Alessandro Giuliani, director of the school technique.
The school year opened with a barrage of internal circulars who rekindled the debate on the school dress code. Not only for students, but also for teachers. In several Italian institutes, short sweaters have been prohibited, juicy pants, hoods, offensive writings printed on t-shirts, too showy jewels and even excessively long nails. The real novelty is that, this time, the invitation to respect the rules is not only addressed to pupils, but also to teachers, referred to “giving good example”.
The point, however, is that there is no national regulation that governs the clothing of the teachers. Not even the collective agreement provides for specific limits or requirements. It is no coincidence that, among the tables open for the imminent renewal of the CCNL School, on which the public and union part are working, the theme of a possible ethical code of behaviors has also been inserted, to fill a regulatory vacuum that has been dragging for years.
“Regulating the student clothing may seem reasonable in an educational key – observes Alessandro Giuliani, director of the School techniquethe most authoritative portal of school information (founded as a magazine in 1949) – but you have to ask yourself to what extent it is legitimate to intervene on the external aspect of boys and girls without harming their personal freedom. For teachers, however, the speech is even more urgent: we cannot limit ourselves to invoking common sense. A clear code is needed, shared by the ministry, unions and public opinion, to avoid arbitrary interpretations and useless conflicts ».
Giuliani underlines that the question does not only concern clothes. «The case of the teacher with a profile on Onlyfans or that of writers-links finished in the center of public controversies demonstrate how fragile the border between individual freedom and educational function is. A teacher must give a good example not only in the classroom, but also outside, otherwise he risks losing authority in front of the students and, by reflection, to weaken the credibility of the entire educational institution “.
On the union front, the position is equally clear. Patrizia Basili, national manager of the teachers ‘guild, recalls that “the CCNL does not regulate teachers’ clothing in any way, indeed article 40 clearly states that the teaching function is based on cultural and professional autonomy. The only rule that could be traced back to clothing – he explains – is article 54 of the consolidated text on the public employment, which refers to the code of conduct of public employees, issued with Presidential Decree 62/2013. But that code does not make any specific mention of clothes: in article 3 it is limited to prescribing that the employee avoids behaviors that can harm the image of the public administration ».
From here, according to Basili, “an institutional void emerges that the guild has been denounced for some time: a superior council of teaching would be needed that protects the cultural autonomy of the teachers and, at the same time, establishes a reference ethical code. In the absence of this, the circulars of school managers are completely unilateral, arbitrary and therefore illegitimate ».
On the opposite front, however, there is no lack of those who invite to reduce the tones. Cristina Costarelli, president of Anp Lazio, dampens: «Defining these illegitimate circulars is a bit excessive. The problem is that they are weak, easily misunderstood tools. If a boy shows up in shorts, do we really think we don’t get it in the classroom? It is clear that without a wider ethical code you risk slipping into improvised solutions. Here we are on the border between common sense and true regulation ».
The discussion, therefore, remains open. The Minister of Education Giuseppe Valditara has repeatedly declared that he has been working on an ethical code for teachers and school staff for months, which also includes behavior on social media. Recent cases – from the teacher who used Onlyfans to the debate on Christian Raimo – have made it clear how much the public reputation of the teachers is now intertwined with their professional activity.
The risk is twofold: on the one hand, yielding to excessive moralisms that limit personal freedom, on the other hand let everyone do their own way, undermining the authority of the school. The next contractual round could represent a crucial opportunity to find a balance. Not to standardize individual styles and choices, but to set common rules that return clarity, authority and credibility to an institution that remains, despite everything, the country’s educational pillar.
