Comment by Martin Atanasov:
In less than a week, the fourth session of the 51st National Assembly begins, in which deputies will face the difficult task of considering a number of important issues for the country. Undoubtedly, one of the top topics will be the topic of “education“, as well as the highly polarized conversation about the educational reform proposed by the Ministry of Education and Science in July. The fundamental question is whether this will be the long-awaited reform of Bulgarian education, or its next patchwork.
"Reform" or another amendment
After nearly a decade of partial amendments and postponed ideas, the package of amendments to the Preschool and School Education Act is now one step away from being discussed in the plenary hall. Presented as “large-scale“, these proposals are the most significant attempt to change the system since 2016 and have logically sparked a broad public debate in Bulgaria.
Education itself is a complex system, built of interconnected elements: content of the learning process, goals, teaching and assessment methods, functioning of the school and interaction with its community. When changing one element (or several) without adapting the others, the effect is half-hearted, and the negative result is visible after years.
The proposed package of measures is a collection of many separate “solutions“ to pressing problems, rather than a related reform with a strategic framework and a clear interrelationship. The proposals are diverse – from introducing a new subject, to changes in the application process after the 7th grade, to regulations on the use of mobile phones and new requirements for the annual attestation and dismissal of teachers. Each of these issues is important, but the lack of a strategic framework and interconnection casts doubt on whether the outcome will be successful.
Phone use is a symptom, not a diagnosis
Limiting mobile phones in class is an emblematic example. The idea is not new – many schools already have their own internal rules that limit the use of devices. The difference now is that this is being introduced at a legal level and becomes mandatory for everyone.
Yes, devices distract students – there is no dispute here. But distraction is often a consequence, not a cause. When the system functions in such a way that it is much more convenient for both the teacher and the student to have a monologue, when the goal is to "get through the material" rather than understand and apply it, when assessment encourages memorization rather than thinking - the phone becomes the closest door to the world outside the classroom. And yes, we can "lock it", but students are creative enough to find a way around it or find another one.
Therefore, talking about discipline is relevant only if it goes hand in hand with talking about meaning. Overloaded programs and a pace in which there is no "air" for questions, cases and practice create "cramming". And "cramming" is the enemy of attention. The ban on devices may reduce noise in the classroom (or do the exact opposite – who knows…), but it will not restore interest in the lesson and the learning material.
"Religion and Virtues" - another example of fragmented thinking
Another measure that attracted the most discussions is the introduction of a new subject “Religion and Virtues“. Its supporters and initiators see it as a way to instill values and morality, while critics - as a violation of the secular principle of education and a risk of disunity and discrimination.
From a student perspective, the problem is different: even if we leave aside the dispute about the content or which class and by whom it will be taught, we again see “piecemeal work“. If we want high school graduates to leave school with values and virtue, this must be a principle that is woven into the entire curriculum from grades 1 to 12, not just a single lesson a week. Values are not taught in textbooks or tests – they are experienced every day within the entire school and family community.
International experience shows that successful education systems integrate values education into all subjects and activities, rather than isolating it in a separate learning block. This requires a change in teaching methods and school culture, not just a new subject in the weekly schedule.
Student Voice - The Missing Participant at the Table
However, there is one topic that almost no one touches on, and it is strategically important - student self-government and representation. The current school law does not clearly outline mechanisms for who represents students, how these representations are elected, at what level they are formed and how students can participate in real decision-making, as well as when institutions are obliged to consult them.
In practice, most schools have a structure resembling a student council, but in many places it is either fictitious or has a very limited set of powers and opportunities. The rights of students and the opportunity to participate directly in the formation of policies that concern them at the school, regional and national levels remains a mirage.
During the discussion of the current bill in the parliamentary committee on education, the few students and organizations that got involved - such as the National Youth Forum (NMF) and the National Student Parliament (NSP) - were not only ignored, but also publicly attacked. Their proposals for a clear definition of student self-government, for guaranteed participation in school and national policies, were left without significant attention and in the end their voice was more likely to be listened to than heard. The slip made by one of the two brave ladies who represented the opinion of the students was extremely ugly used for political purposes – a move that demonstrates the attitude towards the topic.
What will the changes bring?
If school is the first institution that a young person encounters, it is there that the foundations of democratic culture must be laid. True participation, in which the opinion of the students has real significance, builds independent-thinking citizens; its absence teaches the opposite: “The grown-ups decide, and you listen“. It is not surprising that in an environment without participation, trust in institutions is low, apathy is high, and many young people see their future outside the country.
Conversely, in schools with real participation, "values and virtues" are not an abstraction, but a living experience - debate, joint problem solving, taking responsibility. By neglecting this participation, no matter how much we talk about education in values, we miss the most powerful educational tool: direct experience and engagement.