There is still chaos over the competition for teachers. After the maxi dossier on the errors (and horrors) of the quizzes delivered to the undersecretary of the Ministry of Education, Paola Frinetti – who is having the document examined – some members of commissions who would have been in charge of formulating or helping to formulate the quizzes without meeting the required requirements. This would appear from the documents analyzed by dozens of professors who have been seeking justice on the competition for months.
So another storm on the quizzone which in March of last year shattered the dream of a professorship for thousands of candidates with often ill-posed, ambiguous questions and answers in many cases incorrect, if not downright wrong.
From non-existent geometric figures to wrong theories: the maxi dossier on the mistakes of the competition for teachers
The written tests (computer based) with closed answers of the last ordinary school competition for the competition cl A057 (Clical Dance Technique), relating to upper secondary school, were drawn up as required by the rules, by a national commission identified by two departmental decrees.
«The presidents of the judging commissions of the competitions for access to the roles of the competition cles A57-Clical dance technique, A58-Contemporary dance technique and A59-Dance accompaniment techniques and theories, musical practice for dance – specifies the team of teachers and ex-candidates led by the linguist Mimo Arcangeli, professor at the University of Cagliari – are chosen from among the school directors of the institutes where a musical and dance high school course with a dance focus is activated, or among the professors of the National Academy of Dance. The members of the commission are chosen from among the teachers of the dance academies at the lyric-symphonic foundations, or from among the artistic directors of the respective corps de ballet».
At the heart of the dispute a national commission of experts, which is responsible for defining the traces of the written tests and the relative evaluation grids, as well as the validation of the questions of the possible pre-selective test, is composed by choosing between level I or II university professors, permanent or fixed-term researchers, research fellows of research, teachers of higher artistic, musical and dance training institutions, technical managers, school managers, tenured teachers of lower secondary schools. The competition commissions are established by decree of the Director General of the Regional School Office responsible for the procedure and include teachers who aspire to be appointed as members of the selection boards of the competitions referred to in this decree for common and support posts must be teachers confirmed in tenure, with at least five years of seniority in the role, holders of the teachings to which the competition refers. In case of entry through the rankings, they must be suitable for the specific ordinary competition or have obtained the teaching qualification through the graduate schools for secondary education or similar courses in the AFAM sector, who must belong to the disciplinary academic sector consistent with the competition cl and have served in the role for at least five years. The ministry replied that “from the query carried out through SIDI on the personal position of the three teachers, members of the National Commission, it emerged that they were placed in the role starting from 1 September 2021, following the ping of the extraordinary competition”. Hence the rejoinder of the team of teachers who are highlighting all the anomalies of the competition. “Teachers of state educational institutions who aspire to be appointed as members of the selection boards of the competitions must be teachers confirmed in the role, with at least five years of seniority in the role, holders of the teachings to which the competition refers”. When the three were nominated commissioners we are talking about? It is obvious that they were appointed after 5 January 2022″.
The irregularities and the answers of the Miur
“By scrolling through the names listed in the deed – reads the document sent to the Miur – it turns out, for now for the A057 competition cl, that three components (a coordinator and two members) they weren’t even confirmed in the role at the time (their probationary year had started from 1 September 2021), as required by the competition requirements, nor does it appear that they were university professors, permanent or fixed-term researchers, research fellows, contract professors with at least three years of teaching experience in the disciplinary scientific or academic sectors characterizing the distinct competition cles”. To corroborate this complaint, dozens of reports and the unavailability of documents explaining why recourse was made to commission members with fewer requirements than those requested, a sort of derogation which no one currently has.
These three commission members – but as mentioned, others are emerging – they would also be enrolled in the same competition ordinary for which they were called to draw up the quizzes, but according to the responses of the ministry they would not show up at rehearsals.
To complete the chaos, numerous errors in the same competition cl in the crosshairs, made up of 50 closed-answer quizzes, the subject of well you are corrections of the Ministry of Education, in July 2022.
«A double correct answer (instead of just one) was attributed to 5 questions and the right answer was simply recognized (with a consequent deduction of two points for those who had answered according to ministerial indications) for a sixth question. An evident discretion in the work of the administration, which should instead have canceled all 6 questions recognized as erroneous », the document sent to the Ministry of Education specifies.
The ministry then replied that “questions 17, 22, 25 30, 38 were canceled because they contained two correct answers and consequently awarded two points to those who had selected the two answers considered correct and left the award of 0 unchanged points for the remaining answer options or in case of an incorrect answer. For question no. 24 because it contained option B) instead of A) as the correct answer, two points were consequently igned to those who answered correctly by selecting answer B) and two points were subtracted from those who chose letter A) and the score was left unchanged for the remaining options”.
The odyssey of the professors mocked after hiring: “Our contract revoked for the errors of the ministry”
Problem solved? Not exactly. «It is surprising that the ministry cannot distinguish the cancellation of a question from its correction, explains Professor Mimo Arcangeli, spokesman for the mocked teachers and head of the team that drafted the dossier with the errors in the quiz -. “Cancel” means, legally, to declare totally ineffective or invalid. Leaving 0 for those who answer a question with two correct answers by opting for one of the two remaining answers does not mean canceling the question but correcting it».