With the proposed amendments to the Law on the Foundations of the Education System, everything is being reduced to a single decision-making centre – namely, the Ministry of Education – stated Ana Dimitrijević, President of the Forum of Belgrade Grammar Schools.

The law outlines amendments concerning pupil discipline, mobile phone usage, and parental responsibility. When asked by Insajder whether these are the core issues facing Serbia’s education system, Dimitrijević replied:

“They aren’t the primary ones, but they aren’t unimportant either. I wouldn’t brush aside any issue we have or call it irrelevant, but there are far more critical matters. What we object to is how these changes are being handled.”

She believes the decisions are being pushed through without public consultation or any form of “market research.”

“That is to say, without consulting us who provide the service, or those who use it. As teachers, we provide a service, whilst pupils and their parents are the service users. What personally displeases me – and a great number of us – is the marginalisation of the role of parents, who form a massive part of the school community. What seems to have become a problem for the ministry and the state as a whole is that the school community has finally become what it was always meant to be,” Dimitrijević observed.

She added that following the suspension of classes, teachers grew closer to parents and pupils, leading to the realization that they form a single community of interdependent members.

“And that we can function better if we cooperate and share common goals. That is evidently what school management teams and the ministry do not like. They don’t want anyone rocking the boat; they want the role of parents to be completely diminished, which is absurd,” Dimitrijević said.

Yesterday, the Ministry of Education announced that it had prepared a Draft Bill on Amendments to the Law on the Foundations of the Education System. The draft introduces solutions aimed at a more efficient operation of parents’ councils, claiming that their role and importance in schools will not be diminished. Dimitrijević, however, contends that their function is being relegated to that of mere observers.

“Because the draft states that parents should merely be informed about certain matters, rather than debating them as was the case until now. Secondly, what does a ‘more efficient role’ actually mean? The bottom line is control by the ministry. Instead of 40 members on a parents’ council, there will now be 15. It is much easier to exert influence over 15 parents than 40 if needed to push through whatever the Ministry of Education or the headteacher has envisioned,” Dimitrijević noted, adding that it also remains unclear who will decide which 15 parents will sit on the council.

She also pointed out that mobile phones have been turned into an exaggerated issue.

“The fact is that children – much like the rest of us – use mobile phones extensively, spending a great deal of time staring at screens. That isn’t healthy for their psychological well-being, physical health, posture, or eyesight. However, as for how the mobile phone ban in schools is envisioned – where children hand them over and someone logs them… Schools have upwards of 1,000 pupils, making this a time-consuming process. Someone has to accept liability for those expensive devices, and children would need written confirmation or a teacher’s signature just to retrieve their phone to call a parent. We live in the 21st century where mobile phones are a necessary part of daily life, and I don’t believe parents will agree to this. Nor will the children,” she said.

“All educators must rise up and declare that this is out of the question”

She believes the matter can be regulated through internal school rules, whereby phones are placed in a designated area at the start of each lesson.

“This has been implemented at the school where I teach for two years now, and it works perfectly – children learn the rules. There is no need for such an outright ban on a device that can otherwise be very useful in teaching,” Dimitrijević explained.

When asked what the next step for educators would be if the proposed amendments are adopted without broader consensus from teachers, headteachers, and the professional public, Dimitrijević answered: “We have come to realise that strikes and warnings are fairly pointless because the ministry counts on us giving warnings, doing nothing in response, and then quietly returning to our classrooms. These amendments even introduce written reprimands for us. Consequently, if we take an unannounced day off without declaring a strike, they can issue us a written warning and revoke our teaching licence. In light of that, opting for radical action becomes extremely difficult.”

The crux of the matter, according to Dimitrijević, is that all educators need to stand up and state that “this is completely out of the question.”

“And that this constitutes a restriction on freedom of choice, critical thinking, and the stripping of autonomy from teachers, pupils, and parents alike. This is a matter for the recognised trade unions, though I fear their response will not satisfy the majority of educators, as they operate effectively as an extension of the ministry. I am concerned that the recognised unions will fail to fight for what teachers expect of them,” Dimitrijević concluded.

 (Insajder, 31.07.2026)

https://insajder.net/vesti/dimitrijevic-predlozenim-izmenama-zakona-o-obrazovanju-i-vaspitanju-sve-se-svodi-na-jedan-centar-odlucivanja-video