Submission on the ABET White Paper
Adult Educators and Trainers Association of South Africa
To the Portfolio Committee on Education
(National Assembly)

17th August 2000

Brief Background
AETASA has been intimately involved in the conceptualisation of the ABET Bill since 1998 until the release of the draft Green Paper which was embargoed in March 1999. AETASA did share the then minister of education’s sentiments as captured in the March 1999 draft that states the following;

1.2 S.A. is facing enormous social, political and economic challenges. These include technological innovation and transfer, rising unemployment, racial strife, crime, poverty, health and many more. It is within this context that adult education appears to have come of age. The Ministry has stressed that ABET is an important vehicle in the social, political and economic transformation and development of South Africa.

1.3 ABET should also be understood as a vehicle or an agent of change, a movement of transformation and with a vision of a new society. The Ministry is convinced that illiteracy and under education not only threaten our economic order, but that they also constitute profound injustices. They undermined the democratic principles of our emerging society.

It is these sentiments by the former minister of education that have inspired us as the social movement to be a part of this ABET Bill process from 1998 until now. As Adult education activist our struggle for ABET goes back to the era when the Freedom Charter was adopted at the congress of the people in Klipspruit on the 26th June 1955. South Africans of all colours said, 'The doors of learning shall be opened to all and that Adult Education shall be provided by the state. Today 45 years later we are beginning to realise that dream we have waited for so long.

AETASA therefore salutes men and women of our country who have worked painstakingly for this bill to what it is today. We salute all who have driven this process for the job well done.

General Observation
On the surface the Bill looks okay and serve as the important starting point to address some of the social ills caused by years of colonialism and apartheid. The Bill like the Skill Development Act of 1998, will usher in a skills revolution in our country', if properly managed and resources are made available.

AETASA's concern is that the Bill seems to put too much emphasis on the state to do things in a regulated way which will inhibit the voluntary and developmental nature of ABET as seen in Nicaragua and Cuba during their literacy campaigns during the 60,s and 70,s.

The Bill seem to have sideline the involvement of other organs of civil society like the NGO's in the whole process of delivering ABET especially ABET level 1 - 4 in terms of NQF level 1.

The other generic observation is that the Bill is continuing with the unfortunate reference to the employment of educators in terms of the educators employment act, an act which exclude thousands of educators with ABET qualifications from various respectable institution.

The Bill also seem not to capture the question of the development of the unit standards, in particular those for ABET practitioners. The question of the ETQA has not been fully addressed in the Bill. AETASA would therefore request the following identified chapters to be seriously considered;

1. The is no clearly identifiable purpose of the Bill AETASA therefore recommends that a purpose under Definition should be included which will be but not limited to;
- Creation of a just society in terms of political, social and economic development

- Eradication of illiteracy and creation of skills as supplemented by the Skills Development Act, Skills Development Act, SDL Act and the recent South African National Literacy Campaign

2. Chapter 3
2.35 Should include, elected members from the community

13. To add that the MEC and or the HOD will link the training with the Skills Development Act, SDL Act through the ETDP seta process and the NSF for the training of the governing bodies.

Chapter 5
27. (1) We feel that this clause is too rigid and will not allow initiatives which at present is allowed where educators start by recruiting learners and start with a few number they have until they are able to register the centre. We propose that it should be rephrased to allow creativity and initiatives within certain time frames.

AETASA also proposes that the question of unit standards should considered.

1. The development of unit standard, based as they are on outcomes has done much to improve the quality of the provision of learning programmes and development of ABET materials.
2. The development of unit standards, in particular those for the ABET practitioner and the standards for the Occupationally based ABET practitioner has further improved the standard of provision of education for the ABET learner.
3. These Unit Standards have paved the way for the establishment of the ETQA as envisage in the paper, which will further regulate and improve provision.

ETQA
1. The ETQA as envisaged in the paper seems to be very much the preserve of the departments of national and provincial education.
2. Although mentioned there should be greater participation of other ABET providers. NGO's and other training and assessment bodies have vast experience of what "works" and what doesn't work" and this experience should be harnessed for the ETQA. Bodies such as UNISA's ABET department, the IEB, Prolit and CEP should form part of the envisaged ETQA.
3. Regulations are to be put in place to standardise he provision of ABET. It follow that, provided the evaluation of a project or a programme is done in strict accordance with those standards, expertise from providers other than education departments can be harnessed without there being a possibility of bias in favour of the evaluator's organisation.
4. The ETQA has the potential of creating a source of funding for the sector.
5. If ABET is to be provided by all sectors, it is arguable that the ABET part of the skills training programmes would best be regulated by experts in the field of ABET. (This, of course, should include providers in provincial education departments, NGO's and independent providers of ABET programmes).
6. A possibility, therefore exists that the ABET ETQA should qualify assure ABET programmes across all Setas.
7 The fees generated in this way by the ETQA could be ploughed back into the ABET sector, to its great advantage.

ABET Levels 1 - 4
1. While it is clear that by incorporating ABET level 1 - 3 in the GETC band has brought ABET to the forefront, there is a possibility that, particular ABET level 1 and possibly ABET level 2, could be swamped in the provision of level 3 and 4.
2. Providers of ABET for employees in, for example the industrial sector, tend to target learners other than those at the ABET level 1 (particularly) and 2 in skills development programme. This is probably due to the obvious research that the higher level an ABET learner has attained the less basic education and training needs to be provided for her or him before she or he can benefit from an occupational training course.
3. In addition, those companies who provide training for their employees (and others, e.g. the unemployed within the sector) tend to gap for the most cost-effective programme on offer. These programmes often claim that basic literacy and numeracy can be taught in a second language. While these programmes are cost effective to the employer, they are often disastrously expensive in terms of learner needs.
4. Learning programmes that teach basic literacy and numeracy skills in a second language underestimate the need, for mother tongue literacy training to precede learning in a second, access, language.
5. Learners often drop out of basic literacy and numeracy classes because. they are forced to learn these skills in a second language. This effectively bars them from access to other training programmes.

Research and Development
AETASA and the sector strongly appeals that NGO's and other providers should be included, so that research can be pooled and the wheel not to be re-invented.

Professionalisation of the ABET practitioner

With the development of practitioner unit standards comes the obvious next step in the professionalisation of the ABET practitioner - the development of Learnerships. The department of education NGK’s and independent providers should be encouraged to develop these. The ETDP Seta should also actively encourage such development and provide funding for this purpose.

Conclusion
Whereas the White paper quite properly targets the provincial education departments' ACLs we believe that it should also place more emphasis on other providers of ABET. viz. NGO's and private providers, because of the possible lack of emphasis on the provision of the really basic levels of ABET. and in particular, in the provision of basic literacy and Numeracy, it is suggested that funding for this area will be accessed from the NSF (for example, women are often in need of basic skills provision and the National Lottery. This might encourage those employers who provide skills training programmes to provide training in these basic, and necessary skills.


Thank You