This week the bill that sought to establish education as a fundamental right sank. He just missed a last debate in the Senate to be approved, but the polarization and the lack of consensus in the corporation sentenced the initiative not to be scheduled during the last week of the legislature and, therefore, to be archived.
According to the criteria of
All this, despite the fact that the first three debates, although slow, were successful, and achieved unanimous support in each of them. But, precisely, the way in which this majority support was achieved in the third debate in the First Committee of the Senate was what ended up dooming the future of the project.
And to do this, the Government and the opposition bench (led by Radical Change senator David Luna) reached an agreement after tense days of deliberation, after which an amendment was constructed that was finally approved by congressmen.
The modifications in the text were not well received by pro-government sectors and by the Colombian Federation of Education Workers (Fecode), which immediately went on an indefinite national strike to demand that the initiative be dropped, arguing that what was agreed upon “ “it blurred the essence of the fundamental right to education.”
There were several points of disagreement that led to three different presentations for the last debate, all of them with significant differences in specific articles, and none of them managed to be debated in the Senate plenary.
Among the points of disagreement are the conception of teaching evaluation, in which the opposition insisted that the results of the Saber 11 tests be considered as an indicator when rating teachers’ performance. Nor was there a consensus on whether to recognize tertiary education (training for work and human development, courses and knowledge updates) as a fundamental right.
Another controversial aspect was the creation of mechanisms for democratic and direct election in universities.
But the point that was definitive in breaking the agreement was the role of private education and the mixed system, against which the opposition raised the possibility of receiving resources from the State, opening the possibility to the so-called ‘ school vouchers’, as well as financing private universities.
With the initiative already sunk, the Minister of Education, Aurora Vergara Figueroa, maintains that this was necessary to generate transformations in the system, which is why the Government hopes to present this and other bills for the next legislature.
For his part, Luna defended the changes initially agreed upon between the parties and pointed out that “the opportunity to build a national agreement was lost.”
Quality education: a legacy of social justice
As a woman who grew up in the department of Chocó, I have learned to see opportunities in the midst of difficulties. We closed the legislature with a shelved statutory education bill.
Despite what happened, today we see a great opportunity for a sector that put education at the center of the national debate, demonstrating that it is the basis not only of the economy, but of society and democracy. In this column I share some lessons from this moment.
Colombia chose the path of education as a fundamental right in the 1991 Constitution and, four years later, endorsed it in Law 115 of 1994, which in its article 9 defined that it is the duty of the State to regulate this right through a statutory law. Since then, this promise has been pending.
The Minister of Education, Aurora Vergara.
Photo:Nestor Gomez. TIME
With this purpose, in 2023 we began to write a new chapter in the history of education, to which more than 53,000 people from all over the country joined: students, teachers, associations, businessmen, unions and congressmen, in more than 100 assemblies that They allowed diverse perspectives and visions to be included.
This exercise of participation and social mobilization revealed that, even in the midst of differences, we agree on the essentials: education cannot continue to be a privilege and it is the duty of the State to guarantee it at all levels and for diverse populations.
Achieving sustainable change in education requires laws built with great consensus, in which the courage of social dialogue is demonstrated. It is clear that we must continue creating spaces to reach a national agreement that prioritizes the 2,099,940 boys, girls and adolescents who today are outside the educational system and who are in the most vulnerable regions affected by the conflict, as well as the 2 million young people, between 17 and 21 years old, who have not had the opportunity to access higher education.
The Government of Change, as stated by the President of the Republic, Gustavo Petro Urrego, will continue to strengthen public education as the great key to social justice and equity. In these months of government we have managed to reduce the dropout rate in official educational institutions, going from 4.3 percent in 2022 to 3.93 percent in 2023 and consolidating the commitment to quality education through comprehensive training.
