The controversy arose from a parent who questioned his child's growth manual. He believes that this manual adds a burden to children and is contrary to the original purpose of education. He called the Education Science and Technology Bureau, hoping to know whether this handbook was decided by the school individually or by the unified regulations at the municipal level. Director Guo's answer did not seem to give a clear answer, but instead asked questions about the child's school, which made parents confused and uneasy. The dialogue between the two sides escalated further, which eventually led to a heated quarrel.
Parents feel that such a manual arrangement has no practical meaning for their children and will only take away their rest time. His questioning has aroused widespread public attention and heated discussions. People are generally disappointed and angry at the arrogance and unafraid of consequences attitude of the director, Guo. Far from solving the problem, his demeanor and handling of the system have only exacerbated distrust of the education management system. Parents questioned the well-being of their children, but the director's reaction and the outcome of the Municipal Party Committee's Propaganda Department raised questions about the responsibilities and sensitivities of the education department.
After the incident, the Propaganda Department of the Municipal Party Committee said that it was being dealt with and promised to issue a notice in a timely manner. However, when the briefing was published, the results were disappointing. The circular asked the director, Guo, to give a detailed explanation of the parents' situation and conduct a thorough examination, but did not mention an apology to the parents. The result is overly simplistic and sloppy. Although the Propaganda Department of the Municipal Party Committee said that there would be follow-up measures, it also seemed to mean that the matter would be shelved. The result of such a treatment has caused public dissatisfaction and anger, and many people are confused and incomprehensible about the actual way of handling.
People's dissatisfaction with the results is mainly reflected in the following aspects. First of all, there is no mention of an apology to parents in the briefing, which makes people feel that the handling is too simplistic and seems to ignore the rights and feelings of parents. Second, the circular asked the director Guo to make a detailed explanation and in-depth inspection, but did not specify the measures to deal with the director. Finally, the Propaganda Department of the Municipal Party Committee said that there would be follow-up measures, but did not clearly state the specific measures and timelines. All of this raises questions and dissatisfaction with the results.
This controversy not only reflects a specific administrative issue, but also exposes a deeper conflict between educational concepts and management concepts. Parents' concerns and doubts about their children's education, as well as their expectations of education administrators, are in stark contrast to the director's attitude and handling style.
Parents want their children to grow up in a relaxed learning environment, believing that the growth manual is a burden for their children and is not in line with the original intention of education. However, Director Guo's response and handling of the situation showed an authoritarian and unwilling attitude to listen, and lacked attention to the concerns and opinions of parents. This contrast has aroused widespread public discussion and questioning, and has become an important reflection on China's education management system.
In education, it is very important to understand the concerns of parents and respect the individual differences of students. Education administrators should be more sensitive, good at listening to the voices of parents and students, and adjust education policies and measures in a timely manner. At the same time, education management departments should also strengthen the study of educational planning and policies to ensure that they meet the actual needs and development potential of students.
Summary: This controversy has exposed the problems and challenges in the education management system. Parents' doubts and concerns about their children's education, as well as their expectations of education administrators, are in stark contrast to the director's attitude and handling of the situation. The dissatisfaction and doubts about the results reflect the public's distrust of education management and the demand for fair handling. This incident needs to arouse the attention and reflection of the education management department to better meet the needs of students and parents and create a good educational environment.