The battle of the uncomfortable books

The free textbooks (LTG) have become the ammunition that this week feeds the endless battle of disqualifications between the obradorismo and the opposition. As always, a dispute to the open grave, between good guys and villains, depending on how you look at it. For many citizens and parents this is not a problem. It is enough to believe the categorical and strident version that coincides with ours, and matter resolved.

But whoever, apart from insults and disqualifications, tries to form an opinion on the success or failure of free textbooks faces a complicated challenge. First, because there are 70 titles dedicated to different subjects, from primary to secondary; something that would prevent most readers (and I include myself), review a good number of them and confirm, for example, whether or not they inculcate Marxism, as their detractors claim and their defenders reject. And, on the other hand, it is clear that assessing some substantive criticisms that have been disclosed requires a minimum of pedagogical knowledge. This has not been a dent so that many of my colleagues dedicated to political analysis have decided, once and for all, that they are perverse instruments of indoctrination and condemn future generations to backwardness.

Those responsible for the LTG, on the other hand, defend their work arguing, among other things, that an attempt has been made to contextualize the materials with the world that the majority of the population actually lives in and to promote values ​​of solidarity and social awareness in our childhood. Some claim the loss of mathematical content and the damage that this will cause; Others respond that there is the mathematics that is needed, but now linked to a notion of others and not exclusively to a technocratic and individualist conception.

How to get an idea from the biased information that has been disseminated by both? The mass media have made a selection of examples of what could illustrate ideological biases or pedagogical inconsistencies. For his part, Marx Arriaga, head of the team that generated the books, exalted the participation of the experts and the years invested in their preparation. Do the quotes published out of context by the opponents justify a conclusive judgment regarding a work of more than 20 thousand pages? Or, on the other hand, should we assume as good the defense that the interested party makes of their work?

In theory, we would have to turn to specialists in the field to find out what is happening and not leave it to the reading of political columns, radio hosts and commentators and, of course, much less politicians and militants interested in mutual disqualification. .

Unfortunately, I found little benefit in exploring the versions disseminated by most of the educators who have entered the debate. Polarization has caught up with them. In part, the problem comes from the media themselves: it turns out that there are experts for the color that suits each one. Opposition media are looking for pedagogues contrary to the prevailing currents in the LTG; Pro-government media, on the contrary, consult and quote specialists favorable to their school of thought. Both justify their respective analysis with arguments and terms that transcend the common reader.

Unfortunately, I did not find, I am not saying that there are not, relatively independent attempts that have made the effort to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the current proposal, both in itself and with respect to previous LTGs. And I say the latter (evaluate it with respect to what was had before), because the exclusive hunting for defects of any version, current or previous, would end with an inevitable condemnation.

In the meantime, I can understand why pedagogues, regardless of their political passions, have reasons to be divided, even those who try to be relatively objective. Mexico is a complex and plural society that harbors contrasting visions, among other things, about the nature of the problems and how to solve them. It is understandable that we also have different approaches to the type of values ​​and priorities that we want to instill in our children. To mention one of the many dilemmas that this entails: fostering a culture of success or emphasizing a community identity? A mix? But in what proportion?

Of course the contents of these texts have pedagogical implications; the science of learning, so to speak, has logics that are not always evident, hence the need for pedagogues and professional teaching. That is, regardless of ideological emphasis, teaching books have to be “pedagogically” well done. In this sense, personally, I would continue to wait for the exposure of educated minds in this field, capable of making an effort to analyze the scope and limits of this proposal, beyond the interest of defending or attacking it.

In the meantime, however, I remain with the notion that by opting for an alternative of change like the obradorista, the majorities favored with their vote, and continue to do so, the attempt to build a country less subordinate to the market and a public life healthier for those who have less. That the educational contents of this project reflect these emphases should come as no surprise. The opposition rejects the new LTGs in advance because they contain an ideological conception, as if the previous versions did not also contain an ideological proposal. Faced with the bombardment of the market society and commercial advertising to which no child escapes, it seems to me that a compensation at school that emphasizes other values ​​constitutes a kind of balance. A neophyte opinion, I assume in advance.

The subject is another. On the one hand, respect for the technical aspects of learning that must be respected, regardless of the ideological emphasis. On the other, the recognition that we are a diverse society, and consequently the respect that must exist for other visions on the part of those responsible for a proposal that affects everyone. Beyond his capacity, one would have to wonder if it was necessary to leave a militant like Marx Arriaga as the spokesman and leader of this delicate task, something that, in my opinion, unnecessarily overpoliticized the disclosure of the contents; The decision to reserve information on how the books were made for five years does not help either; much less the inclusion of passages such as those denounced by the opposition press, according to which Eugenio Garza Sada, a business leader from Monterrey, was a detention and not an attempted kidnapping, and his death a loss of life and not a murder by the Communist League September 23. Something that seems more like an absurd and gratuitous provocation. I still think the new free textbooks deserve a deeper, more measured look than we’ve heard so far.

@jorgezepedap

Subscribe here to the EL PAÍS México newsletter and receive all the key information on current affairs in this country

Subscribe to continue reading

Read without limits

#battle #uncomfortable #books