We are advancing in the financial strengthening of public Higher Education Institutions, going from a CPI+4.65 in 2022 to a CPI+9 in 2024, which amounts to 421,000 million pesos for their budget bases, an emblematic leap that allows closing gaps in access throughout the national territory. Thanks to these measures, today we registered 64,729 new spaces in the system and we see an increase of two percentage points in the coverage rate in higher educationwhich went from 53.84 to 55.4 percent in the same period.
With these lessons and achievements, it is time to take a firm step and consolidate the opportunities that arise from this situation to transform the educational system. We will materialize this purpose by presenting to Congress in its next legislature a new version of the statutory bill, in addition to the reform of the General Participation System, the Ethnoeducator Teaching Statute, the Icetex reform and the new Higher Education Law, essential initiatives to consolidate a legacy of social justice.
By: Aurora Vergara, Minister of Education
What happened to the education reform?
In the Senate we reached an agreement with the Minister of Education, the senators of the Historical Pact and other parties. However, given the uprising of Fecode, the Government scrapped the agreement that had been signed and voted unanimously in the third debate, presenting a completely different text for the last debate.
The President lost the opportunity to build the national agreement that he talks so much about and invites so much, preferring comply with Fecode, who financed his campaign. The Government did not hesitate to hold the opposition responsible and in lying to the unions. What did the agreement say? Did you privatize education? So, the President endorsed privatization and then backed down?
The agreement protected the mixed system. I am convinced of the need to financially strengthen and modernize public education, but this does not mean destroying private education. The role of individuals is important, since they offer high-quality education to 43 percent of those enrolled in undergraduate courses and 72 percent in postgraduate courses.
Young people choose these institutions thanks to their quality, scholarships, credits and subsidies, options that we could not deny them. Public education does not meet all demand, and we could not limit the freedom of choice of young people. Freedom should never be curtailed, and should be a principle that guides the designs of any law on education.
Second, the Government ignored future-oriented education. The emphasis on technology, job training and languages was zero. By 2030, 80 percent of jobs will require skills in science, technology, engineering and mathematics. Today, 2.9 million young Colombians do not study or work due to a lack of adequate skills and work-relevant programs. For this reason, we sought to strengthen tertiary, technical and technological education.
David Luna, senator for the Radical Change party.
Photo:Screenshot
In the OECD, these programs represent 70 percent of enrollment, while in Colombia only 28 percent. The agreement strengthened the Professional and Technological Technical Institutions and the Sena. In front of the Seine, we never wanted to finish it. We listened to all your concerns and even included a new article that guaranteed your autonomy and protected your financing.
Third, the original text undermined university autonomy with mechanisms for electing rectors that opened the door to government influence, as occurred at the National University. The appointment of interim rectors should not become a landscape; each institution must protect itself from government interference, something that the agreement guaranteed.
Fourth, we ensured guarantees for educational quality. Colombia ranked 58th out of 81 countries in the Pisa Tests, and only 14 percent of universities have high-quality accreditation. The agreement promoted rigorous and equitable evaluation.
We proposed that student performance be one of the criteria for evaluating teachers, but we never proposed that it be the only one. Besides, we stipulated that the particular contexts of certain schools were to be evaluated against their peers.
The evaluation allowed teachers who fulfilled their job to have an additional criterion for promotion. Today teachers cannot advance quickly thanks to their skills; our agreement allowed it. The evaluation rewarded teaching talent. Could it be that all teachers think the same as the Fecode directors?
In summary, the agreement sought to avoid dangers and promote quality education oriented to the future, respecting the diversity of educational institutions and the needs of the country.
Fecode was opposed, but they do not represent all teachers. It is a pity how his management dedicated themselves to negotiating with the Government instead of ensuring the educational transformations that Colombia awaits.
For my part, I will continue working so that Colombians have access to quality education, where everyone fits regardless of their ideology. Instead of returning to obsolete discourses, it is time to open education to new ideas. Education is not for a union, it is for young people. Education is for the future, not for the past.
By: David Luna, senator of Cambio Radical
