Daniel Burg, what's wrong with our school system?

Dani Burg unlocks the large entrance door to the school in Niederlenz AG and beams. He leads us through renovated corridors and newly designed rooms. «These are our learning landscapes,» he says, pointing to small desks, each with a privacy screen. Everything is reminiscent of an open-plan office, rather than a traditional classroom. Dani Burg has been working as a teacher in Niederlenz AG since this summer. It's easy to believe that he looks forward to every day in the classroom.

Mr Burg, you have been working on the question of how children can learn better for over 30 years. What is going wrong in Swiss schools?

I can think of quite a few things. One of the most pressing problems for me is so-called bulimic learning, the cramming in of content that has to be reproduced at a certain point in time and is then immediately forgotten. This basic concept of learning has existed for 150 years. Other important topics are order and discipline: in many schools, the same methods are used every day to enforce discipline. It is often not even realised that this is due to the system and that some pupils would cooperate immediately if they were not forced into too narrow a mould.

You have also published a book on these grievances. It's called «The school is suffocating». That sounds dramatic.

Of course there are exceptions, people who report happy school days. But I know of many more cases in which the word «school» triggers anything but feelings of happiness. For those affected, it means pressure, fear, suffering, self-doubt, failure, embarrassment, underchallenge, excessive demands, conflicts. In short: suffocation.

Why is that?

Our school system is fragile and sick. But instead of completely rethinking and rebuilding the system, we are trying to keep it alive with more and more measures such as harsher punishments for pupils, more school psychologists, burnout counselling centres for teachers and so on - and to stay with my image, to give it artificial respiration.

Abolishing the 45-minute cycle, dissolving year groups, introducing individualised learning - you implemented these measures and much more in 2014 as head of the secondary school in Niederwil and Stetten AG. How did this come about?

On the one hand, several management and teaching staff have been working passionately for years on elements of new forms of teaching. The desire to reorganise something had been palpable for some time. On the other hand, there were so many disciplinary problems in several classes that far-reaching changes were unavoidable. For example, when a pupil sets fire to a teacher's jumper during a lesson, everyone agrees that things can't go on like this.

Yet it is always said that the school system is so cumbersome that there is no room for manoeuvre for fundamental reforms.

And that is simply not true! If something is really to happen, the majority of the respective school authorities, school management and teaching staff must want it to happen. The impetus for relevant changes in the system usually comes from the grassroots, not «from above».

A steering group was put together from this group of people in Niederwil - and an external consultant was also engaged ...

... and the primary goal of this steering group was: motivated pupils, relaxed teachers.

And then you implemented one measure after the other in small steps?

No, almost all of them at once. It's like driving a car: You can't just turn a bit to the right. We said that if we abolish the 45-minute cycle, we also have to change the lesson planning. And then we also have to change the work assignments for the pupils and so on. Everything is interconnected. If you break up conventional teaching and assign pupils the project of building a forest house in the woods in four days, for example, then you need new time allocations, different work assignments, new forms of work and assessment.

You mention individual learning environments. What do you mean by this?

Let me give you an example: I was once confronted with a pupil who was so fidgety and restless that we had to ask ourselves whether he could be taught at a normal school at all or whether he belonged at a special school. But instead of constantly reprimanding him, we focussed on his strengths. He is very sporty, has good access to younger pupils, a sensational sense of direction and is a talented organiser. So he was allowed to use the remedial teacher's office and carry out tasks from there. For example, he organised the school doctor's appointment for an entire class and gave PE lessons in a 6th grade class. Alone, without a teacher.

This example summarises a lot of what is important to them, doesn't it?

You're right about that. Keyword individualisation: The boy couldn't learn in a normal classroom environment. Keyword: carrying out assignments instead of working through tasks: The boy flourished in solving everyday problems. Keyword experimentation: The only thing we knew was that the boy would not be able to progress in a normal setting.

Did these measures make learning easier for the boy?

Yes, he felt more accepted, more respected, which gave him a boost for his own learning. You see, with all these reorganisation measures, our aim was to make the leap from training - something that happens from the outside - to education - something that happens from the inside. Of course, some things went wrong.

For example?

A project assignment, for example, that was not well formulated. Some young people cope very well with this form of independent learning, others are overwhelmed at the beginning and need a more detailed introduction. The school day was sometimes chaotic at the beginning, with pupils doing something for a week that the teacher didn't notice. That's not everyone's nature. I, for example, am more of an organised planner. But I'm also convinced that the school developers are right: if you really want to change something, you have to be brave and accept a supposed loss of control.

In which areas have you been successful?

Many subjects, such as history and geography, were easy to teach across year groups right from the start. There were also no problems with performance assessment. A complex assessment system was not even necessary, as I had feared beforehand. What I had underestimated, however, was the cooperation with the parents.

In what way?

We did not explain our approach well enough and only provided a little written information. At the parents' evening at which we provided information about our plans, no parents voiced any criticism - this only came weeks later in the form of a petition. It contained the request to re-establish the year groups.

And?

We got through it with the backing of the school authorities.

