Bernard Toulemonde, former rector and ex-member of several socialist ministerial cabinets, is a connoisseur of the education system, known for his frankness. The co-author of the book What if we killed the mammoth? The keys to (really) renovating National Education (editions de L’Aube, 2017) welcomes certain positions taken by Emmanuel Macron exposed in a major interview at the Point, on August 23. For the senior civil servant, it is necessary to consolidate fundamental knowledge and restore the authority of teachers at a time when the educational level of students continues to decline, while inequalities are worsening. Refocus moral and civic education on democratic values? “An equally essential task but unfortunately extremely complex and delicate since these values no longer have a consensus,” he sighs. Bring the most struggling students back to class before the official start of the school year, from August 20? “A great idea,” he says. This does not prevent him from expressing reservations about certain shortcuts taken by the Head of State.
The Express: In Point, Emmanuel Macron spoke at length on education. Did that surprise you?
Bernard Toulemonde: No, because President Emmanuel Macron is present everywhere, on all subjects and in particular on education, as we have seen again recently during his trip to Marseille. And then no one is unaware that the previous minister Pap Ndiaye was already very much under his thumb. Such an involvement does not seem to me to be completely new since, in the past, several Prime Ministers or Presidents of the Republic had also expressed their very fixed ideas on the school. This goes back a long way, but General de Gaulle had worked to extend schooling to 16 years so that young people are better trained when they enter the labor market. Georges Pompidou, who was an associate of letters, had meanwhile intervened on questions of student orientation. Finally, François Mitterrand had taken a position during the debate on private education in order to close the file. He had also asked that we reinstate the mentions in the baccalaureate when these had been removed by his Minister of National Education Alain Savary. So all this is nothing new. The only notable change is the fact that Emmanuel Macron presents a global school renovation project. Times have changed, the educational institution has deteriorated sharply in recent years, so it is not surprising that the President of the Republic is involved in this absolutely essential area.
The president affirms that “on the school, we must get out of French hypocrisies”. Do you agree with him?
Of course. There is so much hypocrisy! The most blatant being that of the baccalaureate which today has become an absolute sieve. Many higher education teachers complain of seeing students arrive, in the first year of law, for example, who make spelling mistakes on every line. Everyone is well aware of the degradation of the system but, at the same time, many do not necessarily dare to emphasize it for fear of offending the teaching staff. I am also surprised to see that some people wince when we talk about the return to basics, which must nevertheless be made a priority. The other great hypocrisy is the automatic passage and without the slightest barrier of all students from CM2 to 6th. This is why many find themselves in failure. Middle school teachers do what they can, but how do you deal with young people who have a very poor command of the French language? Not to mention mathematics, modern languages, but also history on which the head of state has placed a lot of emphasis.
Precisely, concerning history, the Head of State declared that it was necessary to return to a chronological teaching. However, teachers remind us that this is already the case…
Yes, the formula is a little brutal because, in reality, the chronological order is widely applied in the programs even if certain subjects still need to be approached thematically. The balance seems more or less respected since today we have a mixture of the two approaches. What poses more of a problem – but the teachers are not responsible for it – is the fact that we put much less emphasis on the great figures of history and the significant events that have made France stand out. I explain this by the current lack of national consensus on the value of history in the intellectual and cultural construction of our country. Finally, Emmanuel Macron also insisted on the necessary reform of moral and civic education (EMC) which, alas, is a perpetual renunciation. In 1984, Jean-Pierre Chevènement, who was then Minister of National Education, had tried to restore the republican school and, consequently, to promote civic education, but we saw that it did not go well with the teachers.
For what reasons ?
