Without entering into the merits of who is at fault regarding the dismissal of Mario Mallia, who had been head of St Albert the Great Church School for 16 years, I would like to offer my reflections since I also had been head of a Church school.

The years I spent both as assistant head and head were, no doubt, years of enrichment and memorable. I retired when Mallia had just been appointed head, so the time that I was given an administrative role in a Church school was a time when the transition from religious to lay persons was in its initial stages.

Yes, they were times of transition so it was a learning curve for both us, lay persons, and for the religious community.

I was given a free hand since,  during my tenure as assistant head and head, I introduced various projects, including the inclusion policy, support teaching in the main subjects in the lower classes and a summer reception programme for the new entries into Year 1.

But to say that my headship was smooth-sailing is to be unrealistic. There were sporadic clashes and arguments between me and the director and, yes, one can consider these clashes as a ‘power struggle’.

It was reported in the local media that Mallia had been asked to apologise for suggesting that the role of the college leadership should be clearly defined.

One of the definitions of a headmaster states: “He is the key of the leadership in a school. He is the organiser, leader, governor, director, guide and coordinator of school programmes.”

This quote shows the great responsibilities that a head of school carries. It goes without saying, though, that such responsibilities are shared with the assistant heads and heads of department.

A school cannot run efficiently under two heads. Unfortunately, in most Church schools, one finds the post of rector or director besides the one of headmaster. So the reason why problems of administration very often crop up is because the head isn’t given a free hand to run the school as he thinks fit for the good of the whole school community.

For a lay person to be appointed head of school and then to be requested to ask permission from a higher authority to carry out certain programmes does not hold water.

In response to Mallia’s dismissal, the Church Schools Association acknowledged his valid contribution “to the educational inclusion of disadvantaged students and of students from different backgrounds”.

The association also affirmed that “it believes that Church schools continue to be led through the contribution of lay people and religious and diocesan priests together, as is the case in the majority of Church schools”.

A school cannot run efficiently under two heads- Ray Azzopardi

There is no doubt that Church schools, as all other educational institutions, are run as communities and,  therefore, cooperation among all stakeholders, including teachers, parents and students, is important.

But, and this is the crux of the problem, there should be only one head.

A school cannot run well if decisions for the day-to-day running of the school have to be approved by someone other than the head.

Problems of ‘power struggle’ have been ongoing in Church schools because the role of the rector or director has not been clearly defined. In fact, that is why Mallia requested that the role of the college leadership should be clearly defined.

This ‘power struggle’ is the result of clericalism that still exists in certain institutions. Clericalism is defined as “a disordered attitude towards clergy (religious), an excessive deference and an assumption of their moral superiority. It is when clerics feel they are superior (and when) they are far from the people”.

Pope Francis, in a meeting with the bishops of Chile in 2018, spoke strongly against clericalism. The pontiff asserted: “Let us be clear about this. The lay persons are not our peons, or our employees. They don’t have to parrot back whatever we say. Clericalism, far from giving impetus to various contributions and proposals, gradually extinguishes the prophetic flame to which the entire Church is called to be a witness. Clericalism forgets that the visibility and the sacramentality of the Church belong to all the faithful people of God, not only to the few chosen and enlightened.”

If Church schools are to be run without any interference, the headmaster should be the only person responsible for programmes introduced for the good of the whole school community. The presence of another person, be it the rector or director, gives the impression that the head is not solely responsible. If the need is felt for such persons to form part of the school administration, let their role be clearly defined as is the role of the headmaster.

Surely, there should be no overlapping of roles. Then, yes, there would no longer be the need of warnings of “insubordination” and neither would there be an ongoing “power struggle”.

Ray Azzopardi is a retired head of school.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.