of the national olympiad stipulates that the members of a team (consisting of two students) can collaborate throughout the allotted time, but does not specify whether both members can write on the paper. The result? Different halls, different rules. Some were told that both students in the team were allowed to write, others that only one. Students with longer papers also scored higher.
After the Olympics, several complaints were submitted to the Ministry of Education.
National Student Council: “The Olympics risk punishing the very students they claim to celebrate”
In an extensive statement, the National Council of Students formulates one of the harshest criticisms of recent years regarding the way of organizing school competitions of this kind.
The Olympics should be spaces of meritocracy, rigor and fair competition. Instead, this year, the public space was crossed by too many examples that show the exact opposite: rules perceived as unclear or changed on the fly, appeal procedures that raise questions, but also attitudes that have no place in an educational setting. When students end up asking themselves not where they went wrong, but by what rules they are evaluated, it is clear that we are dealing with a system-wide problem
draw the attention of the student representatives. They also bring up a double standard in terms of standards:
All these situations should not be seen as pretexts to discredit the idea of the Olympics, but as serious reasons to defend it from improvisation and abuse. The problem is not the existence of high standards. The problem is that, too often, the standards seem to be demanded exclusively of students, while those who organize, evaluate and coordinate are allowed ambiguity, lack of explanation and sometimes even disrespect.
The five requests to the Ministry of Education
At the same time, the representatives of the National Council of Students point out the fact that the Ministry of Education, under whose aegis all state-funded school competitions are organized, “cannot remain in the role of spectator of these slips”. And they demand the implementation of several measures that they consider essential for restoring confidence in the system:
- Early publication of the calendar and specific regulations. “In order to ensure predictability and a clear framework for conducting competitions, the calendar of stages and the regulations related to each discipline must be published well in advance, so that students and coordinating teachers are not faced with late communicated information.”
- Transparency of the composition of central commissions. ,,In order to strengthen confidence in the correctness of the evaluation process, it is necessary to publish the composition of the central commissions, as well as to assume clear criteria for the selection of their members, which respect standards of competence, integrity and impartiality.”
- Ensuring the possibility of viewing the work together with the evaluation slip, before submitting the appeal. “In order for the right to appeal to be exercised in a real and informed way, it is necessary to modify the Methodological Norms and the specific regulations of the school olympiads, so that students can consult, before the deadline for submitting appeals, not only the paper, but also the related correction slip. Only in this way can each student clearly understand where and for what he was de-pointed, being able to decide in an informed manner whether or not to file an appeal.”
- Full and consistent display of results, before the deadline for appeals. ,,Students must have access to all results relevant to the final ranking before deciding whether or not to appeal. Any other practice affects the fairness of the competition and makes it impossible for students to make an informed decision.”
- Prohibition and firm sanctioning of offensive, humiliating or intimidating language towards students. “No amount of academic excellence can justify abusive behavior. The Ministry of Education and Research has the obligation to clearly convey that slippages of this type are incompatible with the values of education and must be promptly sanctioned, regardless of the position or prestige of the person who manifests them.”
Where the rules become unclear, and respect for the student disappears, excellence risks remaining just another beautiful word in official speeches”, emphasizes the representative forum of students.
Doru Căstăian: “Superhuman efforts do not flow into anything wider”
If the students come up with demands, Social Sciences teacher Doru Căstăian brings up the very meaning of these competitions, in a critical post.
“I think it would be worth starting a broader meditation on the purpose and systemic function of the Olympics, it would perhaps be more useful than the cartography of a single problematic national Olympics. Historically, the Olympiads are part of an ancient tradition of vertical efforts, with a terminological, but also broadly cultural, reference to Antiquity and the ethics of virtues. They are contests to select the best of the best. From here, the idea of excellence, which of course refers to the ancient arete, to the perfection always aimed at, always postponed, always to be conquered. But, in the ancient sense and not only, excellence is never only dexterity, exceptional technical ability. Technical performance is only meaningful if it comes from a cultural and educational ideal, that is, human, in the best sense of the term. It also comes with very high costs.
New rules for school olympiads: digitized papers and access for hospitalized students. The rules, published in the Official Gazette
The unreasonable effort, the imposed obtuseness of the view, the narrowness of interests, the monodirectionality of resources only make sense if they are done in the name of genuine values and a wider ideal in which the whole community can be recognized. With a recent comparison at hand, the Artemis program makes sense only to the extent that confinements, effort, privations redeem a result that is not self-referential, but inspires an entire humanity and brings out, through an exceptional achievement, what is best in all human natureeh,” the teacher wrote in a Facebook post.
In his view, in the case of Olympiads and school competitions, the effort does not lead to the fulfillment of such ideals:
“Superhuman efforts and self-transcendence do not flow into anything wider because they have nothing to flow into. Inspirational examples do not irrigate anything systemic because the system is often an axiological desert. What could be inspiring work becomes a mechanical, blind, Kafkaesque process. And when that happens, the Olympics become something dystopian.”
From the teacher’s point of view, there is also a structural break between top performance and the rest of the education system:
Not infrequently, in its current form, it works directly against the declared educational ideal of the Romanian school. Many times, excellence measured only in awards is done against and by using the excellence of character, natural relationships, ethical consistency. Not infrequently, the prizes are taken by massively ignoring the many, by marginalizing them technically and by value, by brutally breaking the Olympian, whose performance is supported on countless levels, by the internal logic of the system. With the absolute marginals of the system, things are even worse.
In the same post, Doru Căstăian also came with a disclaimer:
“I wouldn’t want to be misunderstood. I’ve known enough Olympians (I’ve had a few national Olympians myself) and enough Olympian teachers. Among them are admirable students, admirable teachers, who sometimes build extraordinary relationships, based on mutual respect and shared passion. I also met admirable inspectors, who go out of their way to help those involved in the competition as best they can. Systemically, however, the Olympics rather fuel (since they indirectly validate it) a sad state of affairs and an opaque stagnation, successes are self-referential, confirming to all anxious parties (children, parents, teachers) that they are doing their job well”.
The ingredients of public school achievement. “The kids think they’re going to lose a lot of motivation”
The debate remains open
Instead of a conclusion, the Social Sciences teacher wants the topic to be put on the public agenda and debated.
“The Olympics and what they bring, both good and bad, should at some point be the subject of serious public reflection. A first step could be the presentation of a public apology for what happened in Iaşi, ordering the urgent correction of theses, according to transparent and scientifically valid criteria. After that, it would logically follow the initiation of a public debate regarding the role and function of these contests, as well as the pedagogical and moral costs of the exclusive definition of excellence in this way”wrote Doru Căstăian.
