Since the 1970s, governance committees have invested parents with the task of actively participating in the life of educational settings and in the operation of their children's schools. But over time much has changed: children's services have slowly retreated into a hothouse of practices and reflections that have excluded parents from planning, considering them important interlocutors, yes, but with whom the service and its educational proposal are hardly thought about together. The school then, especially the secondary one, still strongly characterized by knowledge acquisition methodologies of an essentially transmissive nature, interprets family participation as direct communication of trivial information (updates on class progress, educational outings and trips, bureaucratic fulfillments...). In this scenario, governance committees, instead of being dialectical contexts in which the school community is built in the confrontation between different - and perhaps divergent - points of view, have turned into bureaucratic tools. The contribution highlights how a series of interconnected crises - both extracurricular (political disaffection, institutional crisis) and school-based (educational impoverishment, dominance of evaluation, power logics) - have emptied the participatory function of governance boards. The result is a formal and superficial school-family communication that betrays the original spirit of educational co-responsibility and reduces the democratic dimension of education to a simulacrum of community life.
A partire dagli anni Settanta gli organi di gestione hanno investito i genitori del compito di partecipare attivamente alla vita dei contesti educativi e al funzionamento della scuola dei figli. Ma nel tempo molto è cambiato: i servizi per l’infanzia si sono lentamente ritirati in una fucina di pratiche e riflessioni che hanno escluso i genitori dalla progettazione, ritenendoli sì interlocutori importanti ma con cui difficilmente si pensa insieme il servizio e la sua proposta educativa. La scuola poi, specie quella secondaria, ancora fortemente caratterizzata da metodologie di acquisizione del sapere di carattere sostanzialmente trasmissivo, interpreta la partecipazione delle famiglie come comunicazione diretta di informazioni spicciole (aggiornamenti sull’andamento della classe, sulle uscite didattiche e gite, sugli adempimenti burocratici…). In questo scenario gli organi di gestione, invece di essere contesti dialettici in cui la comunità scolastica si costruisce nel confronto tra diversi – e magari divergenti – punti di vista, si sono trasformati in strumenti burocratici. Il contributo evidenzia come una serie di crisi interconnesse – sia extrascolastiche (disaffezione politica, crisi istituzionale) sia scolastiche (impoverimento educativo, dominio della valutazione, logiche di potere) – abbia svuotato la funzione partecipativa degli organi di gestione. Ne risulta una comunicazione scuola-famiglia formale e superficiale, che tradisce lo spirito originario di corresponsabilità educativa e riduce la dimensione democratica dell’educazione ad un simulacro di vita comunitaria.
Musi, E., L’eclissi della partecipazione delle famiglie alla vita dellascuola: una deriva dell’efficientismo formativo, <<LA FAMIGLIA>>, 2025; 2025 (59): 56-67 [https://hdl.handle.net/10807/334917]
L’eclissi della partecipazione delle famiglie alla vita della scuola: una deriva dell’efficientismo formativo
Musi, Elisabetta
2025
Abstract
Since the 1970s, governance committees have invested parents with the task of actively participating in the life of educational settings and in the operation of their children's schools. But over time much has changed: children's services have slowly retreated into a hothouse of practices and reflections that have excluded parents from planning, considering them important interlocutors, yes, but with whom the service and its educational proposal are hardly thought about together. The school then, especially the secondary one, still strongly characterized by knowledge acquisition methodologies of an essentially transmissive nature, interprets family participation as direct communication of trivial information (updates on class progress, educational outings and trips, bureaucratic fulfillments...). In this scenario, governance committees, instead of being dialectical contexts in which the school community is built in the confrontation between different - and perhaps divergent - points of view, have turned into bureaucratic tools. The contribution highlights how a series of interconnected crises - both extracurricular (political disaffection, institutional crisis) and school-based (educational impoverishment, dominance of evaluation, power logics) - have emptied the participatory function of governance boards. The result is a formal and superficial school-family communication that betrays the original spirit of educational co-responsibility and reduces the democratic dimension of education to a simulacrum of community life.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.



