He has put a significant title to the first chapter of the book: Innovation as an act of faith (Innovation as faith). Sometimes
it seems that we need innovation by innovation, yes or yes, it's something we have to do, but it's a pretty empty concept, because what do we understand when we say innovation? Adapting something that was done before to current resources and repeating what has already been invented using new technologies? The question of technology has gone by our hands; technology makes it easy for us to do some things, but we should use common sense. If not, we're perverting innovation, and that's why I say we've turned it into religion: we line up to listen to people who speak from the pulpit, and the merit of those people is that they've published a book to tell how beautiful the classroom is, but they've left the classroom to give lectures and there's an institution behind them that supports them. Another thing is to do different and new things in the classroom, and that's what we teachers strive for every day, we improvise every day.

I don’t believe in pedagogical methodologies definidas.Algunas of the methodologies that
are emerging I like a lot, I like to try new things… but in a context and to their extent. I'm not convinced by which future methodology I don't know how wonderful it's being sold, because the same starting methodology works differently in the center of one city or another, in one neighborhood or another. The sociocultural context, for example, influences. There's nothing wonderful, not even worth the same for everyone. I believe that the fact that young people learn or do not learn depends on a good relationship with the group of students, on luck, on the adequacy of the methodology that you are taking at each moment to the needs of these students and on the adequacy of the students to the needs they have, on the fact that there are students who learn the methodology in the same way and others who need more to be on top. Therefore, more important than the methodology is the ratio (number of students per classroom), and it is essential to have two teachers in each classroom to be able to manage the existing diversity, as well as avoid ghettos, that there are no ghettos centers, because we are people of all kinds that form the world and the street.

What is the teacher's function?The teacher must
accompany the student in his or her learning process, no more or less. Using whatever method you want, the goal must be for students to learn what they can. And when I've learned him, I mean he has to learn from everything, also from falsifying studies, for example, whoever wants to be a doctor will have to learn to pass the tests to reach the goal. Let everyone have the learning they need to get what they want to be and live better than their parents. May our sons and daughters live better than us, think critically, be able to change society. We have to give them tools to survive, live as best as possible and have time to fight, only because the one who has working time won't fight, it won't revolutionize. I'm going to give you content, of course, but if the students ask me about politics, I'm going to answer them, it's part of my role, and that they have my opinion, that of other teachers, that of their parents, that of their friends, and the most important, that they work their own opinion.

How are you as a teacher?
Jo, I don't have ideas, but sometimes I get things right and sometimes I get worse. I improvise a lot in class, as I see it, and in that sense I'm very chaotic, because I'm able to radically change what I had planned. I'm the antithesis of the teaching robot.

You don't like teachers and stars, but more than one will say that we also need education theorists.
Yes, educational research and the presence of the authors in the center are necessary to see what is done, to share opinions and experiences between each other, but we do not need those who live slogans. And listen, I don't think it's wrong, I'm not going to judge anyone who wants to live like this, but I think it's dangerous for people to think that these people's futile speeches are more important than the teachers who are every day in class. I'm worried that parents and society will take some characters as referents and pay more attention than their children's teacher -- that we think it's the classroom, but it's not the classroom. We are turning education into a spectacle that mixes with events and prizes promoted by companies and banks. I've also been told, don't think, why don't I participate in one or the other to address the speeches of various mediatized characters. But I wonder, what's worth more, what I'm going to say here or dedicate that time to my class? After all, I am not particularly concerned about the lack of critical people in the media, I am more concerned about the lack of critical people in the education commissions, in the administration… In the decision-making spaces.

You mentioned companies and banks. Private entities are increasingly involved in the educational market. Private
macro-organisations always have the objective of earning money and, therefore, as long as there is business in education they will remain there. What two high-performing businesses are still untapped? Education and health, and we are seeing what is happening in these two sectors: privatisation, participation of external agents, subcontracting of services… PISA is just one example: the authors of the study only have economic data in their heads and they do not care about the learning of our young people. In addition, these are illegal tests, as PISA is done in schools without any guaranteed standard and paying public money. And we're talking about a lot of money, it's surreal. It is legitimate for private enterprise to want to do business, but public education should be well protected from these neoliberal influences. What happens is that the public school upsets politicians and opens the doors to companies. Imagine if the Administration says: “From now on, we leave the textbooks of the publishers and we will publish the material ourselves, and each year we will distribute it by photocopying among the students.” Instead, subsidies are granted for textbooks, to whom is it interested?

To claim innovation, he says in the book that the concept of “traditional school” is widely used and that it offers a vision full of topics that do not correspond to current classrooms.
After all, there is not a single educational model, but as many models as teachers. There are good traditions and bad traditions, and for example the master class is considered a negative model of the traditional, unilateral and passive school, but it can be done in many ways the master class, and everyone does not know how to give a good master class, that is able to capture the attention of everyone, that interconnects examples and guarantees the participation of students… Another thing is what they sell us when they say “master class” and what comes to us. Above all, I see around professors who agree with the dynamic times. Having said that, of course there are bad practices that have to be avoided. For example, the policy of closed doors (thinking that the classroom is something proper and personal), not to mention educational methodologies in work meetings, dynamics of isolated subjects…

Another topic: the students used to be more disciplinados.Puede than I studied in an abnormal institute, but in my time bomb threats were common, smoking at recess, painting in the bathrooms… Today I don’t see painted, the bathrooms are clean and the teachers seem like an
absolute controller, we watch everything so nothing happens. But today's young people are no more undisciplined than they were before. All right, young people who had previously left school from a certain age are now in the classrooms of the ESO, and not in the street, or those who previously segregated can now be in class, but I prefer to have them in class than on the street. I believe that we have created a society that is afraid, that we have manipulated reality, but the data indicate that today's society is no more violent than before. What has changed is the perception and the need to control everything.

You have a blog, but you've said there's no real, deep debate on education on the Internet.
The Internet does not reflect the day-to-day classroom; it reflects what is “curable”, the positive outcome of beautiful and exciting projects, but leaving aside the difficulties and mistakes that have occurred along the way. In the blog I try to promote the debate, but it is true that a serious debate is missing. In any case, social networks are not a place for serious debate, the problem is that in the centres I often miss out on in-depth pedagogical debates.