Two pedagogical pitfalls to avoid regarding the Schools Decree

According to ministerial data for 2024–25 on state primary and secondary schools, there are said to be around 520,000 pupils of foreign origin. According to data from the ISMU Foundation, as reported by Corriere, there are 930,000 pupils with a ‘migrant background’. The figures are already proving difficult to reconcile. Furthermore, the definition of ‘foreigner’ used to calculate the ‘cap’ in schools is not unambiguous; the category may refer to a pupil who has just arrived in Italy and does not know the language, or to those born and educated in Italy. They should be counted in two different ways: ‘A passport distinguishes between nationalities, but educational needs do so far less’, as Professor Manasse writes. Then, amidst the usual furore of recent days, alongside the figures and specialist analyses, there are at least two ideological tics – more typical of left-wing pedagogism but not entirely absent from non-partisan populism either – that need to be debunked.

The issue of the ‘excessive’ number of foreign pupils in classes: setting aside xenophobic nonsense, the crux of the matter – which can be resolved without having to build ‘more school complexes’ – is the level of language proficiency. Unfortunately, even in upper secondary classes, pupils are often placed who lack sufficient language skills. With the absurd rhetoric that ‘they cannot be placed in different streams because that would be segregation’, all too often they end up sitting idle at their desks, without any support: this is the real racism. It would be enough simply to count how many there are and organise basic courses to bring them up to an adequate language level: after all, we do the same for Erasmus students.

Second propaganda myth: the veil, or rather even ‘the burqa’. The two must be distinguished, and it is not always true that a liberal state should ban a cultural – or even religious – symbol. But here too there is a harmful reverse rhetoric: those who argue (even educationalists!) that this would lead families (Muslim, but not only) to withdraw their children from compulsory schooling. Yet compulsory schooling is, by definition, compulsory. The state has both the power and the duty to ensure that non-compliant families (and anti-vaxxer families) fulfil their obligations.