The UPN, committed to building the new Ten-Year Education Plan

Such a first PDE proposed to: I) make education a national objective and a matter of concern for all; II) recognize education as the axis of human, social, political, economic and cultural development of the nation; III) develop knowledge, science, technique and technology; IV) organically align the institutions of the education sector and the educational activities of other state entities and civil society into a single system; and V) guarantee the validity of the right to education.   At that time, the goal was that by 2005, “[…] 8.5 percent of GDP would be allocated to education, of which 6.5 percent would come from the public sector and 2.0 percent from the private sector […]” (MEN, 2000). However, the proposal was watered down and the opportunity to promote and strengthen the right to education was lost.

The PDE 2016-2026 is currently being completed. Its focus has been marked by the interest of private groups in the education sector, which sought to forge a model in which education would be dependent on big capital and multilateral organizations. For example, it states that “[…] By 2026, education should be free and of high quality at all levels, from initial to tertiary […]” However, it has been a decade marked by the deepening of the financial crisis and the withering of public higher education; the preference for subsidies over demand, which has diverted substantial resources from public higher education to private institutions; the division of secondary education against higher education and the strengthening of technical and technological training (as skilled labor).   Therefore, we urgently request that the creation of the new PDE be reoriented to become a reference in public education policy at the service of social change in our territories, educational institutions, and life projects. Thus, we want the design of a robust, sustainable, relevant, and coherent system that supports and is based on the principles of social justice, equity, and peace.   In that regard, the PDE 2026-2036 may allow recognizing some issues to guarantee its traceability in the short, medium, and long term in order to:  

• Assess the scope and relevance of the PDE according to the General Law on Education: “This Plan will have a benchmark dimension, i.e., it will be evaluated, constantly reviewed and taken into account in the national and territorial development plans,” which would mean linking education to national sovereignty, popular interests, and a great pedagogical project.
• Reaffirm the compliance with Article 9 of Law 115 of 1994, which states “The development of the right to education shall be regulated by special legislation.”
• Focus the new PDE on defending public education, cultural diversity and strengthening it, while respecting the contribution of each individual.
• Redefine the criteria for evaluating the quality of education in terms of holistic training processes and recognizing the value of pedagogical practices in the classroom, beyond indicators and test standardization.
• Agree on a new unified statute for the teaching profession and advocate a curricular reform in the face of the new training realities of each school cycle, linking it to higher education.
• Define a new training project that responds to the demands of these times in terms of territorial policies, pedagogical demands, and national and international decolonizing spaces, in dialogue with faculties of education, research centers, union organizations, as well as with staff/professors, the student movement, and other stakeholders.
• Join the PDE with a clear policy and funding goals for S&T in education.

Let us now pose open questions for collective reflection which can help build the new EDP:

• What kind of individual or society, or what kind of nation and model of development, is this Plan intended for?
• Where could the collective and epistemic debates on training, pedagogical practices, new fields of knowledge and study related to interculturality, proper education, ethno-education, critical pedagogy, popular education, the relationship between science and technology, the new foundations of peace, memory and human rights be drawn from?
• How could guarantee the financing of the Ten-Year Plan within the discussion of the General System of Participation?
• Could this plan be a new proposal to reopen the debate on the Statute of Education and recognize the right to education as a fundamental right from kindergarten to university, and as well as a common good?