Waking up to South Africa’s education crisis
“The ghost of bad education continues to haunt us,” said basic education minister Angie Motshekga. She was talking at a recent education conference held in Midrand, Johannesburg. Motshekga further opined that the quality of education was way below standar
Was Outcome-based education ever appropriate for SA?
The report was backed by the deteriorating results achieved in competency tests conducted at the universities of Pretoria, Free State, North West and Rhodes. And the blame for the declining trend lands squarely on the contentious outcome-based education (OBE) system that was foisted on educators over the past decade. “One of the unintended consequences of OBE is that we stopped having comprehension tests and reading and spelling,” said Eloff.
The online information portal wikipedia.org describes OBE as a recurring education reform model. “It is a student-centric learning philosophy that focuses on empirically measuring student performance, known as outcomes.” The OBE system contrasts with traditional education, which focuses on the resources available to students, or inputs. Students must “demonstrate that they have learned the required skills and content” to graduate from the system. Why did South Africa decide to implement OBE? In his paper titled The Effective Implementation of Outcome-based Education in SA, BR Grobler observes that “the new government decided that an OBE curriculum would best suit the country.” It was assumed that this model would “redress the past inequalities in education.” As a result “the ministry of education launched an OBE system in 1997, Curriculum 2005. OBE was implemented in Grade 1 during 1998 with Grade 7 and Grade 2 being phased in during 1999. In 2000 it was implemented in Grades 3 and 8 and in Grades 4 and 9 during 2001.”
There were many OBE detractors. One of the major concerns was with grading, with some suggesting that government favoured the system because it could be manipulated to improve national pass rates. The following sentiment, expressed in an opinion piece online, is typical of this grouping: “In real terms the [OBE grading process makes] it practically impossible for a student to ‘fail’. Even those who would not achieve a passing grade in a traditional age-based [education system] can be recognized for their concrete, positive, individual improvements.” But South Africa faced a resource crisis too. The department of education pushed ahead with the OBE system despite inadequate staffing and administrative capacity at schools across the country. A large segment of the teaching body simply wasn’t (and still isn’t) ready for OBE.
The policy versus implementation debate
The problem with an inappropriate education methodology is the time it takes to realise you’re on the wrong track. As evidence mounts that government’s education policy is failing the youth, one has to wonder how long it will take for them to admit their mistake and take the tough steps required to remedy the situation.
There have been some promising signs. Motshekga is on records that “there’s little doubt that [South Africa] needs to improve the quality of education.” But an admission of a shortcoming doesn’t guarantee corrective action. We’re concerned that the minister believes government has begun dealing with the matter by creating two education portfolios. Cutting a problem into two sections doesn’t necessarily make it easier to solve. Besides – the bulk of the crisis lies in basic education – which is Motshekga’s baby. Her observation that government “would like to improve learner outcomes by 2014” rings hollow considering government’s legacy of improvement by lowering hurdles rather than raising standards.
Jon Lewis, research officer of the SA Democratic Teachers Union, isolated the real reason for the country’s education crisis. He noted that the department of education’s policy statements “were impressive to read in the abstract; but for many schools [were] mission impossible.” Frameworks and policy documents may be in place, but are pointless without effective implementation. Poorly trained and demoralised teachers further hinder implementation. The statistics tell the real tale of South Africa’s basic education policy. A 2008 report reveals that 42% of schools are overcrowded, 79% had no libraries, 68% had no computers and 60% were without laboratories. And the majority of students don’t feel safe at school!
The President is on board
Education is among government’s top priorities. Earlier this month President Jacob Zuma addressed 1 500 school principals at Durban’s Albert Luthuli International Convention Centre. Zuma told the audience that government and teachers should unite to drive change in learning, teaching and management at schools. “The question that we must answer today is why our policies have failed to deliver excellence and what we should do about it,” said Zuma. Although government admits there are problems with the current education system, they seem reluctant to finger their own inappropriate policy as a contributing factor.
Editor’s thoughts:
It’s shocking that a South African learner can spend 12-years in the country’s education system without gaining acceptable reading, writing and arithmetic skills. While higher education minister Blade Nzimande castigates universities for not accommodating enough ‘previously disadvantaged’ students, his basic education colleague is simply not generating enough university level material! Is outcome-based education relevant in a country with South Africa’s demographics? Add your comment below, or send it to gareth@fanews.co.za
Comments