A school without mistakes? 8 out of 10 teachers do not like it: it is from failure that you learn the most – SURVEY RESULTS

That says eight out of ten teachers Yes for rejection. Nearly 9, in fact 86.6% of those interviewed. An overwhelming majority. And the same goes for parents; numbers that fall for students, of which 6 out of 10 are in favor of rejection. vote of School Technology, to which they replied 893 readers (of which 84.5% teachers).

As for the origin of the questions, we register a greater interest from Northern Italy, which represents about half of all respondents.


On the school grade front, the survey seems to be more “felt” in high school; probably why in high school, the problem of failing numerically becomes more revealing.

Readers’ answers

But the most interesting answers come from open questionwhere we asked our readers if in their view it is possible school without error. As often happens, the issue seems divisive in the school world.

The answers are actually numerous in all directions: there are those who consider a school that “forgets” to refrain from being non-meritocratic, and in fact anti-pedagogical; and those who believe that an effective school should function without fail, but to certify skills and levels.

However, the agreement seems to be unanimous in the ideal school, the one without error, it would be necessary to have fewer students per. class and a really active teaching and laboratory, enriched by classrooms and buildings up to the arduous task. In short, even if one wants to, there are no conditions for a school like this.

“Failure is the ultimate act when everything else has failed,” a reader of School technologybut “the system needs to be heavily reformed to eliminate the need to fail,” and we are far from capable of that, as we see every time education is decided to be divested (education spending in the years 2022-2025 – so program the government in economics). and the financial document – for example, it goes from 4 to 3.5% of GDP).

Because none to a school without fail

  • A school without mistakes means a school without meritocracy, it means demotivating children to commit. So no, a school without fail is neither possible nor useful.
  • “Everything practical is stupid, write it down in your children’s room. And a school that does not fail is a bad school. We are building a society where adults want the evil from those they have brought into the world. The real transgression in today is to study, to do things well ”cit. Paolo Crepet.
  • Not everyone is eligible to be promoted.
  • If he fails the dance exercise, he gets it repeated, otherwise he always stays at the same level. Why should this very banal principle not apply to schools?
  • Sometimes rejection serves to become aware of one’s mistakes and take as a starting point these to improve.
  • It would be a highly counterproductive and totally uneducated choice.
  • It does not help the younger generation to overcome failures and frustrations.
  • Relationships are always one to give And having, an exchange; if the student does not “give back” what is necessary for his maturity, it is true that he repeats the school year.
  • The deserving have the right to be rewarded. A serious school must be meritocratic.
  • Failure is also a way to make the student mature and make him more aware of his own pedagogical-didactic shortcomings.
  • The primary school should also fail more. Otherwise, the belief is transferred that even if one does not study, one continues anyway: all this is discouraging and depressing.
  • If he did not fail, many students would no longer study and consequently many teachers would lose their motivation to teach.
  • To fail means to give the children the opportunity to fill in some gaps. So a school without this option would not make sense.
  • I believe that “do not fail” does not favor children’s growth; on the contrary, it does not make them responsible and does not make them aware of the value of commitment.
  • The school would be a diplomat (and unfortunately it is to a large extent already).
  • The school is a factory for failed graduates. Teachers fail less because of guaranteed reforms, because of incompetent ministers and because of parents who beat teachers.
  • But life itself fails which is not up to what is required in an increasingly competitive world.
  • The illusion of being what one is not is created and the foundation is laid for failure in the world of work.
  • A school without failures learns nothing because it is precisely by failure that one learns the most!
  • It would be a very uneducated school. In a school without errors, the legal value of the qualification should be removed.
  • To fail is not cruel. The real evil is to promote without profit.
  • Amnesties and benefactors are of no use to anyone.

Because Yes to a school without fail

  • It would be enough to base the school system on level certification.
  • You have to work according to skills, by level and with multiannual objectives. At the moment it is not possible because the teachers have introduced and re-proposed one punitive, moralistic school modelwhich does not create social promotion.
  • Yes, but if there were spaces, structures, organizational methods suitable for promoting the cultivation of interests; if there were leaders a little more “visionary” And open minded.
  • Yes, but only if the whole school system is revolutionized: open classes, real laboratory teaching, schools really open to the territory.
  • As for the primary school, it could be done, except for serious shortcomings for fifth-grade students; on the contrary, for the first-class secondary school and even more of the second-class one should resort to the refusal when it is really inevitable.
  • Only if the school has given EVERYONE, I repeat, ALL the tools to avoid failure. But he has to prove it.
  • It is possible when the teacher manages to combine skills, authority, sincere devotion and the ability to convey healthy pride and ambition.
  • Of course! But we need teachers who are very well prepared pedagogically and on the professional front.
  • We should never fail and make the obligatory constant guidance for those who need it, as they do in Northern Europe. Abolish maturity and do it A niveauersubject by subject exams with grades confirming the level reached.
  • It is very possible, yes, as a teacher you must give your soul so that everyone is able to achieve positive results as long as the students participate! Continuing a student who occasionally frequents with prolonged absence without illness, who benefits? For the student, certainly not. Social services need to work better.
  • Yes, but a huge effort needs to be made because many colleagues still think of rejection as a rift to cleanse the classes of those who cannot. The school must do everything to support children who are based on different situations and reach different results. In the classes, one has to do a lot of individualized work and give more to those who have less. The school, which is still too entrenched for the typical student, for the frontal lesson, for performances, for inconsistent verifications and thus we lose sight of the students’ maturation and growth.
  • In many countries of the world this is already the case. Failure is always a failure for the school and the family. Society, wrong models, uneducated parents, teachers who should have another job, about something they should be rejected, not the students. Outdated didactics based solely on blackmailing the poll shows their pedagogical impotence. We are behind.
  • With fewer students per class and stricter rules.

We clarify that the study was carried out by the newspaper “La Tecnica della Scuola” in the period that passes from 17 to 21 June 2022. Took part 893 readers. The study is not of a scientific nature: the results are derived from automatic calculations.

Leave a Comment