Catholic education is a bit of a storm. In recent years it has waged an intense battle over the final objectives, the teacher shortage and the declining quality of education. There is constant pressure from political quarters, from the N-VA to Vooruit. Yet the greatest threat to Catholic education comes from within its own ranks. Internal tensions and social challenges lead to an existential crisis. Several critical supporters fear an implosion.
Lieven Boeve will step down as CEO of Catholic Education Flanders in June. After two five-year mandates, he returns to his old stable, KU Leuven. His successor faces major challenges.
Guimardstraat will therefore be viewed with great interest in the coming weeks. With a market share of 70 percent, the seat of director general is considered the most powerful seat in Flemish education.
But then Boeve’s successor must succeed in keeping the organization together. That will be a challenge, because there are internal tensions. School boards believe that there is too little recognition of their effectiveness, that too little decision-making is made through consultation, and that there is too little local feeling. And that their freedom and autonomy are threatened by an organization that pursues freedom and autonomy. Management boards also feel that their interests are not being adequately represented.
Lack of empathy
The context helps explain the unease: the education debate has become deeply polarized in recent years. Catholic education also participates in this carousel. Many school boards believe that the tone is too aggressive and the communication is not sufficiently connecting. That also plays an important role in the doubt. Empathy, for boards, management and teachers, is a key word. The lack of it reinforces the question: what do we actually get in return?
That question is pertinent. Because in the past decade there has been a strong focus on administrative scale-up. Today, several school boards are so large that they organize their own guidance, support schools and purchase materials. They are almost no longer dependent on the dome. This does not only concern the congregations, such as the Jesuits, the Salesians of Don Bosco or the Brothers of Charity, but certainly also large regional authorities, such as in Antwerp or Brussels.
Within the Catholic education network – not a tanker, but an enormous fleet – the question is loudly asked what kind of organization Catholic Education Flanders should actually be. Is it an employers’ organization or an educational umbrella organization? Boeve has already thoroughly reformed the organization, but many school boards are longing for further modernization. Catholic education benefits from staying together. But in addition to the major financial challenge that Catholic Education Flanders faces, the principle of solidarity is also under pressure. While the large school boards are yearning for more participation, many small schools are figuratively on the verge of death. They just need extra support on a financial and pedagogical level.
Godforsaken
An equally crucial question is how strong the position of the church institution in Catholic Education Flanders should remain. Education is the last public place where the church tries to maintain its position in society. Although Lieven Boeve did not receive a single question about Forgotten God, the shadow of that TV program about sexual abuse in the church also hangs over Catholic education. Many wonder how long the church will continue to punch above its weight.
That the church has a role to play in Catholic education is not a point of contention. But the way in which she exerts influence does lead to, often pent-up, frustration. For example, Antwerp Bishop Johan Bonny is chairman of the board of directors. Many find that inappropriate. The fact that the vicars, the representatives of the dioceses, have many seats in the administrative body is also an anachronism, according to some.
Another sigh has to do with the appointment of the new top woman or man. According to many, the procedure is a black box. Is it the bishops’ conference that makes the choice? Or does the board of directors also have a role to play? For some school boards, but also for potential candidates, this procedure is a turn-off. The fact that Boeve’s reappointment was in the newspaper sooner than on the agenda of the board of directors five years ago caused a lot of bad blood.
Schools also feel that the presence of the central pedagogical guidance service is decreasing. This can partly be explained by government savings – the service has to make do with a third fewer people. But some schools also indicate that the pedagogical story is no longer strong or inspiring. They lack vision and impact. The same criticism applies to the curricula, a showcase for Catholic education for decades. Fueled by the social debate, trust is starting to crumble. The new ZILL (meaning in learning, meaning in living) curriculum is receiving a lot of criticism in primary schools. The fact that five school boards recently submitted a mathematics curriculum, written by teachers, is a canary in the coal mine in that respect. The leader loses his followers.
The doubt is fueled by rising costs. The contribution that schools must make to remain members of the umbrella organization was significantly increased last year. The income is desperately needed, because the network organization has to make significant savings – since corona it has been operating in the red. A savings exercise is underway. Catholic Education Flanders must fear the ‘NMBS syndrome’: becoming more expensive without noticeably better services. Travelers don’t accept that; Directors and boards do not accept that.
Meaning
The core of Catholic education, the meaning-giving component, is also under enormous pressure. On the one hand, this is practical in nature: there are too few baptized people in primary education and too few religious teachers in secondary education. The concept of the Catholic dialogue school, devised by Didier Pollefeyt and Lieven Boeve, both theologians at KU Leuven, is therefore on the verge of bankruptcy. Christianity uses this concept as a starting point to enter into dialogue with other religions and cultures. But in order to enter into dialogue, you need a core of teachers who are religious. Secularization has advanced so far that these are no longer available in many schools.
Another criticism is the lack of attention to meaning, apart from the religious. If there is one player that can or must provide elements of meaning to young people who are in search of themselves, it is Catholic education. According to many, this importance is not emphasized enough.
This cocktail means that many schools in the rapidly changing society are unable to find enough answers to increasing diversity. The key question is what religious education should look like in the future. But schools are also struggling with how to deal with the headscarf. In that respect, there is a gap between the central vision and the implementation in the schools. Boards and directors still fear a pull effect if they allow the headscarf. But many admit that the situation is untenable.
Many challenges cannot be answered centrally alone. More cohesion must also be sought among church towers and cathedrals. It is an open secret that in large cities such as Antwerp or Ghent there is often a lack of cohesion between Catholic authorities. Whether and what role Catholic Education Flanders should play in this remains a question mark.
If Boeve’s successor wants to keep Catholic education together, he should take advice from the first thought from “The Gospel according to Lieven Boeve”: “For anyone who wants to save his life will lose it. But whoever loses his life for my sake and for the gospel’s sake will save it.” (Mark 8:35)
For this piece, De Standaard spoke to various directors, directors, members of management committees and (former) members of the board of directors.