We first come up against a practical problem: those who are mainly in charge of the EMC are history and geography teachers. However, the latter tend to devote these hours of class to their other subjects. The other problematic factor concerns the content of moral and civic education, which is mainly approached in a technical and “administrative-political” way. The focus will be more on the functioning of municipalities, departments or elections than on the “values” that Emmanuel Macron spoke about. The concern is that these values have disintegrated over time. We live in an “archipelago society”, to use the words of Jérôme Fourquet, where there are no longer uncontested values. Let’s take the example of violence: when I was a child, we were obviously taught that you should never raise your hand against anyone. Today, how can this value be transmitted to children when television and political speeches say the opposite? While parliamentarians, themselves, advocate violent actions? I am also thinking of the value of work which, in our society rather focused on holidays or leisure, is contested by part of the political class but also by part of the parents and therefore of the students. We also know that respect for another value, secularism, cost Samuel Paty dearly because, here again, there is no longer any consensus. It is very complicated for teachers who are still attached to it to hold on.
“Today, it is up to the teacher to build his authority”
Emmanuel Macron insists on “the authority of the masters”. Do you think, like him, that this should be a priority?
Yes, the Head of State also speaks of “the authority of knowledge” which seems extremely important to me because, here again, this principle has crumbled over the years. In the past, professors dispensed their knowledge from the top of their chairs and were perceived as the bearers of a truth that everyone accepted. Today, it no longer works like that since authority is a construct. In other words, it is not because the teacher arrives in a class that the students will immediately shut up. It is up to him to build his authority, to ensure that he is respected and listened to even though he has not been taught this. Some do it very well, for others it is more difficult.
“We have a generation, even several, who unfortunately have somewhat lost their bearings because of a pedagogism which said, basically, that the school should no longer transmit”: what does this statement inspire in you?
This is a very old debate. Personally, I never really understood what was put behind the word “pedagogism”. In political language, it is sometimes opposed to authority, which does not necessarily seem judicious to me. That we ask a teacher to show pedagogy, that is to say to transmit his knowledge as well as possible, is rather something positive, which must be encouraged. Moreover, being a good pedagogue can help strengthen authority since this is how we obtain the confidence and support of students. Afterwards, it is necessary to recognize the existence of certain possible excesses of pedagogism, in particular when this idea goes hand in hand with a certain laxity on the results. I’m thinking of those who imply that “you shouldn’t ask too much of students from difficult neighborhoods or poor families so as not to upset them more”. It’s a stupid pedagogism that does a disservice to these children.
Among the projects announced, there is also this desire to bring the students most in difficulty back to school from August 20. Which sparked an outcry…
Experiments of this type already exist, such as the Open School system set up during school holidays in priority neighborhoods and which deserves to be encouraged. This is all going in the right direction. What strikes me is the reaction of certain majority unions who cry out loud when we talk about reopening establishments from August 20 to help the students most in difficulty academically. For them, asking these children to shorten their holidays would be a form of “stigmatization”. As if the fact that volunteer teachers agree to welcome them for a week or a fortnight before the start of the school year was not a positive gesture towards them! The whole thing being to present it to the students and not as a punishment. The fact of having less in class would allow them to have more available teachers, to mix learning with more playful practices. It is an excellent idea. That teachers, who often call themselves left-wingers, reject this kind of attempt to reduce inequalities outright saddens me. I find that pathetic! But to speak only of the month of August would be to ignore all school days. However, we know today that the students’ days are far too full. The current rhythm should be reviewed and the daily hourly rate lowered, in particular by moving to a 4.5-day week in primary school. Unfortunately, neither the municipalities, nor the teachers, nor the parents of pupils are in favor of it. We remember that Vincent Peillon’s attempt ultimately ended in failure.
Do you think Gabriel Attal is sufficiently armed for the task ahead?
We do not ask the ministers who succeed one another on rue de Grenelle to be specialists in education, the important thing is that they know how to surround themselves with good advisers. What is expected of them above all? Let them play politics, show themselves to be attentive, skilful and know how to feel things, but also let them have a long arm to obtain the necessary credits for their projects. I think Gabriel Attal has all these qualities, the future will tell us if he will make a good Minister of Education.