Recently, a news about "Fuzhou cancels the punching of safety education platform" has attracted national attention. A stone stirred up a thousand waves, and Xiamen, Chengdu and other places issued notices to cancel the mandatory requirement of punching in safety education platforms. In Jinan, many parents and teachers also told reporters that some primary and secondary schools and kindergartens have cancelled the safety education platform punching, and there is no mandatory requirement for parents and students.

"It's high time to cancel" is the first reaction of many teachers and parents to the compulsory punch-in requirement of safety education platform. Punching in the safety education platform APP has always been questioned as a formalistic task to increase the burden on teachers, parents and students. Nowadays, many education departments explicitly cancel compulsory punching, which is a correction to the previous practice.

Local education departments and schools may wish to draw inferences from one another, further comprehensively clean up unreasonable education and teaching tasks, truly reduce the burden on teachers, students and parents, and create a good educational ecology.

In order to promote safety education for students, it is a good thing to build a safety education platform and increase rich safety education curriculum resources for students to learn. In some places, safety education has been changed into compulsory punching on the internet, which has caused a series of contradictions and problems.

Many parents in lower grades believe that forcing students to study on the safety education platform will not only affect their eyesight, but also increase their burden, with little effect. Many parents punch in their children's lessons. In addition to primary schools, some kindergartens also require safety education platforms to punch in. However, children are too young to learn independently at all and become parents' punching cards.

For teachers, there is nothing they can do in the face of this situation. In order to complete the tasks assigned by their superiors, they can only constantly urge their parents to punch in to complete the task of observing classes, which also causes the contradiction between home and school to some extent.

The really useful safety education for students should be to give them independent study space, cultivate their safety awareness and skills in interaction, and let them experience more. Safety education is related to the safety of life and property, and must not be superficial.

Asking the safety education platform to punch in, in addition to creating a false image that the school attaches great importance to students' safety education and home-school co-education, has little practical effect, but is tossing teachers and parents.

In recent years, teachers generally reflect the heavy burden of non-teaching. Counting and urging students and parents to complete various punching tasks is one of the non-teaching burdens. Parents are also at a loss and question the school's task of transferring education.

The requirement of compulsory punching reflects the simplified thinking of some local safety education concepts. The cancellation of compulsory punching on safety education platforms by local education bureaus is the first step to cancel unreasonable education and teaching work.

We must realize that there are many similar tasks assigned to teachers, students and parents. All localities should comprehensively clean up the educational and teaching tasks that have no practical educational significance and are only superficial, and liberate teachers, students and parents from these tasks.

This requires deepening the reform in the field of education, simplifying administration and decentralizing power, strengthening supervision, improving services and giving schools autonomy in running schools. Generally speaking, although China has been deepening the reform of streamlining administration, decentralizing power, strengthening supervision and improving services in the field of education, the administrative department still dominates the management and evaluation of schools and teachers, and teachers must complete various non-teaching tasks assigned to schools.

Many "admission tasks" actually ignore whether this kind of education is really useful to students. Only by straightening out the relationship between the administrative department and the school and defining the responsibility boundary of the school can we effectively put an end to unreasonable education and teaching tasks and return the school to the education-oriented standard.