For years, the N-VA preached counter-revolution in Flemish education, with constant torpedoes on the domes and complaints about the lesser focus on knowledge. After five years in Weyts, the harvest appears meager.
Ben Weyts
- Age: 53
- Position: Deputy Prime Minister, Minister of Education, Sport, Animal Welfare and Vlaamse Rand
- Place: Head of the Flemish Parliament Flemish Brabant
- Quote: “The situation is serious, but also hopeful,” after the latest Pisa results
With the N-VA at the wheel, everything would be different, the N-VA claimed. Education needed a boost and figurehead Ben Weyts was given carte blanche by his party to do so.
He certainly got education moving in certain areas. The central tests, in which all students will be tested four times, will be an important mirror for schools in the coming years. For the first time, lateral entrants can take seniority into account when they choose education. And during corona, much-needed catching up was made on the digital front. The N-VA has also recognized better than any other party that language will be a challenge in the coming years – it previously rightly expressed its unease about the loss of knowledge. Although experts regard the minister’s discourse as “narrow”, the message is clear: language is becoming crucial.
Weyts has made little progress on the large sites. The teacher shortage is the biggest priority of a Minister of Education. Weyts realized this too late. Parents should not discuss the quality of education if their child does not have a teacher for eight hours a week. In recent years, the minister has not been able to get beyond a few minor emergency measures; the field repeatedly called this culpable negligence. The fact that a teachers’ pact – included in the coalition agreement – remained a dead letter is very unpleasant, especially because Weyts had money available that predecessors did not have.
A lack of a broader educational vision was the common thread throughout the government’s period. Schools mainly saw blanks thrown at them, no sustainable education policy. Weyts also found no answers to legacies of predecessors Smet and Crevits, such as the inclusion issue. A lack of strategic leadership contributed to this. His expressed aversion to midfield, the Council of State, the inspectorate and even the parents meant that he did not engage in enough discussions with his most important partners. Too often he opted for finger-pointing and culpability, rather than for connecting.
In terms of communication, the minister proved that high visibility is not directly proportional to good policy. Weyts, seasoned in political communication, saw his image as a good crisis manager, built up during the pandemic, increasingly melt away. The fact that he may have appeared drunk in parliament last year – which he always denied – is being criticized politically. Many thought that he recently appeared in front of class in boxer shorts as unworthy of a minister.
The incidents fit within the broader picture that Weyts lacks not only feeling, but also empathy with education. In that respect, his proactive and voluntaristic way of communicating added fuel to the fire. Weyts will therefore ultimately receive a B certificate based on the report from administrators, directors and many teachers: feel free to continue, but not in this domain.