How were the sceptical parents convinced?

Some of the mothers and fathers came to the realisation themselves after a few months: it works! The behaviour of one mother, who was very much against the changeover at the beginning and wrote to me after a year to say that she had now understood the principle, was very impressive. She is now one of the biggest fans of this model. And then there have been other parents who have simply resigned themselves to the motto: «I don't like it, but I can't change it either.»

And did you have everyone in the teaching staff on your side?

In March 2014, we announced that we would be switching to cross-grade classes after the summer holidays. This is practically the speed of light for the slow mills of school operations. Teachers then had six weeks to give notice if they did not want to support this changeover.

How many have cancelled?

2 out of 25 There are teachers who are less suited to this system than others. Someone who likes to withdraw into the safety of the subject matter naturally has a harder time. The same goes for a teacher who attaches great importance to a tightly structured programme.

What do you think about homework?

They are addressing the source of great suffering for millions of families. Homework is confronted with more bad feelings than almost any other topic. Boys in eighth or ninth grade in particular have an astonishing persistence in simply refusing to do it. The teacher checks the homework, it is not done, penalties are imposed, which are not done again ... An endless loop.

Were you able to break through this as headmaster in Niederwil?

Yes, we suspended home work and had excellent experiences with this step. Of course, there were still work assignments, some of which were to be completed at home, but this comprehensive homework, which applied to everyone, no longer existed in this form. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a cuddly pedagogue. But I am in favour of taking the pressure off where it doesn't help and supporting pupils where it is worthwhile.

In your book, you encourage teachers to see themselves as learning coaches. Why do you do this?

A coach advises and helps his clients to work on their strengths and tackle their weaknesses. In other words, as a learning coach, I give an assignment at the beginning of a learning unit and then go from desk to desk to provide assistance. The pupils work out some of the learning content themselves. This encourages personal responsibility, independent action and promotes self-confidence.

Does this work in all subjects?

In geography, for example, it works very well. In history, I perhaps need to be more present and teach a bit more material. I would generally like to see more creativity in the school environment, but many colleagues are held back by their fear of the subject matter. But you can reduce that quite a bit. I've never heard a teacher say: «Great, he can recite five rivers that flow through Brazil.» But the sentence «Great, he can organise himself very well, is a team player» very well. In the end, these are the skills that are in demand.

It is precisely this weighting of competences that Curriculum 21 provides for.

In this respect, the new curriculum is also a step in the right direction. This focus on competences makes it possible to move away from the subject matter a little. But in my opinion, this reorganisation does not go far enough. The basic system is not being called into question: Interdisciplinary learning, mixed-age learning groups, abolition of the 45-minute cycle, these are all issues that are not being touched. It is a minor refurnishing of individual rooms in an existing building, which in my opinion is dilapidated and needs a complete remodelling.

You talk about the experience you gained at secondary school. Would this model even make sense at grammar school? There, the focus is much more on the individual subject and the teaching of the material, and at the end of the school year, you have to pass the Matura.

Maturity means mature. However, no one becomes mature through bulimic learning. My statements on the urgent changes in the school system also relate to grammar schools. At this level too, I believe that work on subject expertise should be drastically reduced in favour of work on personal, social and methodological skills.

How many schools in Switzerland work in such an innovative way?

That is a difficult question. Many schools are committed to development - introducing learning goddesses, organising inter-class lessons in PE - but there are actually very few schools that are implementing structural changes. But I think that a lot can be changed for the better for pupils even within the existing structures.

What can I contribute as a mum or dad?

Parents can support their children's teachers when they try something new - show interest, get information. Positive feedback gives them confidence and encourages them to initiate further reforms.

What else would you like from the parents of your pupils?

I would like to see parents coaching their children in a similar way to what we teachers try to do - and not get involved in the struggle to control their children in school matters.
«Have you done the task? What, still not? Then show it to me again» and so on. Instead, they should ask coaching questions: «Tell me, what did you do at school? What did you do well? What was your contribution? What will you do next? Where do you still need help?» Coaching signals interest and ideally has a supportive effect. But the responsibility for learning success lies with the child.

A great responsibility.

It's not about letting the child go in the wrong direction on their own - in the worst case scenario. Pupils need good guidance, an individual briefing - but they also need more autonomy and therefore appreciation. I have heard many parents
say: School is a horror, I pray that the nine years are finally over. That doesn't help anyone.

What do you suggest?

I think «strengthening strengths» is key. Of course, you have to keep at it when things get uncomfortable, and I also demand that. But otherwise, you should encourage the areas in which the child's strengths lie. This gives them self-confidence and joy and also colours the other areas. As you can see, I couldn't work in the old system any more.

More articles on the topics of schools and learning:

• Schools in transition: Where is our education system heading? The school of the future - an approach.
• «Homework should be abolished »Lisa Lehner, headteacher and vice president of the Swiss-German Headteachers' Association, dreams of an ideal school without homework and with a child-orientated timetable...

• How do you learn properly? Fabian Grolimund on the art of learning and why relationships play such an important role.