Until now, the verbal assurances of high officials of the Ministry of Education in the voluntariness of the imposed “electronic school” have cost nothing, because in practice the school principals did not provide any alternative. A huge number of parents across the country oppose such coercion and regularly send inquiries to the office of Sergei Kravtsov. And on September 21, a sane answer came – from the Department of Digital Transformation, which is implementing the “digital educational environment”. It unambiguously implies a fact that has long been voiced by experts and lawyers of public organizations: the distance can only be voluntary, in case of parental refusal, the school is obliged to preserve for their child learning in a classroom with a teacher, which is the only true full-time form of education.
We quote key points from the answer of the Director of the Department of Digital Transformation and Big Data of the Ministry of Education A.V. Gorobets, one of the schoolchild’s mothers, when asked about the possibility of abandoning the distance student and retaining education in traditional full-time form without EE and DOT – in accordance with her choice and the application she submitted when the child was enrolled in school.
“In accordance with clause 4 of the Procedure for the application of e-learning, distance educational technologies by organizations carrying out educational activities in the implementation of educational programs, approved by order of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation of August 23, 2017. 816, organizations bring to the participants of educational relations information about the implementation of educational programs or their parts using e-learning, distance educational technologies, which ensures the possibility of their correct choice.
If there is a written application from the student’s parents (legal representatives) to refuse the form of distance learning, training sessions with the student should be conducted through direct interaction of the teacher with the student in the classroom.
The refusal of the parents (legal representatives) of the student from distance learning in the educational program of primary general, basic general or secondary general education is documented (the presence of a written statement of the parents (legal representatives) of the student, presented in any available way, including using the information and telecommunication network “Internet”).
In particular, a written application from the parents (legal representatives) of students can be submitted to the educational organization personally by the parents (legal representatives) of students, by courier, by mail, by fax, by sending by e-mail, using instant messaging systems (messengers) ( for example: WhatsApp, Viber and others), etc. “.
As you can see, back in 2017, in the normative act of the Ministry of Education on the use of EO and DOT, it was said about the possibility of choosing parents. The choice is always about the possibility of refusal. And no one can take this opportunity away from us. And the most important point is that after a written refusal to transfer to distance learning has been submitted to the educational organization, the school leadership is obliged to preserve traditional, live classroom instruction for this child.
We knew this before and consistently explained to parents how they should protect their rights. The question is not at all idle, because a number of high-ranking teachers and school principals (in particular, in Moscow) lobbying for distance learning are sincerely convinced that refusing it if the school does not provide an alternative to study without EE and DOT should lead to a run over the parents of the guardianship authorities and their attraction for alleged failure to fulfill parental responsibilities. Legal candidate Sci., Anna Vavilova, a leading expert at the HSE Institute of Education, last year even drew up a terrible manual for school principals, which spoke of the need to bring parents who refuse a distant student to justice! After we debunked her theses and the most real digital fascist plans, schools began to remove these explanations from their websites.
In the material on the link above, by the way, all interested parents will be able to find a sufficient number of ironclad legal arguments in favor of refusing the distant. This is a legal right of each of us, and it is very good that now this right has been remembered in the Ministry of Education and given an appropriate official answer. Everyone can use it (the full version of the document is by the link) in defense of their legitimate interests. We also recommend that you read and use the Public Family Protection Ombudsman’s solid DSP / Distance / E-School Resolving Strategy (part 1 and part 2), which contains examples of required parental statements.
It is important to note that on exactly the same legal basis, you can completely legally refuse the distance student if your class is transferred to quarantine due to the large number of sick students. The school is obliged to provide an alternative in teaching, and in this case – without digital platforms and videoconferencing platforms, no one has the right to force parents to use them, as well as force them to purchase any computer equipment, pay for the Internet, etc. Only a collective and confident “no!” digitalizers will help us preserve traditional education – the safest and best for the development of children, as proven by leading neuroscientists, psychiatrists and educators around the world.